Well, Protestant Apologists can't take outside criticism; they immediately use cheesy latin-sounding attacks.

Glenn <peoples.glenn@gmail.com>	12:19 AM (1 hour ago)
to martin

It's pretentious to make this anything about Gospel bridge building. What made you think your vague, unhelpful, basically content-free and completely public scolding would be well-received or that you and I have a relationship where it was appropriate? Don't imagine that you have any sort of high ground.

martin arno <mchrisarno@gmail.com>	12:53 AM (25 minutes ago)
to Glenn

Dear Glenn,

     As we say in California: you need to take a chill-pill. 

You post great stuff, and then sometimes you post corny stuff, which deserves to be criticized. There's no need for you to go on the attack; I understand how rhetoric works so don't bother accusing me of trying to take the high-ground. This isn't about either of us; this isn't personal at all; it's (at least meant to be) constructive.

The criticism was public because you're a public figure and should expect public criticism. But your response was overly hostile, lacking in a genuine attempt to understand why someone might find some of your posts questionable.

As to your question about our personal relationship: you and I don't have a personal relationship (why should we?), save when you asked for facebook friends a number of years ago. I followed you because I thought you were smart; but now your persona gives off the impression that you're not intellectually prepared to deal with followers who have any criticisms of the way you've phrased certain internet-comments. 

In terms of your fun question on why Martin has the right to question Glenn's intellect: your attack on my motives conflates persons and ideas. You know better than that. Furthermore, why are you so concerned with your relationship with me? You know that both of us nothing and the Gospel is everything. 

As to your ultimate question about my motives: neither of us has a "high-ground." (I'm not even looking for a high-ground; I don't care. The point was to return your confusing statement with an equally confusing reply.) There's no high-ground. 

In sum: I like what most of what you have to say and I don't like it when you post pointless non-Christian posts. So cut it out. You're better than that. 

Love, 

Glenn	1:00 AM (23 minutes ago)
to me Glenn 1:00 AM (23 minutes ago) to me None of this seems to apply. I never said I never accept criticism. I think your comment (it really wasn't any kind of sensible criticism, but I didn't even see the need to delve into it because of your terseness and rudeness, I think) was arrogant and pretty vacuous. I also didn't say anything about you questioning my intellect. Is that what you were doing? I said nothing about your motives, and your continued condescension with "you know better than that" for something I didn't do typifies the spirit to which I responded at Facebook. Making that kind of remark while saying that you don't think you have a high ground must surely grate, even as you type the words. We do not know each other. Hear this: You seriously lack social skills if you thought your comment at FB or your attempts to privately advise me are a good idea. I don't think you have an appropriate perspective on what you did. I don't really wish to have a protracted conversation about this, Martin. All the best. l

     There's no need to invoke non-sequiturs. I'm not trying to argue with you. The original post was about the way you present your ideas to non-Christians.

Again, this isn't about us. God doesn't care about us; there's a million of us. You know this isn't about us, so there's no need to get personal. 

If you want me to attack your criticism of my criticism of you: you're using a obfuscation-technique to dismiss my criticism by calling it unintelligible so that You don't need to get so nasty against me. I'm not an enemy, and I genuinely care about the way you present your ideas.

Your criticism against my criticism missed the point of my criticism. My criticism's point what that your post was totally unrelated to Christian evangelism and swayed into Trumpogetics. It's politically polarizing. So stick to what you do best.

Glenn Posts "DIdn't read; will delete."


Ok so the copy and paste thing is messed up.

My point is that i've dealt with folks before who claimed to speak for God and then couldn't. Here's another Protestant example. When faced with criticism, he goes balistic and says you're incoherent and violent.
There is is everybody.


There's an issue with the formatting here. Basic point: Protestant can't stand up to most mild criticms; Protestant accuses you of being evil; Protestant bans you from protestant land; protestants burn in hell.

Ther

	1:15 AM (3 minutes ago)
to me

Didn't read, will delete.