Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
First of all, I have tried to abide by the rules of FR always. You should have access to everything I’ve ever written on it, so I leave it to you to verify one way or the other. I have even broken off several discussions when I perceived they were going in a pointless and personal direction.
Second, just because someone deems something to be “personal, “ doesn’t mean it is. Today, for example, Nancy Pelosi was talking about the House leadership “deeming” the Senate Health Care bill as having been passed by the House and so now ready to be returned to the Senate for reconciliation. Most people, on hearing her tortured reasoning, found themselves thinking, “Well, she can deem the bill as being passed by the House, but that doesn’t make it so.” She may even genuinely think her position to be responsible and honest. All that makes her is genuinely, sincerely wrong.
Third, the phrase Houghton M. seems to be worked up about had a context ... one clearly given. In replying to him I wrote the following, providing him the context of his own remark (which, it seems to me, is far more personal and judgmental than anything I wrote:
Houghton M. also wrote:
“Well, go ahead. What you believe in is cheap grace.”
Cheap? Hardly. “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matthew 26:47) Manifestly, you have no idea what you are saying.
My point was simply that Houghton M. had no cause to say of the person he was writing to that he or she believed in “cheap grace.” What was manifest, i.e., plain to see, from the argument of the person to whom he was writing that that person believed that the vicarious atonement of Jesus Christ covered all sins of all people, a not remotely unknown theological, scriptural position. I merely pointed out that “cheap grace” is not cheap, given the price paid at Calvary by Christ, as evidenced in His own words.
Houghton M. can say and think that I was getting personal, but that doesn’t make it so. I do read what people say, and try very diligently to take note of the actual context of their remarks.
By requoting my own words, I was pointing out to him that he hadn’t even bothered to read what I said, and was simply crying, “personal.” I would suggest, with all due respect to FR and its moderators, as well as to Houghton M. and all of FR’s users, that before one cries “personal,” one should ascertain whether he is in fact reading the other person rightly. Civility should prompt one to inquire a little bit first when there is some possibility of uncertainty.
That being said, I will take your admonition to heart even though I am having a lot of trouble seeing the reason for it. Issues are what are to be discussed here, and that with reason, not emotion.