Kishkumen wrote: But in a history of exchanges between two people there is a certain give and take that exists to allow room for comment. I am not calling Daniel a bigot. I am saying that he is stingy in that give and take. A cool guy will say, "you know, I may have been wrong about that," and then others around him say, "no problem, you're just human like the rest of us."
Ray, and others, have made a point to illustrate the friendly and genuine encounters that they have had with Dan. I completely believe these accounts. I don't know this DCP though.
The person who I am familiar with is simply message board Dan. For many others, this may be the only Dan they know as well. He is witty and intelligent. As Kishkumen pointed out, he is also stingy in conceding points that should be conceded. I further feel that his work environment, and his church/social community(many times the same group) place him in a position where he feels inclined to resort to dialogue online that is intellectually dishonest. Maybe this is a combination of personal pride as well as a desire to protect the community with which he is a part of. Who knows. It is rather odd though, that when an individual sets out to defend their version of the Christ narative, they quickly abandon all charateristics of Christ as the discussion progresses.
Being honest and fair while defending the church online, is more than difficult. Most members who may try are aware of this. I don't think Dan, and most other members for that matter, really have the temperment or training in public defense of the church. I'll bet Dan would like to have a "do over" with regards to internet forums for the past ten years. I'll bet he would choose to leave it all alone.
If DCP was consistantly a courteous and honest representative of his religion online, he would have my respect. Again, I only know forum DCP, and forum DCP has not been consistantly courteous and honest in my experience.
