RayGarton wrote:

I'm sorry for causing so much fuss. That wasn't my intention.

Ginger wrote: My grandmother is a major influence on my life and she says she really likes the SDAs, but we don't know much about them.

I was simply providing some information for Ginger in response to this.

Sincerly wrote: The subtlety of Ray's and your post--- as just innocent information--- is patterned after the "father of lies" which trapped EVE.

I assure you, my intentions were not satanic. I think you're being a little harsh. Just because someone posts something you disagree with does not mean that person is debating you. The websites I linked above provide carefully researched and thoroughly documented information about Seventh-day Adventism. If you don't agree with what they say, Sincerly, then I suggest you bring that up on the debate board, where it belongs, rather than accusing me of being satanic.

And so was Satan just giving Eve some information concerning GOD.
Ray, had you not multiple times on other threads explained that you were here to "warn" those who came seeking by presenting your false claims-------one might at least question your listing of "Critics sites" as "poor intentions", but in the face of such contempt for the SDA Church and EGW, your "intentions" are "confessed" by you.
Ray, Do you honestly believe that any SDA believes that your subtle posting of "critical sites" wasn't a form of "debate".

Again, We know how "carefully and thoroughly documented the information" is on those sites as our own examination of the source reveals them riddled with erroneous opinions and conclusions.

Again, this is not the "Debate forum" and any postings by you of such material is placed in the wrong Forum.
Correction of your last sentence---You weren't accused of being "Satanic". But the subtle tactics you had used were those he used.

RayGarton wrote:

Sincerly wrote: Again, We know how "carefully and thoroughly documented the information" is on those sites as our own examination of the source reveals them riddled with erroneous opinions and conclusions.

That hasn't been my experience. It seems that "erroneous opinions and conclusions," in this case, is synonymous with "things we don't agree with or like."

Sincerly wrote: Again, this is not the "Debate forum"

Then why are you debating? I'm not here to debate you. I guess what you're saying is that this board is only for the posting of thoughts and material that you agree with, and anything you don't like is an attempt at "debate"? Is that it? I just want to be clear on this, because I can't seem to do anything that's okay with you, Sincerly, and as far as I can tell, you are -- whether self-appointed or otherwise -- the guardian of these boards. Do you work for Beliefnet?

Ray, on the other thread, I explained the functions of these forums(and those applied to the various B'net forums). And I believe you read and responded to that post before you wrote this, so you are aware of the functions(or are by the time you read this).
I would agree with you if you would post something which was true. and presenting claims without supporting facts is "subtle critical debate"----you know that a response is coming.
You would be correct if you posted those "claims" on the "discuss" forum.-----is that to hard??

No, I'm not a Host on these forums, but if you read the ROC you would know that everyone is asked to report offenders of those ROC. It seems that you enjoy doing as you please---rather than obey. Could that have been a point in your leaving the SDA Church.-----as obedience is stressed and expected by the followers of GOD; and that from Eden.

And your last post was more Debating/accusing and had nothing to do with the thread.

RayGarton wrote:

Sincerly wrote: And your last post was more Debating/accusing and had nothing to do with the thread.

I'm not debating anything here, Sincerly. I'm just responding to your continued posts.

And isn't Responding-----no matter the "words"----debating.?

RayGarton wrote:

Sincerly wrote: And isn't Responding-----no matter the "words"----debating.?

Ah, so you want these boards to be empty. I hope you'll let everyone else know that they aren't to respond to anything. Does that mean you can post, but no one can respond?

Sincerly, do you have any idea how irrational you're being? As I said in the other thread, please, just leave me alone. There's a bit in the rules about harassing people, too. This is starting to look a lot like harassment.

Ray, one is irrational when they refuse to follow the ROC and then The twisting of another's words as you did above falls into that category as well.
As you posted, "I'm just responding to your posts"
And isn't your agenda to "warn" people(and your method of accomplishment) on these SDA forums a "harassment"??

No, We very much and sincerely do Welcome ALL to these Forums who are truly seeking the Truth and God's Kingdom.