Of a truth, the statement of "Christ's Greatest Hits" was not answered! If it was, please let me know where.

How can we excuse Christ telling someone that in order to be saved one must "do no murder," etc?

In His Grace,

Susan

>This single, unpublished book is what
>Ted calls Pat's "many books"
>concerning SDAism and part of
>why he is fixated on
>her.

Hmm-m-m, more creative reading?!? Ted didn't say anything about that in the previous post.
+++
1 Timothy 2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Perhaps you should read all of the posts a bit closer.

You know, your insinuations really revolt me. Why do you constantly try to belittle and degrade me on this forum? I have never made any personal jabs at you. The only thing I have done is to address your personal attacks on others.

Your behavior shows nothing of the Christian "love" that you tout. You cannot constantly berate and belittle someone and do it "in love."

So CUT IT OUT! If you have nothing good to say about someone, then don't say anything. But since the very first time I came on this forum, although I had never even mentioned it, you posted publicly that you doubted I even had a doctorate! (As if that has anything to do with anything!) Why the instantaneous attack? Then you posted on another forum that a person should not call me "Dr." because my doctorate was "only" in music. What is your problem, anyway? If you are envious of my advanced degree, then go get one for yourself! But your belittling my achievements accomplishes nothing but making you look like you are jealous.

You also publicly have indicated that I am lying about my SDA background. Then you go to a forum that I have rarely been on and begin the slander about me yet again. Behind my back even! What is it with you? Why this hateful fixation? Other people have written me privately and asked just what our relationship was that you go out of your way to be nasty to me. Why can you not address my words and leave personalities out of it?

Now, I am warning you, not just for my sake, but for anyone else that you might get fixated on, keep the conversation impersonal. Stop the personal attacks. Not only is it not Christian, but it truly impedes the flow of free conversation.

And if you doubt my words, then ask me for proof instead of publishing publicly that I am less than honest.

If you and Ted are an example of how loving and kind SDAs are, then I think you have presented your case excellently.

May God truly bless you this day with peace, David. The Peace that comes from knowing that you are accepted, as I am, as a child of God, an heir of His Kingdom. And that, because He is merciful, then you can be merciful also.

My thoughts and prayers are with you.
You are, as I am,
In His grace, alone.

Patti

LAST EDITED ON 08-26-01 AT 12:03 PM (GMT)

>Perhaps you should read all of
>the posts a bit closer.

Well here's the way it went:

tmac said in the only sentance that referred to your Mommy: "Dare you accuse me of having obsessions when I am not interested in you or your Mommy half as much as you have been commissioned to destroy God's Church?"

And then you said: "This single, unpublished book is what Ted calls Pat's "many books" concerning SDAism and part of why he is fixated on her."

And I said: "Hmm-m-m, more creative reading?!? Ted didn't say anything about that in the previous post."

So, obviously my point stands.
===
>You know, your insinuations really revolt
>me. Why do you
>constantly try to belittle and
>degrade me on this forum?
> I have never made
>any personal jabs at you.

Oh, yeah right!
===
> The only thing I
>have done is to address
>your personal attacks on others.

More baloney.
===
>Your behavior shows nothing of the
>Christian "love" that you tout.

I don't tout it; you do.
===
> You cannot constantly berate
>and belittle someone and do
>it "in love."

True enough; but then, I have complimented you and you have never responded in kind.

===
>So CUT IT OUT! If
>you have nothing good to
>say about someone, then don't
>say anything. But since
>the very first time I
>came on this forum, although
>I had never even mentioned
>it, you posted publicly that
>you doubted I even had
>a doctorate!

That's 'cause I'm skeptic--too many people claim things that ain't so--like the infomercials on TV.
===
>hy the
>instantaneous attack?

Actually, it was after you had posted a bit and it was obvious that you didn't know what we as SDA's believe or teach.
===
> Then you
>posted on another forum that
>a person should not call
>me "Dr." because my doctorate
>was "only" in music.

Your doctortate was irrelevant to the discussion at hand being out of your field. I once had a prof who said that by the time he got a doctorate he couldn't believe how ignorant he was in his own field--of, course the difference is that he's intelligent; you post like you know everything about this field in which you have no training.
===
>What is your problem, anyway?

I don't like lies.
===
> If you are envious
>of my advanced degree, then
>go get one for yourself!

Nope, not envious. Inyteresting that you thought I might be.
===
> But your belittling my
>achievements accomplishes nothing but making
>you look like you are
>jealous.

I haven't belittled your accomplishments nor am I in the least bit jealous.

1 John 4:20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen
===
>You also publicly have indicated that
>I am lying about my
>SDA background.

It has been doubful given your blatant mis-representations.

1 John 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
===
>Then you
>go to a forum that
>I have rarely been on
>and begin the slander about
>me yet again. Behind
>my back even!

Nope, you mis-represent again--I simply pointed out to some others (who "praised" you; as if you were an expert and knew what you were talking about) what you believed.

1 Timothy 4:2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
===
>What
>is it with you?
>Why this hateful fixation?

Not hateful--my heart is cool and calm; as I said above I hate lies.
===
>Other people have written me
>privately and asked just what
>our relationship was that you
>go out of your way
>to be nasty to me.

Then they lied to you and you bought it.

Proverbs 17:4 A wicked doer giveth heed to false lips; and a liar giveth ear to a naughty tongue.
===
> Why can you not
>address my words and leave
>personalities out of it?

You don't.
===
>Now, I am warning you, not
>just for my sake, but
>for anyone else that you
>might get fixated on, keep
>the conversation impersonal. Stop
>the personal attacks. Not
>only is it not Christian,
>but it truly impedes the
>flow of free conversation.

You first.
===
>And if you doubt my words,
>then ask me for proof
>instead of publishing publicly that
>I am less than honest.

It hasn't done any good in the past why should it now?

I've even complimented you and others when you were right and you and they have nevere ever reciproicated in the least--I'm not surprised.
===
>If you and Ted are an
>example of how loving and
>kind SDAs are, then I
>think you have presented your
>case excellently.

I know nothing about what Ted believes nor do I care.
+++
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it. - Henry Ford, Sr.

I said:
And then you said: "This single, unpublished book is what Ted calls Pat's "many books" concerning SDAism and part of why he is fixated on her."

Posted by Ted, 07-04-01
"If that is not enough, the web site shows one determined that we focus on Christ only, but her books, articles and all her participation on the forum does not put Christ as first in everything."

Posted by Ted, 07-05-01
"No I know you have not addressed that! Neither will I satisfy with you just telling us that you addressed that. Pat has made many books and articles against the Adventist Church and Adventism."

My answer to Ted, 07-05-01, after which he banned me from his site:
Patti:
"Ted, Ted, Ted. My mother has written ONE (1) book and one book only. (You can read all about my childhood in it, if you are curious, btw!) She has written NO published articles--nothing but her participatory posts on forums online."

This conversation can be found at this website.
Can Jesuits be females?

You have falsely accused me, David. I have not lied. (You should have picked up on the fact that Ted did not deny the statement.)

May God deal gently with you.

May He give you His peace.
Patti

I went by the thread we were on; I didn't expect Ted to refer to other threads. I didn't know (or care) about the other threads--you didn't refer to them either.
+++
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it. - Henry Ford, Sr.

I went by the thread we were on; I didn't expect Ted to refer to other threads. I didn't know (or care)

Do you not care about the truth?

about the other threads--you didn't refer to them either.

It doesn't matter whether I referred to them or not. I made a statement to Ted (He was aware of the other conversations), and you jumped in the middle of it and accused me of lying. You made assumptions based on your hatred and suspicion of me. You falsely accused me because you refused to give me the benefit of the doubt. Just as you publicly insinuated that I was lying about my doctorate. Perhaps you should find out the facts first before you throw your accusations around. If you had only asked me before you accused me, I would have told you, and saved you some public embarrassment. And now you even refuse to acknowledge the mistake and try to make things right. I don't care. It is not for my sake that you need to apologize, but for your own.

Next time, perhaps you will not be so swift to make accusations. (You know what they say about people who assume ) At least I hope you have learned something.

BTW, I forgive you.

Go with God. And may His peace cover you this day like a warm and downy blanket of assurance

Grace and peace,
Patti

A reasonable person responding to a specific post in a specific thread is entitled to assume that you are dealing up-front with what people have said--not to have to go helter-skelter all over the board.
+++
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it. - Henry Ford, Sr.

A reasonable person responding to a specific post in a specific thread is entitled to assume that you are dealing up-front with what people have said--not to have to go helter-skelter all over the board.

A "reasonable" person, with no axe to grind, would assume that people are telling the truth, instead automatically condemning them based upon their dislike for that person. I even told you that I could show you the evidence, but that did not stop you from continuing to call me a liar.

You do not call everyone else on this board a liar. That privilege seems to be reserved for me. And, David, you have not "caught" me in a lie yet. (It would be counterproductive for me to lie on a public board such as this one. Someone would surely find out and one's credibility would be permanently damaged).

So, how about from now on, you give folks (I am a "folk," BTW, the "least of them," I am sure.) the benefit of the doubt instead of publicly pronouncing them liars in front of the whole world without any evidence? It is not only the neighborly thing to do, it is the best way to keep from ending up with egg on your face.

God bless you.

Patti

>A reasonable person responding to a
>specific post in a specific
>thread is entitled to assume
>that you are dealing up-front
>with what people have said--not
>to have to go helter-skelter
>all over the board.
>
>
>A "reasonable" person, with no axe
>to grind, would assume that
>people are telling the truth,
>instead automatically condemning them based
>upon their dislike for that
>person. I even told
>you that I could show
>you the evidence, but that
>did not stop you from
>continuing to call me a
>liar.

I didn't "condemn" anyone. I simply stated what I observed.

snipping the rest of the ...
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it. - Henry Ford, Sr.

David, I'd just about be willing to bet you will not apologize to Patti for falsely accusing her. After all, the end justifies the means, right David?
Here is a link that shows how Adventists treat their enemies:
http://www.ellenwhite.org/canright/case.htm

>David, I'd just about be willing
>to bet you will not
>apologize to Patti for falsely
>accusing her. After all, the
>end justifies the means, right
>David?
>Here is a link that shows
>how Adventists treat their enemies:
>
>http://www.ellenwhite.org/canright/case.htm

The deaths of millions of saints is a witness for Gregg's Church. But here we see that Gregg also has the standard immunity to his own principles that racks Patti's course. Even now I saw they were talking about not making things personal.

Gregg, Patti and others from the Dark Ages keep teaching us to go to the points and stop personal jabs, but all their messages cannot but reveal their hatred. It is really difficult defending against people who have no conscience. Why is it that after they do the things they tell us we cannot do (like even having obsessions) they then talk much to tell us that they didn't do what they have done and are not what they have proven to be?

I see a completely different history from Adventists and every other denomination. Even Protestant denominations have persecuted and Adventists didn't. Even Martin Luther called Gregg's and Patti's organization Antichrist.

Is the issue to find the truth? or to do what Gregg, Patti and others who have such ends justifies the means capability constantly teach against (personal attacks and to a church) really what is the agenda here?

So we are left with Christ's greatest hits. The good reward for people claiming to be Christians and talking about love before they make the jabs. They can talk their way out of anything as historically and since they know they are taking control of everything in their treason.

In His Grace,

Susan Williams

>David, I'd just about be willing
>to bet you will not
>apologize to Patti for falsely
>accusing her.

Have you ever seen her apologize wwhen we have shown she was wrong?!?
===
>After all, the
>end justifies the means, right
>David?

No, I don't think like that; interesting that you did however.
===
>Here is a link that shows
>how Adventists treat their enemies:
>
>http://www.ellenwhite.org/canright/case.htm

I have run into Douty's type of work before; I have shown that he lie--so why should I believe what he says here?
+++
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it. - Henry Ford, Sr.

David wrote:
"I have run into Douty's type of work before; I have shown that he lie--so why should I believe what he says here?"

Evidence, David, show the evidence.

>David wrote:
>"I have run into Douty's type
>of work before; I have
>shown that he lied--so why
>should I believe what he
>says here?"
>
>Evidence, David, show the evidence.

Good man, always ask for the proof; unfortunatel,it appears not to be here. I'll havew to dig through my boxes and find what he said--I lucked out, it was on my hard drive: The SDA church "attributes to her {EGW} to this day an inspiration equal to the Bible's" from Another Look at Seventh-day Adventism by Pastor {he only foams at the mouth on occasion} Norman F. Douty (Baker Book, 1962): page 187. On page 20 he claims that we believe that EGW's inspiration "is the same as that of the prophets whose writings were never a part of the Bible."
+++
Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it. - Henry Ford, Sr.

David, while equating EGW's writings to the Bible is not an offical belief, it is one that is held by a good number of Adventists. Another idea that is held by some Adventists is the role of EGW as an infallable interpreter of scripture. Both of these concepts can be witnessed in action by browsing some Adventist forums. If these concepts are wrong, the Adventist leadership sure isn't doing much to correct them. I think Douty was right on the money.