Why is it that the good "Squire" and "robt.k.fall"--who are one-in-the-same--gets to have two accounts here on the Baptist Board?
Now, it seems to be pretty darn clear that the persons in the following links are one-in-the-same:
Since Hamilton Square Baptist Church (where the "robt" attends) used to be "Zion Baptist Church" (where the good "Squire" attends) and since their pictures are the same......
How is it that this is OK when the rules clearly state:
"[SIZE=-1]11. Each person may only have one account. People using
multiple accounts may be banned." (source) [/SIZE]
Brother Arch, all I am asking from Squire Robertson/robt k. fall is an apology for lying to me. He openly stated he wasn't Squire, then Brother KYR exposed him, and he's yet to admit/apologize to me for lying. Is that too much to ask?
Another "witch hunt " I see.....what is the need for purity gentlemen that is so prevalent in your need and desire to expose? I'm sorry but I'm not going to be the one cornering someone and throwing the first rock. Rather my eyes are on Christ...and he is writing something in the dirt. Follow His example.
:godisgood:
Yes, I have used two personas on Baptist Board.
And no I don't consider myself
Though I'm interested in what I did to stir such animosity.
I can understand
but not the first.
I did not mean to deceive anybody and yes I do consider the two personas to be seperate.
I regret that some here took them as a deception.
As the Squire, I've sought to be neutral in this forum and sought to refrain from stateing my own opinion on the topics under discussion.
As Robt. K. Fall, I have stated opinions I felt I could not state as the Squire.
It seems that when I merely stated the commonly held position that the Great Commisssion is found in Matthew rather than John, I stirred up a hornets' nest.
And I further incensed some here when I had the temerity to state my opinion on the tenor of some of the more heated argumentation.
As for the matter of Dr. Mohler, it seems DHK's remarks were taken as acts of lese majeste.
And were taken as harshly as if this were Thailand.
The problem is while many here hold Dr. Mohler in high esteem.
Others do not.
For all the direct influence he has on my life and ministry, he might as well be on the moon.
If anyone here wants to see what real Arminian Baptists hold to PM me with your email addy and I'll send you the Statement of Faith of the Council of Evangelical Christian-Baptist Churches.
Our Russian brethren are truly Arminian.
Not all of us are revivalist in our practice, as some here would have us to be.
Rather, we follow after Spurgeon, who once said
If I got the quote wrong, I'm sorry.
It's 3:37 am local.
God bless you all.
And good night.
Squire - I was under the impression that we were not allowed multiple memberships. This is why so many are upset about this issue.
You're basically presenting two personas to the group, which, regardless your feelings on deception, is duplicitous. You are using your two memberships to present differing opinions on topics. Claiming neutrality under one name while offering a non-neutral opinion under another name is double-mindedness, whether intentional or not, and the Bible speaks against it.
Please note that this is not an attack on you. I don't know you well enough to launch an attack on you. I'm only posting in regards to what I've read in this and the other thread concerning the dual-membership issue. God bless.
I googled the Statement of Faith of the Council of Evangelical Christian-Baptist Churches and found it very interesting. I actually find myself in agreement with some of the items listed therein, even though I've never claimed myself to be Arminian. I tend to stay away from labeling myself under the Cal vs Arm banners. Thanks.
What are you talking about? Oh wait I see because he is a Calvinist. You know what, you just told on your self. This clearly indicates that you are harassing him because he is not a Calvinist. Thanks for the admission.
Not only is it an admission that you personally have an ungodly animus toward those who are not Calvinists but that all of you Calvinists do. Thanks for the divisions that only comes straight from the pit of hell.
RM, it's are about fairness. It's not right to ban someone....The Biblicist, and then ignore what an admin was doing. I PM'd an admin and got no response and nothing was done about it. It should be the same for everyone of us.
The appellation under our username should not cause different rules....
I'm in full agreement PT. Whatever his stated rationale could be, it is dishonest to use two different handles for one person. It's against the very rules he is here to enforce! People have been banned for doing what he's doing. His excuse defies the imagination.
Squire/Robert: you are to have one, and only one handle here. No alias is allowed. Stick with one and abandon the other. That's grace because lowly peons cannot get away with what you have foisted on us.
Actually it is common practice to not allow multiple accounts accept for admins and mods. It is done all over the internet and when I had my board I did the same thing.
You people do not get to make the rules or set the boundaries for them. If Andrew wants to allow mods and admins to have multiple accounts there is a good reason for that. It is your responsibility to worry about what the rules are for you, it is not your place to worry about what the rules are for mods and admins.
Squire having more than one account is perfectly fine. It gives the mods and admins an opportunity to interact on the board outside of their admin role. You all just need to grow up and send your wagons on down the trail.
It's dishonest to play like a Cal and a non-Cal simultaneously. That's doing exactly the same as a troll. It's EXCEEDINGLY dishonest (treachery actually) if he were the one behind banning The Bib: