Professor Kent, Geanna did acknowledge the logical progression of my flood …

Comment on Ravi Zacharias: Should Church Members be Held to a Higher Standard? by Rich Constantinescu.

Professor Kent,

Geanna did acknowledge the logical progression of my flood response to her. And in the midst of her withering sarcasm, which I asked her to leave off so we could focus on the task at hand, she got mad and resorted to her oft-repeated “I’m just a little college girl, so let me say what I want.”

If she wants to take up my discussion with her, she’s welcome to do the work. I don’t believe you are fitted for the task.
God bless,

Rich

Rich Constantinescu Also Commented

Ravi Zacharias: Should Church Members be Held to a Higher Standard?
Professor Kent,

You might present evidence that Geanna Dane was run out of here because of “the very same treatment.” You shouldn’t expect Ken or anyone to take you on your word for it alone. Geanna brought it upon herself because she was “mimicking the same tone and tactics used by others”, you say.

This supposed “mimicking justification” is a waste of time used from time to time and recently on the “Hate Speech?” article at Spectrum blog. When illogic fails at overcoming, with increasing frequency some try to shift blame on other people of their obnoxious, illogical postings under pretense that they were meant so for a noble purpose: of teaching others a lesson.

Such argument is a waste of time and moreso disdaining and maligning for it blames others not only perpetuates the “evil.” Rom. 12:21
God bless,

Rich


Ravi Zacharias: Should Church Members be Held to a Higher Standard?
Professor Kent,

You might present evidence that Geanna Dane was run out of here because of “the very same treatment.” You shouldn’t expect Ken or anyone to take you on your word for it alone. Geanna brought it upon herself because she was “mimicking the same tone and tactics used by others”, you say.

This supposed “mimicking justification” is a waste of time used from time to time and recently on the “Hate Speech?” article at Spectrum blog. When illogic fails at overcoming, with increasing frequency some try to shift blame on other people of their obnoxious, illogical postings under pretense that they were meant so for a noble purpose: of teaching others a lesson.

Such argument is a waste of time and moreso disdaining and maligning for it blames others not only perpetuates the “evil.” Rom. 12:12
God bless,

Rich


Ravi Zacharias: Should Church Members be Held to a Higher Standard?
Sean: “This is because morality is not dependent upon accurate knowledge, but upon living according to the very best knowledge that is currently known in a loving manner toward one’s neighbors that is heart-felt…”

GC88 597.2 says, “The truth and the glory of God are inseparable; it is impossible for us, with the Bible within our reach, to honor God by erroneous opinions. Many claim that it matters not what one believes, if his life is only right. But the life is moulded by the faith. If light and truth are within our reach, and we neglect to improve the privilege of hearing and seeing it, we virtually reject it; we are choosing darkness rather than light.”

LP 87.2 says, “But the Lord, who sent out his ambassadors with a message to the world, will hold the people responsible for the manner in which they treat the words of his servants. God will judge all according to the light which has been presented to them, whether it is plain to them or not. It is their duty to investigate as did the Bereans. The Lord says through the prophet Hosea: “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee.” Hosea 4:6

False doctrine is worse than the act it inspires. The doctrine which justifies or condemns the act of sin is as superior over it as the seed is superior over the flesh of a fruit. We can never say of the seed, “that’s not the flesh, that’s just the seed.” “It’s not the issue.”

Ex. 34:6-7
God bless,

Rich


Recent Comments by Rich Constantinescu

Intelligent Design – Science or Religion?
Thank you Sean. Very helpful information. Praise God.
God bless,

Rich


The Reptile King
Kent debuted here at ET two years ago with proclamations that there was no evidence that the theory of evolution was taught at LSU but since has modified his evolution-free period to the last 1.5 years. He has threatened to leave time after time but never did. Nor has he stopped reminding us us he is persecuted and misunderstood.

Kent: “Bob, you’ve hardened your heart and gone mad. You wouldn’t know “truth” if it smacked you between the eyes. You’ve proven to every reader here that you are not “in Christ.” Turn off your computer, throw your modem in garbage, and save your soul before it is consumed with hatred and falsehood.”

Rich then noted that Kent shouldn’t be too upset about people not taking him as seriously as he would like because Kent came here pretending to not be an Adventist but it turned out he actually was an Adventist. The kind that doesn’t see much to worry about administration using vulgarity, drinking alcohol and evading authority albeit.

It is a little amusing that an observation that Kent tried to make readers think he wasn’t Adventist and the unacceptable tone of his ad hominem post towards Bob (not like the posts he harvested of Bob’s) is met by more ad hominem and – of all things – an accusation of ad hominem. I cannot think of many better text-book examples of projection.

However, credit where credit is due. Kent is persevering and he did let Bob keep his computer even though he made him throw away his modem. A nice scholar-to-scholar gesture or perhaps a typo yet short of the camaraderie we were waiting to see.
God bless,

Rich


The Reptile King
Kent apparently does not realize he lost some of us when he stormed in to Educate Truth two years ago ranting and waving, “If I were an Adventist, I’d be ashamed to be one of you!” The fuss Kent put up made some here ask why an outsider was so upset about the Adventists not “representing”? When the shame game didn’t work Kent stormed out, stormed in, stormed out again (and again).

Some of us wondered, why is Kent so interested? Is he for lack of a better strategy trying to corner ET in any way he can in this case by shame and blame? Is he playing whatever side he can to get his advantage? Some of us asked directly if he was after all an Adventist, to which Kent irately responded, “as to the question of whether I’m an Adventist or not … it makes no difference.”

We have been for some time more than beginning to see the truth in that statement. Therefore Kent truly should not be upset when some people don’t take seriously his apology of, “I also am a Creationist.” Trust is built and the foundation is missing.

Here is recent gem towards a “fellow creationist”:

Kent says, “Bob, you’ve hardened your heart and gone mad. You wouldn’t know “truth” if it smacked you between the eyes. You’ve proven to every reader here that you are not “in Christ.” Turn off your computer, throw your modem in garbage, and save your soul before it is consumed with hatred and falsehood.”

Hatred indeed. Those who stand for what they believe are, understandably, a mystery and great cause of perplexity to Kent usually worth many hours of his insight and forethought on his computer and modem. That last post apparently is not the fruit of taking enough time to cover one’s tracks.
God bless,

Rich


The Reptile King
Kent, I was not primarily quoting EGW as an authority. I only noted that if someone quotes one portion of EGW writings as authoritative about the supposed disvalue of the “deductions of science” being evidence for or against a point of faith, they should be free to accept other parts of her writings which make it clear that science is not opposed to God’s Word. I do agree that the conflict is not between science and faith but only with the deductions of science and the conclusions of the natural, rebellious, un-renewed heart. EGW never opposed science. She opposed as the Bible says, “science falsely so-called.”

Our colleges all have students from non-Adventist persuasions. The world is invited to and attends all our other schools. They have a right to know what we are teaching if we are bearing false witness.
God bless,

Rich


The Reptile King
Kent, you either missed or ignored the point. The point was and is, if someone would take EGW as saying “deductions of science” means there is no false science, just one true science that is totally contradictory to the Bible and we must choose to live in blind faith without it that is wholly inconsistent with the other many statements by the same author who talks about true science revealing God whereas false science doesn’t.

Your knot is easily untied. An enemy has done this.
God bless,

Rich