I did not bring up this part of the discussion in a pro-active way. I've brought it up as a reaction to YOUR claim that others' aim is to (a) shake up your faith, which you say is despicable; and (b) no one should denigrate another's faith.
My point was not to cry, "Offense!" Offense!" My point was to say, "How can you say what you said when your very founder would never even have gotten off the ground had he not tried to shake up the faiths of others and denigrate them?"
My point was a reactive one: You can't have it both ways. You can't say it's okay for J.Smith to have said what he said, but it's not okay for any contemporary. All I was calling for was consistency.
>> "How can you say what you said when your very founder would never even have
>>gotten off the ground had he not tried to shake up the faiths of others and denigrate
>>them?"
I never said that, you are confused.
>>(a) shake up your faith, which you say is despicable; and
No, I said Shake, Shake up is diffrent.
>>(b) no one should denigrate another's faith.
No one should.
>> All I was calling for was consistency.
Fine lets both be consistent I’ll ask my question to you and let’s see if you can answer it (we’ve been doing I the other way for some time now.) I believe I have answered your questions in a consistent answer if you read them literally ands don’t try to interpret my words.
Why is it that those who leave the church can’t leave it alone?