Subj : Rush to Judgement?
To   : TODD HENSON
From : RALPH ZETTER
Date : Wed Nov 01 2000 10:50 pm

> > >  
> > >  On Oct. 31st, 2000 - John Wilson wrote to Todd Henson:
> > >  
> > >  JW> That we differ is way evident...I've come to enjoy your insulting
> > >  JW> scorn and personal attacks...(I think I've come off easy, being
> > >  JW> merely a `jerk'  ...I admit to being shocked when you called
> > >  JW> someone a pervert; when his response showed you clearly that
> > >  JW> such a charge was im error...
> > >  
> > >  
> > >  John,
> > >  
> > >  While I might disagree with Todd's aggressiveness, (I'm unable to
> > >  think of a more suitable term at the moment), after seeing Voigt's
> > >  posts in the Matzdobre echo and some of his arguments here, I'm
> > >  inclined to think that "pervert" is an appropriate label for the
> > >  person you're attempting to defend. Perhaps if you had a more
> > >  complete picture of the exchanges involving Voigt, Henson and others,
> > >  you'd recognize that.
> > 
> > I've only been peeking in just a bit here, but it does seem that Todd likes
> > to grab the bull by the 
> > horns, doesn't he? I'd have to agree though with your opinion of  Mr.
> 
> 
> Ummmmm..sure, you could say that. I am often direct. Sometimes I admit to
> being too much 
> so, but I've noticed that there are some folks that just can't handle
> direct questioning and get 
> defensive.
> 

There sure seems to be a few sensitive types here. :-)

> > Voigt, only because I saw 
> > the "Matzdobre" echo, thinking it was something Jewish because Matzdobre is
> > a misspelling of 
> > matzobre. It is quite the little vulgar hatefest there, so I didn't post
> > there, nor go back. They all 
> > sound like a bunch of babies who follow you around and yell things at you
> > because they 
> > themselves are weak. Every last one of them. One big pig pen you might say.
> > :-)
> 
> 
> On that we would agree.
> 

I took the liberty of taking you up on your challenge to inspect the
Matzdobre echo for your 
quality and quantity of messages. I saw only a small number of messages
from you. You were 
taunting Chuck. I wasn't including you in the pig category.

> 
> > I find some of Mr. Massingil's posts thoughtful, when he and Mr. Henson are
> > not duking it out. 
> 
> 
> I also find some of his posts valuable, and have saved a few for future
> reference. But in the last 
> couple of weeks, he's invented all kinds of "attacks" and agendas by me
> that don't exist. And 
> as you can tell.....well...you can dig through the old messages yourself
> and see what I mean.

I did a little. He did seem a bit defensive.

> 
> 
> > Same with Mr. Wilson. John and Todd seem to go a lot of rounds. Todd, well,
> 
> 
> The case with John is somewhat similar. There are lines of admiration
> between the two, so they 
> take similar attitudes.
> 

I see.

> 
> > he seems to have 
> > a very strong personality, which isn't necessarily a bad thing if it's
> > channeled properly. I just 
> > think that maybe some folks around here don' t like to have their ideas
> > challenged and take it 
> > out on the challenger. But hey, I'm just a hillbilly, what do I know? ;-)
> > I'm more laid back, so a 
> > person like Todd wouldn't get to me.
> 
> 
> A "person like Todd"?   What am I like?
> 

I just meant someone who likes to zealously pursue arguments. I wasn't
making negative or 
positive judgement.

> 
> > I figured I'd see something about Plato here, but instead there's nothing
> > but personality 
> > conflicts. Kinda like Jerry Springer (heeheeee).  I guess I'll just have to
> 
> 
> Agreed. But there is some good philosophical discussion in a minor
> percentage of the time. :-)

I've seen a few.
 
> 
> > be the outside observer. 
> > Sometimes I won't post in fear of stirring up more dust...maybe when the
> > dust settles some 
> > more...
> 
> 
> Heck, jump right in. Stir.

Alrighty.

> 
> 
> > I do find the few truly philosphical bits here to be interesting. Todd
> > believes in the Biblical God 
> > and it's accompanying philosophy, John believes the universe is alive, and
> > I'm still not sure what 
> > Frank believes, but I like the mix of all these ideas. And how the topic
> > goes back and forth 
> > betwen science, religion, philosophy, and back around again. Good mix. I
> > suppose Joseph is 
> > an atheist. There are a few others here, but these guys seem to talk the
> > most and the loudest. 
> > :-)
> 
> 
> As I said, I am direct.
> 
> 
> > I might want to bring up Buddhism, but I don't want to get into a long
> > drawn out debate on 
> > Buddhism against the Bible, because I know Christians don't have much room
> > for other 
> > religions. Makes you wonder what they think happens to all those people who
> > never heard of the 
> > Bible. I guess they fry. :>)
> 
> 
> That's not an entirely well-formed view. I appreciate certain aspects of
> Buddhism, just as I 
> appreciate various aspects of many religions. But there are certain core
> truths that are not 
> negotiable. But the writings of Paul in the NT keep following me around
> lately, where he wrote 
> that even though the gentiles did not have the benefit of receiving God's
> Law in as detailed a 
> manner as the Hebrews did, they still could obey the law of God that was
> written in their hearts 
> and become a law unto themselves. The soul of man is attracted to the idea
> of meaning in life 
> that transcends the physical, and all men have an intuitive knowledge of
> such truths, truths 
> which point to God.


Hmmmmm. I haven't heard the Bible explained like that. But then again, I
don't consider myself 
to be extremely well read with the Bible. 

> 
> So, while I might sau that Buddha was wrong in his ideas of reincarnation,
> the gods, etc, I can 
> still see the value in his teachings of the "right path", which were
> motivated by the attraction of 
> his soul toward God, given the amount of truth that he DID know. And I
> can't summarily declare 
> that he is in hell just because he wasn't a Christian. 

Interesting.....I sure like that a lot more than to simply say "Hellbound!"
without any real thought 
behind it. The Christians I know could learn to hear some of this stuff
that yer saying, because 
they seem more intent on proclaiming eternal hellfire on those they
disagree with, rather than 
really get into the nitty gritty of the message like you did. Do you have
an email address?

> 
> And there is a difference between a person who is a unbeliever because he
> denied Jesus, and 
> being an unbeliever because he never even heard of Jesus but was searching
> for God according 
> to the amount of light that he DID have. Big difference.

Yeah, one doesn't believe in the Bible because he's never heard of it, and
one has heard of it but 
rejects it. I'm closer to the second category I guess, but not exactly.

> 

--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr4
 * Origin: BBS Networks @ www.bbsnets.com 808-839-5016 (1:10/345)

.