Chad Richard Bresson wrote:
[snip]
>  >One member gets out of hand and a couple others get after him about it.
> 
> As applied over the last couple of days, *who* determines what "out of 
> hand" means?  It's hard not to notice that the protest about *me* in the 
> past 24 hours has been coming from those who are in fundamental 
> hermeneutical agreement with each other.  The protest is not coming from 
> a moral high ground, and in fact, I find it amazing someone would try to 
> claim it.

I seem to be the one who began the so-called protest.  With whom am I in 
agreement hermeneutically?

[snip]

> If I'm in need of correction, I'll gladly take it... but I'm not seeing 
> it here.  What I do see are the "consternated" (see my original post 
> yesterday) venting frustration, a frustration (unwittingly) borne out of 
> heremeneutical differences more than anything else, IMHO.

My frustration is borne out of your refusal to elaborate on your 
drive-by posts, not out of hermeneutical differences with you.  The 
"correction" I did offer was for you to stop with the drive-bys because 
they adversely affect communication.  I am not sure how one could 
extrapolate hermeneutic differences from that.  Perhaps you are speaking 
of others, though, who have chimed in on the issue.

[snip]
--
john-thomas