gosh warrior, no need to get so snippy. we're just talking here.....

"Warrior4Christ":

No the comments you quote are not "flaming."

Yes you might get banned soon.

Read the rules again.

More details have been provided about "trolls" with a link to the AOL page that expalins what a "troll" is.

You seem to be a troll.

Quote
rrmoderator
"Warrior4Christ":

No the comments you quote are not "flaming."

Yes you might get banned soon.

Read the rules again.

More details have been provided about "trolls" with a link to the AOL page that expalins what a "troll" is.

You seem to be a troll.

:lol:
For those reading this post and don't know what a 'troll' or 'trolling' is, let me enlighten you...
[i:85ef3d7a89]"In Internet terminology, a troll[/color:85ef3d7a89] is a person who enters an established community such as an online discussion forum and intentionally tries to cause disruption, most often in the form of posting inflammatory, off-topic, or otherwise inappropriate messages."[/i:85ef3d7a89]
[i:85ef3d7a89]The term troll is highly subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. The term is often used to discredit an opposing position, or its proponent, by argument [u:85ef3d7a89]ad hominem[/color:85ef3d7a89][/u:85ef3d7a89].[/i:85ef3d7a89]

My friend, I am not a 'troll'. I am not trying to cause disruption, post inflammatory, off topic or inappropriate messages. What I am trying to do is to counter the accusations that your little team have posted. Are my responses 'off topic'? Are not YOUR posts 'inflammatory'?

[i:85ef3d7a89][b:85ef3d7a89]The term is often used to discredit an opposing position, or its proponent, by argument [u:85ef3d7a89]ad hominem[/color:85ef3d7a89][/b:85ef3d7a89][/u:85ef3d7a89].[/i:85ef3d7a89]

Since you are using this term to describe me, could it be because what I post has validity and truth and you are trying to 'discredit an opposing position'?

You have asked us to abide by the rules, I am abiding by the rules. Let me state my case every time you blast my church, my pastor, my congregation and our cause.
Even if you don't, we will still continue to preach the gospel...

"Some indeed preach Christ even from envy and strife, and some also from goodwill: The former preach Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my chains;[u:85ef3d7a89] but the latter out of love, knowing that I am appointed for the defense of the gospel[/u:85ef3d7a89]. What then? [u:85ef3d7a89]Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is preached; and in this I rejoice, yes, and will rejoice[/u:85ef3d7a89]." - Phillipians 1:15-18

"Warrior4Christ" -
[img:85ef3d7a89]http://www.christianmediadesign.com/Warrior4Christ.jpg[/img:85ef3d7a89]

Ignoring or downplaying spiritual abuse, cultic tactics, emotional manipulation and deception is certainly not part of "preaching the gospel."

"Warrior4Christ":

If you read this thread some "warning signs" were once linked regarding a potentially unsafe group.

See [www.culteducation.com]

Look at those warning signs.

Does your church have democratically elected church government through which the general membership elects boards, officers, elders, etc. that can constiutionally discipline a pastor and if necessary fire him?

Does your church have an independently audited financial statement or budget which is published regularly that discloses in detail all the salaries, compensation and expenses paid out from church funds?

Most Protestant churches have these safeguards.

Does yours?

nm

maybe free, it's not even a coward issue. it's more of an 'i just don't know' issue. truthseeker, yourself. me, rrmod and others have tossed a lot of red meat out there, and i've yet to see even some weak attempts at rebuttals other than "leave my pastor alone".

i wish we could attract a more sophisticated response. at least warrior keeps the dialog going. i hope he doesn't get banned.

hey warrior, did you guys have the annual "i'm thankful for" service tonight? i'm just asking. i used to enjoy all the testimonies.

nm

Hi Free Agent,

Do you still attend John Schmidt's church? I recognize some of the names that you mentioned in your post since I new a number of people in the hisperia church. I hope that some of the people I knew left. Can you pm me the address and time you guys meet. I'd like to stop in for a visit when I'm in the area. I can't pm yet till I have 10 approved messages. :(

By now all of us have heard of the disgusting racist slurs by Michael "Kramer" Richards toward a couple of African American patrons at a Los Angeles comedy club.

This news story triggered something that I read on a pro-Mitchell website a few weeks ago before my vacation. The website had a transcribed sermon by Wayman Mitchell entitled "Blueprint From Heaven". The sermon was an interesting insight how Mitchell thinks his fellowship is suppose to operate.

But what stuck out in my mind and bothered me was the brief description from Mitchell's mouth about a Mexican convert to his church:

[i:889124679f][b:889124679f]In 1974, a young "wetback," came into our congrega­tion. A hippie passing through had witnessed to this Mexican and his Apache girlfriend. They both came to the church and responded to the altar call. The young girl split, but that young "wetback" stayed. [/b:889124679f][/i:889124679f]

[www.waymanmitchell.com]

This is very racist statement and discription of people of Mexican descent. I have lived here in the southwestern part of the U.S. for all my life. You do not call or describe someone who is Hispanic or Mexican as a wetback. It is just as offensive as calling or describing an African American as a nigger!

How do people sit in Mitchell's church services and hear things like this and just ignore it? How can anyone with any conscience tolerate (and even transcribe and post on a website!) a racial slur and a insult toward anyone of any race from anyone, especially from a so-called pastor.

The evidence here is undeniably damning.