As I see it, Bill is a litle too thin skinned. Having said that, I must add the belief that the observation really doesn't matter much if offense has been taken. I felt Jonathan was not only too thin skinned but wrong in how he understood some of my comments. But clearly, he was offended. How I felt about the situation becomes unimportant in view of that. We are charged to "as much as is possible, be at peace with all men." We can always say things differently. We can always find a different way of responding. In spite of my observation about Jonathan, the regret I felt about his complaint was real -- because, had I known, I could and would have presented my remarks in a less ofensive way. The responsibility was mine. Relationships do not continue in a happy sort of way with any other point of view.
John
In a message dated 7/29/2004 5:22:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bill, appears to have made his decision to depart which is sad because once again he has judged my motives which is something only God is capable of doing with any accuracy.
I find the questions below to be valid ones and each time I challenge Bill I do so hoping that he will be able to "give an answer for the hope that is in him (1 Peter 3:15)" but he usually become angry and defensive turning honest questions into accusation which tells me that all of this talk about "fellowship, giving, sharing, participation, communion, and community - is just that, talk" It will take more than a seductive doctrine to bring it to pass. I've not understood things Bill has said many times before in the light of God's Word. If Bill would be less emotional and more willing to dialogue it could work. At this point I am neither stumbled nor offended.
Grace and Peace, Judy
