[Apologetics] My "fan" club

Tue Jun 26 16:55:20 EDT 2007

Hi
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Art Kelly 

  Since he is unwilling to provide reciprocal courtesies
  to you, then you should provide all of the facts about
  his distortions and deceit on YOUR website.

  In fact, he has done you a favor. 

  By trying to play with a stacked deck, he has exposed
  the fallacious nature of his modus operadi and cast
  great disrepute on the nature of all of his comments.

  Keep on eye on his website and then report on YOUR
  website what he is doing that is factually and
  intellectually in error.
At the moment I save the website as PDF each time I see a new comment.  I hope to put it all together next week.

Now he's stated more explicitly:

"Well, Stephen has emailed me saying he is not able to provide clear unequivocal Biblical evidence for the questions I asked him on this blog."

I never said that.  I don't know how such a statement could be sincere.

I'll have each and every e-mail to and from him saved as PDFs as well, with text files for the headers, and have them available with my blog defence.
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Stuart D. Gathman 

  On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Stephen Korsman wrote:

  > And he's said that I don't allow comments on my blog, and also that I
  > said that I am unable to answer his questions.

  > http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com/2007/01/sabbath-musings-pt1.html

  He might have had technical difficulties on your blog and jumped to 
  conclusions.  (Wrong - but easy to do.  Don't jump to conclusions yourself.)
Please point out if you see me jumping to conclusions!!

His comment at the last link above says:

"It's interesting to note that Stephen Korsman blog does not allow people to respond. He has banned comments or participation."

That doesn't sound like technical difficulties.  It's a broad statement.  Which I did misinterpret, but I don't think it's the same as below:

On my blog it becomes:

"As far comments being blocked, there are some posts that you are not allowing comments, I didn't say you blocked me personally."

Since I worked out how to activate comments, there are very few where comments are closed; most are because I didn't actively set the comments on because I didn't think it was important enough to comment - I have few commentators; the rest I either forgot to set the comments on, or was having trouble with comments.  He may be jumping to conclusions, but I think it's clear enough that he's not willing to give me the benefit of the doubt on much.

Quite frankly, I don't want his sort of contribution.  Maybe that sounds unfair, but I must draw the line somewhere.  Civilised dialogue is fine, pontificating with no intent to give the other person a chance is not that.

This is starting to leave me feeling a bit sick.  It can only do me good - extra publicity, and a solid explanation with good evidence of his ... mischief?

It's just hard to imagine what goes on inside the mind of someone like that.  Is he the type that puts up billboards saying the Pope is the antichrist?  Why is he so extreme without any apparent interest in actually discussing issues?  Why the questions designed to be unanswerable?

God bless,
Stephen
  --- Stephen Korsman <skorsman at theotokos.co.za> wrote:

  > Hi
  > 
  >
  http://www.theotokos.co.za/blog/post/index/387/Dr-Francis-Beckwith-comes-home
  > 
  > Could you look at the comments section, and say if
  > you think I've done the wrong thing?
  > 
  > Thanks for the moral support over at his blog ... 
  > 
  > It's not often someone sets up a blog like this. 
  > It's a bit more than I was prepared for.
  > 
  > He has deleted my comment on his blog commenting on
  > his change, where I quoted the original statement
  > mentioning me, and the revised version, so that the
  > original statement isn't visible, and inserted the
  > remainder of my comment later on. 
  >
  http://stephenkorsmanreviewed.blogspot.com/2007/06/deliver-us-from-evil.html
  > 
  > I have a screen capture and a saved version of the
  > original blog post.
  > 
  > And he's said that I don't allow comments on my
  > blog, and also that I said that I am unable to
  > answer his questions.  Both untrue. 
  >
  http://reinventingsdawheel.blogspot.com/2007/01/sabbath-musings-pt1.html
  > 
  > So far he's refused to link to my blog from his
  > blog, which is about me and my blog.
  > 
  > Do I answer according to his rules, or just provide
  > an answer?  If I provide an answer, it'll help other
  > readers, but he'll have a field day.  I can always
  > add a bit about how his questions are loaded and
  > unfair, etc.  I think that's the way I'll go.  It
  > looks like he'll be after me for some time, so I
  > want to make my first attempt as strong as possible,
  > because I don't have the time to chase him around
  > the internet explaining myself each time he proposes
  > a new challenge.  I want my first one to be lasting.
  > 
  > Thanks,
  > Stephen
  > --
  > Stephen Korsman
  > skorsman at theotokos.co.za
  > The Theotokos Website
  > A Rural Virologist  ||  RSS feed
  > Sabbath Keepers  ||  RSS feed
  >  
  > IC | XC
  > ---------
  > NI | KA
  > 
  >   ----- Original Message ----- 
  >   From: Stuart D. Gathman 
  >   To: Stephen Korsman 
  >   Cc: Apologetics Group 
  >   Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 11:49 PM
  >   Subject: Re: [Apologetics] My "fan" club
  > 
  > 
  >   On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Stephen Korsman wrote:
  > 
  >   > I suspect that they do allow historical
  > evidence, but only that that serves
  >   > their belief system.  Anything else, as you say,
  > is tainted by the evil
  > 
  >   Working out their belief system:
  > 
  >   In their view, apparently all (or almost all) of
  > Christianity went "off the
  >   rails" shortly after the new testament documents -
  > on or before the 
  >   destruction of Jerusalem.  Do they believe that a
  > "remnant" remained
  >   faithful those thousands of years?  Or is it like
  > Mormanism where God sent
  >   their prophet to restore true faith to the earth
  > after it had disappeared?
  > 
  >   -- 
  >         Stuart D. Gathman <stuart at bmsi.com>
  >       Business Management Systems Inc.  Phone: 703
  > 591-0911 Fax: 703 591-6154
  >   "Confutatis maledictis, flammis acribus addictis"
  > - background song for
  >   a Microsoft sponsored "Where do you want to go
  > from here?" commercial.
  > 
  >   _______________________________________________
  >   Apologetics mailing list
  >   Apologetics at gathman.org
  >   http://bmsi.com/mailman/listinfo/apologetics
  > 

  ART KELLY, ATM-S
  13524 Brightfield Lane
  Herndon, Virginia 20171-3360
  (703) 904-3763 home
  (703) 396-6956 work
  arthurkelly at yahoo.com
  art.kelly at cox.net
  ArtK135 at Netscape.net

  ____________________________________________________________________________________
  Need Mail bonding?
  Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users.
  http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091
  _______________________________________________
  Apologetics mailing list
  Apologetics at gathman.org
  http://bmsi.com/mailman/listinfo/apologetics
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gathman.org/pipermail/apologetics/attachments/20070626/b5e22210/attachment.html>