Search This Blog

Sunday, January 9, 2011

Smiling Assassins of Dialogue

It is so sad, it is just so sad. More than that is is also frustrating in the extreme.

Time and time again, any attempt to engage in conversation, to open dialogue with Sydney Episcopalians on their reading of the biblical creation account ends in early closure - a prompt shut-down of the subject.

More than that, they shut you down with a cool, precise, we-are-nicer-than-you way but the effect is still the same slamming of the door in you face as if they had raged at you before doing so.

This barrier to engagement and the veneer of niceness has an ill effect on those who attempt to redress the error pervading the Episcopalian Diocese on the subject of origins.

It draws serious rebuke as occurred in comments of the topic "Evangelical Courage" of 14 Nov at

This is all unhelpful.

For the record, Dr Thompson did not post my reponse to his irrelevant questions so I provide what I said now:

Mark, I was walking but you called to me. I will respond.

Nowhere did I say that you had denied the office of Jesus Christ as Creator nor had I said you failed to attribute to him the glory that is his due as the one for whom and by whom the universe was created.

I don't believe you have asked the appropriate question(s).

You shut down the conversation before I could make a thorough examination of your position

Off to the CMS Summer Camp, I suppose?

Sam Drucker


John said...

I feel stronger than you about what happened, Sam. My call is that Mark Thompson is parsimonious with truth. He's also a hyprocrite who accuses you of playing the man, and then in the same breath launches into a personal attack on you.

While not full-blown Gnostics, they display some characteristics of this heresy with regard to creation that an objective-minded person should be concerned over.

John said...

He also self-righteously proclaimed: "One last point: how many times do I have to say that I am not committed to theistic evolution, let alone any full-blown account of evolution, before you will accept what I say?"

Note his belief that not having a belief is the default position. And note what the first, and only, option would be if there were a position to uphold: A pagan, amterialist one. Talk about purses and sow's ears!

It's guys like Mark that give Christianty a bad name because of their lukewarm, ambiguous and ambivalent response to important issues about how life came about. Atheism loves these kind of guys - and so does Satan. Not having a position is as good as having the Enemy's because while you're not working and siding with God, you're actually working against him b y not lending support and by undermining the biblical history.

Mark's framing his options in such a non-committed manner is so, ahh, well, so, effeminate: "Well, it could be this..or that...but, oooohh, I'm not going to tell you because, well, it's so devisive. OOOhh, ahhh!"

Great work, Mark. The Kingdom of God has progressed greatly on your watch. BTW, just love all those incredibly relevantly evangelical postings of yours. Sure will haul in the lost.

sam drucker said...

John, I guess a person not willing to engage on the subject will show inconsistency in behaviour.

It is disappointing but I guess I have already said that.

Sam Drucker

neil moore said...

What you guys need to realise is the root of it all is that Biblical Creationists are held in contempt within the Diocese.

Their gloss of respectability quickly evaporates when the light of truth is brought near to them.