From: daveb@pogo.wv.tek.com (Dave Butler)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Free gifts? NOT!
Date: 25 Jul 92 01:53:38 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Wilsonville,  OR.

Gregg Skinner puts me in an awkward situation.  I agreed in email that our
differences on this issue are likely irreconcilable and offered to, in spite
of the temptation to do otherwise, allow him to have the last word in both
t.r.m and email, as I felt my previous articles could stand on their own.  
As I have already said, the subject is getting quite tiresome.  Thus he sent 
me his last set of rebuttals.  As is obvious, he has now sent those rebuttals 
to the net as well, which is fine.  Unfortunately he has also requested me to 
respond, and accede to his latest analysis:

> I accused Mr. Butler of missing the point of the discussion.  In fact
> we were each missing each other entirely as we discussed orthogonal
> subjects.  It is not a sign of weakness for Mr. Butler to recognize
> that we were not addressing the same issue.  I ask him to do that.
					       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Clearly I must make some sort of reply, as silence can be construed to have
several meanings.  I have reread the articles involved, and still find
disagreement with what he has stated.  I could go into a point by point
rebuttal, but that would take away the "last word" which I already ceded him,
and prolong an issue who's only gain in the end would be ego strokes of one
sort or another (I will submit a rebuttal if Gregg specifically requests it,
but as I said in my last article, I am getting to the point where I am quite
satisfied to let this conversation die).  There no doubt was confusion between
us (I know I found Mr Skinners position very puzzling at times), but I am sure
of the questions I asked, the answers I got in return, and why the questions I
asked were germane.  In the end, it is up to the audience to decide each for
themselves, whether Mr Skinner or I is right, and I doubt further input will
have any affect.  In any case I doubt that decision will have any great impact
on the world.  

As this is no longer an argument about an issue, but rather become a
meta-argument (ie: an argument about an argument), I see little else to be
gained from it.  This is especially true, as Gregg has now stated (or
clarified) that he does not defend the idea that salvation is truly free, and
thus the original issue has dissolved.  So unless my response is specifically
once again requested by Mr Skinner, I will allow it to rest. 

Believe it or not I am not at all pleased with myself when I allow my emotions
take sway, and allow myself to become irritated or angry with another who
takes part in a discussion.  And even though I have enjoyed verbal sparring
matches and giving as well as I get, I get more satisfaction from the articles
in which I have made my point with a completely calm demeanor.  Admittedly
though, I am prone to react emotionally and with cutting wit, when I feel I
have been unjustly accused with misrepresenting a subject (ie: honor
besmirtched and all that).  Thus, my coming to the unpleasant realization 
that  I was extending this argument for the sake of "honor" (ie: ego) and 
self-righteous anger, made me realize that the issue IS completely over.  
So, for continuing what has become a useless argument, and doing so for ego's 
sake, I apologize. 

				Later,

				Dave Butler

    Of the seven deadly sins, anger is possibly the most fun.  To lick
    your wounds, to smack your lips over grievances long past, to roll over
    your tongue the prospect of bitter confrontation still to come, to savor
    the last toothsome morsel both the pain you are given and the pain you are
    given back - in many ways a feast fit for a king.  The chief drawback is 
    that what you are wolfing down is yourself.  The skeleton of the feast 
    is you.
				Frederick Buechner
				Wishful Thinking

    PS. Mr Skinner of course is welcome to respond to this and thereby
    gain back the "last word", which I have now partially usurped.