Opinion of jmfcst

[JSojourner]

I never thought he was obsessed with Palin.  He thought (as I do) she was attractive.  And he was first to say she would be selected...when a lot of us were pooh-pooing the idea.  So props for that. Additional respect for his integrity in recognizing she was a dumb when it became quite clear to anyone with an open mind.

He has a remarkably good read on football, even though I don't share his love of the Cowboys.

Knows more than I ever will about the stock market and investments. Seems to have a pretty good economic head on his shoulders.

Devoted family man and Christian. Part of a church that does some really impressive things to help people in need.

He rarely resorts (if ever...I can't think of a time) to insults and name calling in debate, which I consider very classy.

All that lands in the FF category.

The rest?  Well, HP is too harsh.  But he's nearly impossible to have a good faith dialogue with about anything Biblical. I don't think this comes from any deep-seated nastiness or hate.  It's just a "this is how I read it... how I read it is right...and how you read it is wrong" mentality. In that very "no shades of gray" sense, he is the BRTD of the fundamentalist Chrisitan right.

So a vote is really impossible for me.  Though if the Cowboys end up in the Super Bowl against the Steelers, HP will be quite doable!  Har!

[JSojourner]

The rest?  Well, HP is too harsh.  But he's nearly impossible to have a good faith dialogue with about anything Biblical. I don't think this comes from any deep-seated nastiness or hate.  It's just a "this is how I read it... how I read it is right...and how you read it is wrong" mentality. In that very "no shades of gray" sense, he is the BRTD of the fundamentalist Chrisitan right.

To say that our disagreements are based on me being unable to accept another opinion is really a red herring that I think is obvious to all that read our disagreements.  In fact, you and I agree on many biblical issues, JSJ.  And, on those issues of agreement, you and I can walk through the scriptures with the same approach.  I say again: when you and I share the same approach, we are pretty much in agreement.

But, when you, by your own choice, do not follow that same approach, it has lead to us disagreeing on certain hard-hitting issues such as: the necessity of faith in Jesus Christ, the necessity of repentance, and homosexuality.

So, basically, when you and I walk through scripture and allow the chips to fall where they may, we agree.  When you “refuse to accept” the way the chips fall, we disagree.  It’s a matter of the difference in consistency of our individual approach

Even most of the non-believers on this forum agree with my interpretation on these issues.  And, historically, my interpretations on these 3 matters are shared by many more Christians throughout history.  Yet you keep attempting to portray our disputes as if I am up in a tree by myself and that I am stubbornly unwilling to climb down.

I admit to being hardheaded, but that doesn’t mean that my hardheadedness is necessarily the cause of our differences, rather I think it is a lack of consistency on your behalf due to certain scriptural positions being too harsh for you to swallow…and I think the majority of unbelievers on this forum would agree with my portrayal of our dispute.

I disagree with you a hundred percent.  But now we are disagreeing about the nature of our disagreement...which only proves dialogue around issues of soteriology, sexuality and Biblical inerrancy are impossible.  Perhaps I am part of the problem, too...I don't know.  While I see a lot of common ground in some areas, perhaps we are both just too enamored of our own interpretations of Scripture.

But -- and I mean this -- I really do consider you an exemplar in many areas, not least being personal devotion.

[JSojourner]

FF. He adds another perspective for us that we would otherwise not have, and he does so with knowledge and civility. jmfcst gets a bum rap here, and it's too bad.

No, he's just a hate monger and a bigot.

I disagree, Opie.  I presume you are referring to Jmfcst's views on sexuality.  Well, I certainly do not share his views.  However, I do not believe he comes by those ideas from a place of hatred or bigotry.

Jmfcst genuinely believes people who are gay are destroying themselves spiritually, and eternally so.  And given Jesus' teaching to care about the welfare (temporal and eternal) of all people, Jmfcst believes he should tell his version of the truth regarding sexuality.  

He has never approached the issue from a "God hates fags" perspective and, in point of fact, has been quite dismissive of those knuckleheads.  This is one of the reasons I manage to respect him, despite our dramatically divergent views.  

[JSojourner]

jmfcst has posted more in a thread which asks what OTHERS think of him, than others have posted............classic:

If Jmfcst had an ass that looked like that, he would be considerably more popular! 

[JSojourner]

Call me crazy, but I like him. We don't ever seem to agree on anything, but whatever.

He has a terrific sense of humor...whether the barbs are aimed at his party or mine, I usually get a good chuckle.  That automatically makes someone you disagree with -- even on major issues -- pretty likeable.

But I still prefer the young lass in GM's photo. 

[JSojourner]

But I still prefer the young lass in GM's photo. 

She would hurt you bad, Sojourner......

Oh no, I am never the spankee...I am always the spank-er. 

Unless, of course, you are referring to various contortions that might be necessary AFTER the spanking.  Well, then...perhaps.  But that's a good hurt.