tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post114374251788233348..comments2023-10-27T08:44:56.668-05:00Comments on Oversight of Souls: Plagiarism again, response to Sheep's CribRay Van Nestehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05871695572227993190noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143819549177487472006-03-31T09:39:00.000-06:002006-03-31T09:39:00.000-06:00Brother Gillmartin,I accept your apology. Thank yo...Brother Gillmartin,<BR/><BR/>I accept your apology. Thank you. The goal of course is truth for the good of the church, as you suggested as well.Ray Van Nestehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05871695572227993190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143817473832974552006-03-31T09:04:00.000-06:002006-03-31T09:04:00.000-06:00Who's on first?Who's on first?B.J. Maxwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12944776042828126606noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143765625258946852006-03-30T18:40:00.000-06:002006-03-30T18:40:00.000-06:00Mr. Gillimartin, Now maybe I am confused. It seem...Mr. Gillimartin, <BR/>Now maybe I am confused. It seemed clear to me that you were suggesting that Dr. Van Neste was advocating a position in line with "neo-pharisaism." Thus it would be logical to conclude that this was just modern pharisaism, especially since you offered no definition of "neo-pharisaism" that differed from "pharisaism" in any way. Additionally, you did define "pharisaism" at the end of your post, though you did not offer a definition of "neo-pharisaism," leaving one to assume, as I did that you meant "modern-day pharisaism." You said this in regards to Dr. Van Neste:<BR/><BR/>"At first I thought Dr. Van Neste had fallen into this trap, but then he put up a post which clearly demonstrates he abhors pharisaism as much as I do. So at this point I believe he has inadvertantly stepped in it and just needs a good shoe cleaning."<BR/><BR/>I don't think (nor do I think anyone else believes) that you were calling Dr. Van Neste a Pharisee, but you seemed to suggest implicitly that he was being legalistic in regards to this issue. Now, what I took issue with and felt you should apologize for was your comment in which you said the following:<BR/><BR/>"Clearly the unwritten words in Van Neste's your posts reveal an underlying theme of superiority and arrogance; they you imply that only those who fit his your round hole are acceptable, the others are hopelessly doomed to trying to get into a square hole. I don't think so!"<BR/><BR/>That to me was worthy of an apology above all else, not the issue of whether or not Dr. Van Neste is a Pharisee when it comes to writing sermons.<BR/><BR/>I hope that clarifies why I called for an apology and why I felt one was in order (not that Dr. Van Neste desires one or feels that one is necessary). Thank you, however, for your candor and your willingness to apologize for not being clear.D.R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11588838898962876640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143759388505805042006-03-30T16:56:00.000-06:002006-03-30T16:56:00.000-06:00Your response is proof that it's easy to write les...Your response is proof that it's easy to write less and say more. Good job.Kevin Roehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14822623796888650288noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143758361334467692006-03-30T16:39:00.000-06:002006-03-30T16:39:00.000-06:00Brother Ray -Praise God for solid supportive frien...Brother Ray -<BR/><BR/>Praise God for solid supportive friends! Wouldn't you agree?<BR/><BR/>With regard to your response ... I'm envious of your gift for brevity, a gift those of Irish descent sorely lack I suppose.<BR/><BR/>I'm hoping more will post comments on our blogs for the benefit of all; at this moment I mulling over what has been said. <BR/><BR/>Please understand, I am deeply concerned about the health of the Bride in the western world. I pray the Lord will allow both of us to make a contribution to the restoration of her health in our efforts.<BR/><BR/>BTW I deliberately avoid the use of the term "Pharisee" because it doesn't fit you. For the same reason, I also avoided using the words "legalism" or "legalist." In spite my efforts, it has been suggested I labeled you a Pharisee.<BR/><BR/>If felt in any way this to be true let me apologize. It is not true in my heart, in spite of what my words may have conveyed.John Gillmartinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11985997360287568530noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143751692113825972006-03-30T14:48:00.000-06:002006-03-30T14:48:00.000-06:00You have been very gracious and forthright in your...You have been very gracious and forthright in your response, Dr. Van Neste. I appreciate your irenic spirit in light of the fact that this man has clearly misunderstood and, in turn, misrepresented your words. What's worse, he has moved past your words to your motives. Like D.R., I posted a response (more like a defense of you. Yes, I know, you don't need me defending you, but it made me feel better) over on Mr. Gillmartin's site.Bretthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03371609028217669747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143747988051899312006-03-30T13:46:00.000-06:002006-03-30T13:46:00.000-06:00I wrote a response over at Sheep's Crib myself and...I wrote a response over at Sheep's Crib myself and suffice to say I think that Mr. Gillmartin is confused. He doesn't seem to understand the arguments that either Steve Sjogren or you are making. And I think his charges of "neo-pharisaism" and legalism are both unwarranted and tacky. I think he misses what the Biblical call of pastor-teachers/elders is, as well. I am hoping he eventually sees the point being made. Thanks again for bringing this critical subject to the forefront for discussion. I know of a few people who do (or at least have done in the past) exactly what Sjogren calls for pastor to do (one is sadly a Union grad).D.R.https://www.blogger.com/profile/11588838898962876640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17279588.post-1143747058935407792006-03-30T13:30:00.000-06:002006-03-30T13:30:00.000-06:00Very simply put. And simplicity is often the best...Very simply put. And simplicity is often the best argument. It seems common sense that preachers need to spend time in the Word. John McArthur said this week on Dr. Mohler's radio show that spending time in the Word is first and foremost a means to edify and feed his own soul to walk with God daily. The congregational ministry is really the overflow of such personal labor in the Word.<BR/><BR/>I don't think the Sheep's Crib really understands you if it thought it was necessary to critique you of discouraging study of resources. Anyone who knows you will say that you are about as modern day Puritan as they come (which is a great compliment).<BR/><BR/>In short, nice job on the brevity of this response and encouraging everyone to check out the archives and compare the positions. But somehow I think this post is going to generate a lot more debate and comments.Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12151986979908159019noreply@blogger.com