New Subforum

[Letalis]

New subforum created per member request.

http://www.christianforums.com/t5673841

Please come up with some guidelines for the subforum when you have a chance.

Welcome! :wave:

[JAS4Yeshua]

Thanks, Letalis. :)

[JAS4Yeshua]

From discussion in WoF Forum COnfusion (http://www.christianforums.com/t5673841-wof-forum-confusion.html) this is what has been discussed for this forum.

The way it appears right now, there is a:

Spirit-Filled - Pentecostal/ Charismatic Congregation

This has sub-forums of:
Pentecostal and WoF

But no Charismatic Non-WoF sub-forum.

This means that Pentecostal and WoF believers have their own space, but Charismatics who do not agree with WoF have no place to call their own.

In the interest of harmony and in line with how congregations are seperate IRL, wouldn't it make sense to split this forum into its three distinct parts?

Now is the time to do this...

Because of Dave and Pete's clarifications, I'm re-wording my post. :P ;)

What makes other Charismatics different from WoF or Pentecostal?

1) Healing teaching
2) Prosperity teaching
3) Gift dispersement among believers
4) Slain in the Spirit

These four (and possibly more) are the teachings that tend to be divided over, and should be the basis for the new forum.

Again, I think we should iron out our rules with our existing forums before adding new forums, but wanted to still put in my 2 cents towards the topic at hand. ;)

This (obviously) isn't inclusive of every post in that thread, and we'll have opportunity to define who we are. I'm going to start a separate thread for rules discussion and voting, as well as one for discussion of the forum title, if it should be renamed or not.

[flaglady]

Congratulations, Jas. Look forward to a(nother) new dawn!!

[NewSong]

Thank you very much for the subforum. I am very pleased. :)

[Dave01]

Congrats on the new forum!!

[JAS4Yeshua]

Thanks, Dave. :)

[Tenebrae]

Brilliant:thumbsup:

[JK]

Thank you for the new forum

[talitha]

forgive me if this is already being discussed somewhere else - I have not read all of the threads in this subforum yet.

I know I'm Charismatic and not WF, but I am unclear on what 'we' supposedly believe about all of these things:

1) Healing teaching - I do believe that our healing is provided for; however, I also believe that God can use times of sickness for good in our lives. I think there needs to be some balance in this teaching.

2) Prosperity teaching - I just cannot go along with the fulness of WOF prosperity teaching - there are WAAAYYY too many poor saints - myself included.

3) Gift dispersement among believers - WOFers don't believe in gift dispersement? I think they would beg to differ about that. What do you mean by that, James?

4) Slain in the Spirit - erm, I most defnitely believe in this and other creative ways God has of touching people.

blessings
tal

[JAS4Yeshua]

My name is Jason, but I can see why you thought James. ;)

Those are four things that seem to cause the greatest strife and division. I didn't expand upon them there, because that is something that is meant for the rule discussion.

Healing: WoF and some Pentecostals believe in PHIA and similar doctrines. We believe the God does heal, but in His time and in His way, and when He doesn't He provides to help us through the sickness.

Prosperity: Teaching of the WoF (I think exculive, but I could be mistaken). We disagree with.

Gift Dispersment: This is more Pentecostal, and is along the lines of tongues being evidence of salvation. Some believe you have access to every gift, while we believe that Holy Spirit disperses the gifts to each individual believer as He sees fit.

Slain in the Spirit: I was told this is Pentecostal. It is something we disagree with.

Again, since these haven't been defined yet, the "we" is what I've gathered from others who have requested this subforum. I know it is what I believe, and I can only assume that others believe the same. That is why we still have to determine what our rules will be.

[talitha]

Gift Dispersment: This is more Pentecostal, and is along the lines of tongues being evidence of salvation. Some believe you have access to every gift, while we believe that Holy Spirit disperses the gifts to each individual believer as He sees fit.

Slain in the Spirit: I was told this is Pentecostal. It is something we disagree with.

Again, since these haven't been defined yet, the "we" is what I've gathered from others who have requested this subforum. I know it is what I believe, and I can only assume that others believe the same. That is why we still have to determine what our rules will be.


Okay, so this forum is not for everyone who meets the title-description. I see. :(

[JAS4Yeshua]

Which is why I started the thread about renaming the forum. It is prejudicial for one, and for two, it doesn't cover everything.

[talitha]

okay

remaining podless
tal

[JAS4Yeshua]

okay

remaining podless
tal
I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. My point is that we shouldn't restrict based on WoF or Pentecostal, but on the teachings. I know there are plenty of Pentecostals, like yourself, that would be at home in this forum. :)

[talitha]

I have a Pentecostal icon because in the absence of a Charismatic one it is the one that fits me best. My church is non-denom. I am neither Pentecostal nor WOF, and I had hoped that this subforum would be a place free from the arguments between one and the other.... I had hoped that it would be a place where we wouldn't have to explain that the Lord is free to manifest any way He wants regardless of the boxes we want to put Him in......

[JAS4Yeshua]

Which is what we are trying to achieve. We could definately use your feedback when it comes to establishing the rules. :)

[didaskalos]

Am I correct that the main thrust of this forum is to exclude WoFers from participating?

IOWs the only thing that distinguishes you, the one thing that makes you different is that you disagree with someone else?

I wonder if this is not the Thulsa Doom mentality"

"Like it or not, WoF defines who you are and what gives you identity and individuality. Without WoF, this forum would not exist."

In logical terms, this makes for a very weak and dangerous point of commonality. Like the KKK (who were prejudicial against Blacks) and the Nazi (who were prejudicial against Jews), forming a group based on prejudice against another group has never gone well.

So what is the difference between this and the WoF or Pentecostal subforums? Those forums are based on common beliefs and fellowhip around those beliefs. This forum, OTOH, is based on exclusion and prejudice against people, and states this in the very forum name.

I am interested in how you plan to prevent WoFers from participating in your discussions. Will you make a rule that says "no WoFers allowed?" Will you exclude them, a single specific group, based on what they believe? Will you put up a sign over the drinking fountain? Will you make them ride in the back of the bus or wear a badge?

I am very interested in seeing how all this pans out.

[JAS4Yeshua]

If you've taken the time to read anything before posting, you would have seen that I've been against the name because of what you say. But, just as there is a space in the WoF forum for those who agree with PHIA to discuss freely, we now have a place where we can discuss our views of healing freely (among other things). It is Charismatic without the Charismania. ;)

[talitha]

TPFKAD,

I understand your qualms...... but in a practical sense, here is what I have found at CF in the forums where I thought I might belong:

WOF - too self-centered, too much focus on what "I" get, and on big-name preachers like Hagin and Copeland
Pentecostal - too legalistic and boring, too focused on tongues as "the" evidence
SFPC - wayyyyy too much debate, mostly between WOF and anti-WOF
Non-denom - anarchy

[didaskalos]

TPFKAD,

I understand your qualms...... but in a practical sense, here is what I have found at CF in the forums where I thought I might belong:

WOF - too self-centered, too much focus on what "I" get, and on big-name preachers like Hagin and Copeland
Pentecostal - too legalistic and boring, too focused on tongues as "the" evidence
SFPC - wayyyyy too much debate, mostly between WOF and anti-WOF
Non-denom - anarchy
What you say about these other forums may be true... at least to you.
But coming to this forum, whose only distinguishing element is to be against another group, is sort of like jumping out of the frying pan into the fire.
Seriously... a forum based on the exclusion of others?
When the Bible talks about preference and prejudice, it uses the word hate... even in regards to ones parents, wife, and children.
You may disagree... but I think this forum is based on prejudice.... Hate!

[JAS4Yeshua]

Dids, whether you realize it or not, the forum name came about from Pete's suggestion. Pete, who is a Word of Faith member.

Also, like I said earlier, if you've taken the time to read posts, you will see that there is a discussion underway to determine a better name for the forum.

[geetrue]

Lets just be charismatic ... doesn't the name come from the heart and stand for what is in the heart?

Jason have you ever been slain in the spirit? I have and how could I ever deny that it is part of a spirit filled life to recieve a touch from God.

It's called the anointing and a fresh anointing breaks the yoke. I get tired of altar calls where everyone comes up and lines up to get slain in the Spirit, but something or someone is making them all fall down.

We have probably slapped some nice people in the face by putting that we are non-WOF in the title.

I think people can make a choice of which sub forum to attend without that disclaimer. Don't you?

Lets face it Pentecostals and WOF'ers are organized churches ... What are charismatic's?

I have already seen several charismatic's post that I would like to get to know better.

People are looking for a place to get along with others of like minded efforts to be one with God.

We can do that, right?

[didaskalos]

Dids, whether you realize it or not, the forum name came about from Pete's suggestion. Pete, who is a Word of Faith member.

Also, like I said earlier, if you've taken the time to read posts, you will see that there is a discussion underway to determine a better name for the forum.
You can call it what you want.
The skinheads do not call themselves "People, non blacks..." but we all know what they are about.
It is still based on exclusion rather than common beliefs. As long as the fellowship is based on excluding a specific group... it has the stick of a hate group.

[didaskalos]

I have tried to make my point.
I will now fade away, hoping my thoughts were understood.
Peace to all.

[JAS4Yeshua]

It is based on common beliefs, not exclusion. It is just those beliefs differ from yours. We aren't excluding you, you are excluding yourself by your differing opinion. The same thing goes for the Pentecostal and Word of Faith Forums. They are there so people with like beliefs have a safe place, not to disclude anyone. Exception is when it comes to debates, and that exists in the SF/PC Forum and all subforums.

[talitha]

You callin' us haters, Dids?

[robbymac]

No, Dids, it's a desire for a forum where charismatics can discuss things WITHOUT constantly being inundated with WoF'ers calling us heretics, blasphemers, or the latest flame "No-Faith Charismatics".

Plus, it's kinda strange that you WOF people get your own sub-forum where we aren't allowed, and yet you have the audacity to say that we're based on prejudice and hate? Look in the mirror, dude. Your entire WOF ub-forum is based on excluding everyone that doesn't think just like you do. It seem strange -- hypocritical, almost -- to insist on your private forum, and yet deny the same to others who don't agree with your particular theological bent.

We just want somewhere that's safe to speak to each other without being flamed, character assassinated, and treated with contempt and mocking. That's why it has to exclude WOF.

We can all still meet in the main forum in we want.

[synger]

I think the problem is that there is a movement, "Charismatic" that includes Pentecostal and Word-Faith. But there is no one word or term that can be used to define Charismatics who are not part of those groups. In library terms, it's a taxonomy, or labeling issue.

It's like having a big bin for berries, and inside it one one big bag for strawberries, another big bag for blueberries... and a third for any berry that's "left over" and is neither strawberry nor blueberry. To have separate small bags for all other kinds of berries would separate them out into too small of groupings. How many "marionberries" or "huckleberries" are you likely to have to fill a single bag? But if you group all the other berries together, all the marionberries and huckleberries and boysenberries and blackberries and raspberries and gooseberries... then you have a big, mixed bag of all sorts of berries that are not strawberries or blueberries.

I'd love to have another term to use. But we'd be making it up. It needs to be clear, looking at the structure of SFPC, that this new forum is a subset of the larger SFPC, but does not include Pentecostal or WoF, which already have their own forums.

Personally, I'd go with "Charismatic", since the "charismatic movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_movement)" was inspired by the Pentecostals but consists of people who often stay in their home denominations.

In that case, we'd have a "Spirit-filled" main forum, with subforums for Pentecostal, Word Faith, and Charismatic. By process of elimination, people shoudl be able to figure out which is which, meaning that "Charismatic" will by necessity be the "mixed bag".

[talitha]

I think the problem is that there is a movement, "Charismatic" that includes Pentecostal and Word-Faith. But there is no one word or term that can be used to define Charismatics who are not part of those groups. In library terms, it's a taxonomy, or labeling issue.

It's like having a big bin for berries, and inside it one one big bag for strawberries, another big bag for blueberries... and a third for any berry that's "left over" and is neither strawberry nor blueberry. To have separate small bags for all other kinds of berries would separate them out into too small of groupings. How many "marionberries" or "huckleberries" are you likely to have to fill a single bag? But if you group all the other berries together, all the marionberries and huckleberries and boysenberries and blackberries and raspberries and gooseberries... then you have a big, mixed bag of all sorts of berries that are not strawberries or blueberries.

I'd love to have another term to use. But we'd be making it up. It needs to be clear, looking at the structure of SFPC, that this new forum is a subset of the larger SFPC, but does not include Pentecostal or WoF, which already have their own forums.

Personally, I'd go with "Charismatic", since the "charismatic movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_movement)" was inspired by the Pentecostals but consists of people who often stay in their home denominations.

In that case, we'd have a "Spirit-filled" main forum, with subforums for Pentecostal, Word Faith, and Charismatic. By process of elimination, people shoudl be able to figure out which is which, meaning that "Charismatic" will by necessity be the "mixed bag".
A very good explanation.

[JAS4Yeshua]

I think the problem is that there is a movement, "Charismatic" that includes Pentecostal and Word-Faith. But there is no one word or term that can be used to define Charismatics who are not part of those groups. In library terms, it's a taxonomy, or labeling issue.

It's like having a big bin for berries, and inside it one one big bag for strawberries, another big bag for blueberries... and a third for any berry that's "left over" and is neither strawberry nor blueberry. To have separate small bags for all other kinds of berries would separate them out into too small of groupings. How many "marionberries" or "huckleberries" are you likely to have to fill a single bag? But if you group all the other berries together, all the marionberries and huckleberries and boysenberries and blackberries and raspberries and gooseberries... then you have a big, mixed bag of all sorts of berries that are not strawberries or blueberries.

I'd love to have another term to use. But we'd be making it up. It needs to be clear, looking at the structure of SFPC, that this new forum is a subset of the larger SFPC, but does not include Pentecostal or WoF, which already have their own forums.

Personally, I'd go with "Charismatic", since the "charismatic movement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_movement)" was inspired by the Pentecostals but consists of people who often stay in their home denominations.

In that case, we'd have a "Spirit-filled" main forum, with subforums for Pentecostal, Word Faith, and Charismatic. By process of elimination, people shoudl be able to figure out which is which, meaning that "Charismatic" will by necessity be the "mixed bag".
Excellent post! Describes the situation perfectly. :)

I would like to state that yes, we would be making up the name, but most of the names we use were made up at one point or another, either from being derived from another word, or being labelled somewhere along the way. I don't think we should be too concerned about that side of things.

I do agree with a basic "Charismatic" name, though.

[Aymn27]

I'm still confused with the "slain in the spirit" difference - I am an Anglican, former Roman Catholic - who currently attends a Vineyard Church - I have been "slain" or "rested" in the Spirit...is this an objectionable teaching for charismatics? I was not aware of that...

Could someone please elaborate?

[talitha]

I'm still confused with the "slain in the spirit" difference - I am an Anglican, former Roman Catholic - who currently attends a Vineyard Church - I have been "slain" or "rested" in the Spirit...is this an objectionable teaching for charismatics? I was not aware of that...

Could someone please elaborate?
I think it is just one thing that we in this subforum will probably not all agree on, unless God decides to change some people's minds ;)

[Simon Peter]

I'm still confused with the "slain in the spirit" difference - I am an Anglican, former Roman Catholic - who currently attends a Vineyard Church - I have been "slain" or "rested" in the Spirit...is this an objectionable teaching for charismatics? I was not aware of that...

Could someone please elaborate?

Hi Aymn,

I've attended AoG, Calvary Chapel, Vineyard, and large independant Charismatic churches in the UK and USA for several years each; and have visited other charismatic churches in Canada and France.

Being 'slain in the spirit' is acceptable to almost all charismatics. Though most Calvary Chapels (self described Bapticostals) would probably object to this in a church service, but are less likely to object in a small group setting.

I know one poster on this forum who thinks 'slain in the spirit' is not Charismatic, attends a Calvary Chapel, which is possibly the least charismatic of the mainstream SF churches.

Hope this helps,
Simon

[Brucea]

Wow
I don't know what to think or say!

I have leaning towards WoF folks yet feel some of their conclusions are carried out to far. I'm rejected by the S/F like A of G because I seem to have a bit of a baptist flare in me. My heart is set upon the wholeness of the grace of God and believe many try to mix the two major covenant the New Testament deals with. Not so much with the word they speak but how they try to live for Christ somehow relying on their own performance to either make them righteous or keep them righteous.

With that said, if this is what makes you fit into this new category here I am!

If this new forum is for those with the Pentecostal experience of speaking and tongues and yet do not accept all the tradition of the different Pentecostal groups, here I am?

What I'm sure of now is someone now thinks I don't belong to this group either!

[JimfromOhio]

Didn't realized we have a new sub-forum til now.:doh:

At least, now I know about it and looking forward to future postings and lurking in here. :D

[JAS4Yeshua]

Being 'slain in the spirit' is acceptable to almost all charismatics. Though most Calvary Chapels (self described Bapticostals) would probably object to this in a church service, but are less likely to object in a small group setting.
Bapticostal? I have to admit, I've been attending Calvary Chapels since December 1995 (regularly since July 1996) and this is the first time I heard that term. ;)

I know one poster on this forum who thinks 'slain in the spirit' is not Charismatic, attends a Calvary Chapel, which is possibly the least charismatic of the mainstream SF churches.

Hope this helps,
Simon
Don't know if you are referring to me or not. ;)

I had a long discussion with Tamara in a Slain in the Spirit thread in which I explained my views and listened to her explanations. What it comes down to for me, personally, is a difference in what I call "Moved by the Spirit" as opposed to "Slain in the Spirit."

In a nutshell, it isn't so much as "Slain in the Spirit" that I disagree with, but some of the abuses that most of us do seem to agree on. The main area of difference between myself and others was in the area of falling. After my discussion with Tamara, I have agreed that I could agree with falling, based on the testimonies of many here. I'm still leery of it, and, as with all things of the Spirit, I will test completely.

Also, to say that Calvary Chapel is the "least Charismatic" you'd have to clarify that more. How would you describe "more" or "less." We do have more order during a church service than other Charismatic churches do (not saying that is better or worse, mind you). But in truth, Calvary Chapel is no less Charismatic than any other, just that the gifts are in operation in a different way.

[JAS4Yeshua]

Wow
I don't know what to think or say!

I have leaning towards WoF folks yet feel some of their conclusions are carried out to far. I'm rejected by the S/F like A of G because I seem to have a bit of a baptist flare in me. My heart is set upon the wholeness of the grace of God and believe many try to mix the two major covenant the New Testament deals with. Not so much with the word they speak but how they try to live for Christ somehow relying on their own performance to either make them righteous or keep them righteous.

With that said, if this is what makes you fit into this new category here I am!

If this new forum is for those with the Pentecostal experience of speaking and tongues and yet do not accept all the tradition of the different Pentecostal groups, here I am?

What I'm sure of now is someone now thinks I don't belong to this group either!
You are definately welcome here. Don't let anyone say otherwise, even if they disagree with you. :)

Didn't realized we have a new sub-forum til now.:doh:

At least, now I know about it and looking forward to future postings and lurking in here. :D
Hey there, Jim! Good to have you around! :)

[Simon Peter]

Being 'slain in the spirit' is acceptable to almost all charismatics. Though most Calvary Chapels (self described Bapticostals) would probably object to this in a church service, but are less likely to object in a small group setting.

Bapticostal? I have to admit, I've been attending Calvary Chapels since December 1995 (regularly since July 1996) and this is the first time I heard that term. ;)

Hi Jason,

Yes, "Bapticostal", right out of the mouth of a Calvary Chapel Pastor of some 15-20 years. I attended a Calvary Chapel for about six years and think this - in many ways - is an appropriate description.

I know one poster on this forum who thinks 'slain in the spirit' is not Charismatic, attends a Calvary Chapel, which is possibly the least charismatic of the mainstream SF churches.

Don't know if you are referring to me or not. ;)

I had a long discussion with Tamara in a Slain in the Spirit thread in which I explained my views and listened to her explanations. What it comes down to for me, personally, is a difference in what I call "Moved by the Spirit" as opposed to "Slain in the Spirit."

In a nutshell, it isn't so much as "Slain in the Spirit" that I disagree with, but some of the abuses that most of us do seem to agree on. The main area of difference between myself and others was in the area of falling. After my discussion with Tamara, I have agreed that I could agree with falling, based on the testimonies of many here. I'm still leery of it, and, as with all things of the Spirit, I will test completely.

I did see much of the slain thread. :swoon: I think you handled yourself quite well, particularly as you were rather outnumbered. :D

I don't have problem with being 'slain', but I have sometimes had reservations about some of the manifestations, some of the 'Holy Laughter' excesses. I have been to the Toronto Airport church, and have witnessed and experienced moves of the Holy Spirit in various churches. But I'm still unable to fully understand some of it.

The closest I can get is to wonder if when the Holy Spirit comes in a powerful way, the enemy is right there trying to muddy the waters. Making it very difficult to discern what is from God and what from Satan. A related example of this would be the powerful encounters of deliverance, whether in scriptures or contemporary experience, it's not unusual to see a manifestation of an evil spirit, as the Holy Spirit does His work.

So generally I accept that most of what we see is from God, but I leave room for some scepticism. I can be leery and test at certian times. I would encourage you though, 'not to throw the baby out with the bath water'.

Also, to say that Calvary Chapel is the "least Charismatic" you'd have to clarify that more. How would you describe "more" or "less." We do have more order during a church service than other Charismatic churches do (not saying that is better or worse, mind you).

What I actually said was "Calvary Chapel is possibly the least charismatic of the mainstream SF churches."
The key to this is in your post:

"We do have more order during a church service than other Charismatic churches do (not saying that is better or worse, mind you)."

Order may sound like a good thing, but at least you acknowledge that it could make things worse not better. In CC case, their concern for order (or a fear of disorder) has meant that they are reluctant to allow the gifts of the Spirit to be used in a church service. They are more open to the gifts (on paper) in small groups, but unfortunately the mindset often carries over into the small groups.

But in truth, Calvary Chapel is no less Charismatic than any other, just that the gifts are in operation in a different way.

Why don't you tell us about some typical Charismatic experiences that are found in your church; and how the gifts are in operation in a differet way?

[JAS4Yeshua]

Outnumbered? Perhaps. I was the only one supporting my side of the discussion. I didn't feel outnumbered, though. I enjoy discussing differing view points because the Lord works through that to sharpen all parties. I learned some things from others and I would hope others learn from me.

Regarding the better or worse, I didn't say that it could be worse. Different doesn't have to mean better or worse. It could just be different. What you might see as worse, I might see as better. That is the beauty of our differences, not something to divide over, but something to embrace.

My whole point is you can't say "least Charismatic" about Calvary Chapel any more than I can say "most Charismatic" about any other church group.

My "different way" was meant that we don't excercize the gifts directly during a church service. They are done during prayer meetings, small groups, afterglows, etc. Not all home studies or Bible studies, as many are handled like that of a church service, as you have also stated. (Although you mentioned small groups, which includes other types of groups as well).

The point is, if you talk about the church service, I agree, in that aspect it is "less." But if you talk about Charismatics in general, then no, you cannot state that we are any less Charismatic because we teach and believe that the Gifts of the Spirit are alive and active in the Body of Believers today. That includes practicing all the gifts. ;)

[Simon Peter]

I'll try to explain what I meant by Calvary Chapel being the 'least charismatic'.

I suppose my understanding of 'charismatic' is not only a professed belief in the gifts, but the actual practice of them. I am sure Satan believes all the gifts are for today, but that doesn't make him a charismatic does it?

It is my perspective that a church that practices the gifts a lot is 'more charismatic' than a church that says they believe in them but rarely practice them.

How many of these have you witnessed in a CC meeting?

- A word spoken in a tongue
- That word interpreted
- A prophetic word for an individual
- A corporate prophetic word
- A miraculous healing
- A person being 'slain' by the Spirit
- A word of Knowledge
- A person singing in tounges
- Someone delivered from a demon

[JAS4Yeshua]

http://eteamz.com/sites/kulit/images/newgotcha.gif

[JAS4Yeshua]

http://eteamz.com/sites/kulit/images/newgotcha.gif

[Simon Peter]

Jason,

deleted...

[JAS4Yeshua]

http://eteamz.com/sites/kulit/images/newgotcha.gif

[JAS4Yeshua]

http://eteamz.com/sites/kulit/images/newgotcha.gif

I was confused. Forgive me.

http://eteamz.com/sites/kulit/images/newblush.gif

[JAS4Yeshua]

http://eteamz.com/sites/kulit/images/newblush.gif

I reread your original post, and I was partly in the wrong. I still think you had to classify "Least Charismatic" which you did in a later post. I just took it too far, and I shouldn't have.

I never meant to imply or suggest that you couldn't express your opinion. I just meant to request you explain more. I just got carried away on a tangent that I should never have gone onto.

http://eteamz.com/sites/kulit/images/newgotcha.gif

[Simon Peter]

Jason,

You are forgiven...

I apologise for where my perspectives have offended you, and for being a little too reactionary.

cheers,
Simon

[JAS4Yeshua]

Thanks for the apologies, and you are forgiven as well. I wasn't offended, just a little overly defensive, where it wasn't needed. I'm just as guilty of misunderstandings as the next person. ;)