Off Topic - Question for Christians

Sorry for the above re-post. Hit the wrong key!

smn

John said:

Stephen Nagler said:

John, it was a simple "yes or no" question.

smn

I didn't (and won't) answer your question because it is a malformed question, i.e., irrelevant to
anything happening here, for the reasons I outlined in my post.

The reasons you outline in your post can be demolished by a 10-year-old. They collapse utterly under
the most scant scrutiny.

Quoted message said:

Did you read my formulation of the issue? Do you disagree with my formulation? If so, in what way?

Go see why.

Now answer the question.

Don't talk the talk if you don't walk the walk.

Bob

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:08:28 GMT, Stephen Nagler <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 10:48:37 -0700, John <[email hidden]> wrote (in part):

Quoted message said:

I didn't (and won't) answer your question because it is a malformed question, i.e., irrelevant to
anything happening here, for the reasons I outlined in my post.

.............

John, the entire topic of Christianity is irrelevant to anything here on this *cardiology* site.

But at least I had the courtesy to label the subj line of my post "Off Topic."

I asked a straightforward question. I named no names. I made no accusations. I wanted to know (in
general) if from a Christian perspective it was OK in the eyes of God for a person "A" to publicly
falsely accuse another person "B" of pedophilia - just as long as "A" has accepted Jesus.

You chose not to answer. That's OK with me.

Have a great day!

smn

I can answer a general question. It depends on what you mean by "OK". Christians are instructed over
and over again in both the NT and OT to avoid all sin. However......if we do sin, Jesus will insure
that we make it to Heaven anyway. This is not to say that once you've been saved, you are free to go
and sin deliberately and without repentance. If I recall correctly, in the early days of
Christianity there was a heretical sect that preached exactly that. But this heresy did not become
Christian doctrine.

Because Christians continue to be human beings after they've been saved, they are not immune from
sin. But any repented sins are forgiven by the blood of Jesus and the Grace of God. I'm not sure
what happens to unrepented sin. I'm trying not to have any of that.

That being said, I still maintain that there is no application of this to any particular situation
that has occured here on smt. On the other hand, there does seem to be a problem for a few
individuals such as Bob, Steve, and perhaps yourself of falsely accusing a particular person of
doing what you describe above. I read the evidence to mean the opposite of what you and your
"friends" seem to be saying. I suggest you tread carefully. God has the biggest stick.

John

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 18:08:28 GMT, Stephen Nagler <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 10:48:37 -0700, John <[email hidden]> wrote (in part):

Quoted message said:

I didn't (and won't) answer your question because it is a malformed question, i.e., irrelevant to
anything happening here, for the reasons I outlined in my post.

.............

John, the entire topic of Christianity is irrelevant to anything here on this *cardiology* site.

I thank you (and Bob and Steve and Matti) for continuing to bring it up, thereby giving me something
to respond to. ;-)

John

"Tiger Lily" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

there are certain cultural differences (like the separate fridges, etc) but the essence of the
love of G-d and his expectations of us on earth are not very far apart at all<<<<<<<<<<<<

A Jew true in his faith needs only to be saved back into his faith through the blood of The One true
sacrifice for all men.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>>>> i use the term G-d out of respect for your faith<<<<<<<<<<

Do you, what did God call 'Himself' ?

Carol T

John said:

I can answer a general question. It depends on what you mean by "OK". Christians are instructed
over and over again in both the NT and OT to avoid all sin. However......if we do sin, Jesus will
insure that we make it to Heaven anyway.

................

So a Christian can bear false witness against his or her neighbor - and he or she gets to
heaven anyway.

Does that work for murder, too?

.....................

Quoted message said:

This is not to say that once you've been saved, you are free to go and sin deliberately and without
repentance.

....................

Seems like that's exactly what you are saying.

.....................

Quoted message said:

I still maintain that there is no application of this to any particular situation that has occured
here on smt.

....................

I never said there was, John. Why so defensive?

.......................

Quoted message said:

On the other hand, there does seem to be a problem for a few individuals such as Bob, Steve, and
perhaps yourself of falsely accusing a particular person of doing what you describe above.

.....................

I cannot speak for anybody but myself - but I have not accused anybody here of "doing what I
described" in my question.. Seems to me that it is now you who are now bearing false witness. Oh, I
forgot. It's OK to do that.

smn

John said:

I thank you (and Bob and Steve and Matti) for continuing to bring it up, thereby giving me
something to respond to. ;-)

...............

Pardon me?

It ain't I who is running this rodeo.

See that, John. You're already being punished for bearing false witness in this very thread. You've
been made blind!

smn

John said:

Stephen Nagler said:

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 10:48:37 -0700, John <[email hidden]> wrote (in part):

Quoted message said:

I didn't (and won't) answer your question because it is a malformed question, i.e., irrelevant to
anything happening here, for the reasons I outlined in my post.

.............

John, the entire topic of Christianity is irrelevant to anything here on this *cardiology* site.

But at least I had the courtesy to label the subj line of my post "Off Topic."

I asked a straightforward question. I named no names. I made no accusations. I wanted to know (in
general) if from a Christian perspective it was OK in the eyes of God for a person "A" to publicly
falsely accuse another person "B" of pedophilia - just as long as "A" has accepted Jesus.

You chose not to answer. That's OK with me.

Have a great day!

smn

I can answer a general question.

Good, This is what we've been awaiting with bated breath...

Quoted message said:

It depends on what you mean by "OK".

Bwaahahahaha. "It depends on what is, is..." Sound familiar? Lets all split theological hairs and
evade the question.

Quoted message said:

Christians are instructed over and over again in both the NT and OT to avoid all sin.
However......if we do sin, Jesus will insure that we make it to Heaven anyway.

Ok, then. "John" says all sins are forgiven.

Quoted message said:

This is not to say that once you've been saved, you are free to go and sin deliberately and
without repentance.

Oh, wait. "John" says all sins are not forgiven.

Quoted message said:

If I recall correctly, in the early days of Christianity there was a heretical sect that preached
exactly that. But this heresy did not become Christian doctrine.

It's what Chung has publicly stated. Mu likewise. So are they wrong? Looks like you're saying they
are, "John."

Quoted message said:

Because Christians continue to be human beings after they've been saved, they are not immune from
sin. But any repented sins are forgiven by the blood of Jesus and the Grace of God. I'm not sure
what happens to unrepented sin.

Here, let me help, "John." Above you say that "This is not to say that once you've been saved, you
are free to go and sin deliberately and without repentance." See, "John." Your own words make it
crystal clear.

Quoted message said:

I'm trying not to have any of that.

Good for you.

Quoted message said:

That being said, I still maintain that there is no application of this to any particular situation
that has occured here on smt. On the other hand, there does seem to be a problem for a few
individuals such as Bob, Steve, and perhaps yourself of falsely accusing a particular person of
doing what you describe above.

I really like your inserting "falsely" in there. You, Chung, Carol, Mu and a few other *Usual
Suspects* spout the same party line. "Poor us, those nasty people attack us because we're
Christians."

"John," you're being dishonest. You need to consider the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
truth or you're as fake as Chung. Not a comparison that anyone should like.

I read the evidence to mean

Quoted message said:

the opposite of what you and your "friends" seem to be saying.

You "read the evidence" to suit your agenda. The "evidence" is rather larger and more conclusive
than your selective reading implies or includes. Poor superficial "John." Can't seem to factor more
than one thing into a consideration. Had Chung only posted once, it would still be suspect, but his
repeated scratching at that subject makes his intent all too clear.

Quoted message said:

I suggest you tread carefully. God has the biggest stick.

Thanks for the deep theological exposition, "John." Makes you seem so, um, *connected* to the
eternal verities. Even though the obvious and damning escape your attention.

Bob

John said:

Stephen Nagler said:

John, the entire topic of Christianity is irrelevant to anything here on this *cardiology* site.

I thank you (and Bob and Steve and Matti) for continuing to bring it up, thereby giving me
something to respond to. ;-)

You're welcome, "John." Happy to offer you (and the U_sual S_uspects) the opportunity to demonstrate
your willingness to say stupid things. Glad to facilitate your dance-around routines when asked
simple questions. Ecstatic to see you pile one absurdity upon another.

Least I could do for a sincere person like yourself. Can I take up a collection for more coloring-
book, No-Prob Bibles for you to thump?

Bob

On Mon, 09 Feb 2004 19:10:24 GMT, Stephen Nagler <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

John said:

I can answer a general question. It depends on what you mean by "OK". Christians are instructed
over and over again in both the NT and OT to avoid all sin. However......if we do sin, Jesus will
insure that we make it to Heaven anyway.

................

So a Christian can bear false witness against his or her neighbor - and he or she gets to
heaven anyway.

Does that work for murder, too?

Sin is sin. My understanding is that it is all pretty much the same in the eyes of God.

Quoted message said:

.....................

Quoted message said:

This is not to say that once you've been saved, you are free to go and sin deliberately and
without repentance.

....................

Seems like that's exactly what you are saying.

Well, you are at all times free to go and do whatever you please - free will, you know. The question
is, can you fool God with this line? I don't think so.

Quoted message said:

.....................

Quoted message said:

I still maintain that there is no application of this to any particular situation that has occured
here on smt.

....................

I never said there was, John. Why so defensive?

Your motives are not all that opaque.

Quoted message said:

.......................

Quoted message said:

On the other hand, there does seem to be a problem for a few individuals such as Bob, Steve, and
perhaps yourself of falsely accusing a particular person of doing what you describe above.

.....................

I cannot speak for anybody but myself - but I have not accused anybody here of "doing what I
described" in my question.. Seems to me that it is now you who are now bearing false witness. Oh, I
forgot. It's OK to do that.

I am not the judge. God is. Remember, He's the one with the really big stick. Would it be better if
I did not warn those who appear in to be in jeopardy? I don't think this could be construed in any
sense to be false witness. Google is the witness of what has been said. AFAIK, reasonably
trustworthy and truthful.

John

On Mon, 9 Feb 2004 15:56:59 -0500, Bob wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Thanks for the deep theological exposition, "John." Makes you seem so, um, *connected* to the
eternal verities. Even though the obvious and damning escape your attention.

Bob, I think you are being too hard on the Junior Chung Ranger here. Perhaps the JCR can explain why
the following was not an attack on Dr. Chung and hence should be followed up on and not condemned:

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, an anonymous poster using the handle "Proctologist" wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Two Minute Diet

Is this Chung the person who was fired from a Florida hospital for stealing money and
sodomizing unconscious patients on the operating table?

In fact, perhaps we should have replied something like

"Why do you say Chung was sodomizing unconscious patients?"

you know, to kind of ask for clarification. Perfectly innocent.

If I read the JCR right, we all failed in not pursuing this.

Maybe Carol T. could also chime in with some Bible quotes to show how it was not Proctologist but
rather the people who were appalled by him who were wrong. I, for one, certainly misjudged him.
Perhaps we should all extend an apology to Proctologist. I mean, he didn't accuse anyone of
anything, did he? He merely asked for clarification.

Or, as the JCR so ably puts it, "if "P" asks if "C" sodomized unconscious patients, my question to
you would be how in the world do you interpret this sequence as an accusation by anybody of
anything?"

--
Steve

Who is the humblest person in the universe? According to Chung, God :-) ROTFL! "I'm Humble!
Worship Me!"

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

John said:

I am not the judge. God is. Remember, He's the one with the really big stick. Would it be better
if I did not warn those who appear in to be in jeopardy?

Bwahahahaha, "John. Too funny. Like "John" is the arbiter of the jeopardy and who faces it. Perhaps
we should call him "John," the judge. from now on.

And no warnings for Chung, Mu or the other U_sual S_uspects. How convenient.

Quoted message said:

I don't think this could be construed in any sense to be false witness.

Perhaps some other description would be more accurate, but the fact remains - yes, I said fact -
that "John," in his consideration and discussion, left out all secondary details like what Chung did
after that first message. So it's either convenient forgetfulness or superficial thinking, or
prejudice rearing its very ugly head, or some unfortunate combination. In any case, the "witness"
and the "witnessing" are both flawed.

Quoted message said:

Google is the witness of what has been said. AFAIK, reasonably trustworthy and truthful.

Sorry, "John." Not trustworthy. Too stuck in the agenda; too committed to excusing Chung and
condemning Stephen. No question about the fact that PG was born online a couple days before the
spurious innuendo. No question about what "she' meant by her comment. Truth must include all the
components of the situation. You failed to do that. As you always do.

Bob

Stephen Nagler <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Thanks in advance for your insight.

Ah, I see, we are essentially looking at the meaning of moral equivalents.
groups.google.comgroupsOpen ↗

Therefore the real sin, if it is one at all, is in the possible misuse of a moral equivalent to make
a point, not an actual accusation of being a paedophile.

For a patient betrayal of trust is a terrible, terrible thing and as a caring doctor I am 100%
positive you would be beside yourself if you knew someone had suffered such a betrayal. As a non-
doctor I would hope that you would consider the gravity of using patient notes in public equal to
such a dreadful crime as paedophilia, even though technically it is a moral issue of personal
standards?

I once called the medical profession of today a B*****d without a father (now you know at least one
sin you may consider me guilty of).

However, a good father helps his children to understand the gravity of moral issues and to empathise
with the personal hurt people can suffer from an action. As I see it the medical profession, as it
is now, is largely fatherless, therefore, very much a B*****d and without guidance. This does not
mean that all children without parents lack good moral standards BTW; some feel the gravity of a
moral crime against someone is as bad as one of the worst criminal offences. In some people's minds
there is no greater offence than that of a paedophile, so it's a good measure of the depth of a
grave moral crime.

If you felt any of the hurt of the mother I told you about, and understood why she managed to
forgive her indignant neighbours, then you too may be able to feel the gravity of some moral crimes
as comparable to a paedophiliac act. The sense of hurt you may feel is perhaps deep and searing if
your profession has let someone down? Perhaps you would consider a breach of patient confidentiality
comparable to grievous bodily harm or something on that scale?

I know of someone who lost the chance of employment because someone abused their position and
accessed medical notes, this utterly destroyed the individual. It has also meant that they have
found it difficult to trust and carry on that bond of trust for other's too. One incident has meant
that maybe future generations in this family and friends will all distrust the medical profession
too. As you know trust is essential in the work of a doctor, without it medicine simply doesn't
work. Without trust medicine is nothing.

Had Andrew used the wrong crime in his comparison to patient betrayal? Maybe you can answer this one
for yourself. To me it is of no consequence if you can empathise with how a patient would truly feel
when there is a breach of confidence, if there is one.

So, what of the devil who is playing games with you by cross posting and manipulating your posts and
thoughts? I would put him behind you if I were you, he's a nasty piece of work. Let him know that
you and Dr Chung have the same One Father over your profession and that you personally feel a
betrayal of patient trust with a measure of the same moral standards.

I will pray that all doctors understand the gravity of patient betrayal- Not as something that is
simply 'something they must not do' because 'someone', 'somewhere' told them it's wrong, but because
they understand the deep and searing hurt it causes people and their own profession.

Carol T

(Carol T) said:

Ah, I see, we are essentially looking at the meaning of moral equivalents.
groups.google.comgroupsOpen ↗

..............

Actually no. I weas asking a hypothetical. It had nothing to do with moral equivalents.

Bust since yuo mentioned it - there is ABSOLUTELY no moral equivalent to pedophilia.

....................

Quoted message said:

Therefore the real sin, if it is one at all, is in the possible misuse of a moral equivalent to
make a point, not an actual accusation of being a paedophile.

....................

Take the word pedophile out of the equation.

Do you think you could answer this question, then:

Is it OK for "A" to bear false witness against his or her neighbor "B" if "A" has accepted Jesus?

...................

Quoted message said:

For a patient betrayal of trust is a terrible, terrible thing and as a caring doctor I am 100%
positive you would be beside yourself if you knew someone had suffered such a betrayal.

....................

Absolutely. And I would similarly be beside myself if a patient betrayed that trust.

On another note, I know of a case wherein a patient felt his or her trust had been betrayed by a
doctor - on an Internet newsgroup, no less - and the patient was so upset that he reported the
doctor to the state medical board. What happened next was quite interesting. The state medical board
engaged the services of an Internet-savvy investigato, who via a Google search took a look at each
an every one of the patient's many allegations in its full and unedited context. And the outcome?
Well, looking at the allegations *in context*, it was found that there wasn't any basis to even
proceed to a hearing. The case was closed.

My point here, Carol, is that you really have to be careful about giving credence to what you read
on the Internet. Remember the "believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see" stuff
out parents taught us? Well the posts on Usenet newsgroups fall into the "what you hear" category.
ALWAYS look at them with a skeptical eye.

.....................

Quoted message said:

I will pray that all doctors understand the gravity of patient betrayal- Not as something that is
simply 'something they must not do' because 'someone', 'somewhere' told them it's wrong, but
because they understand the deep and searing hurt it causes people and their own profession.

................

A very good thing to pray for indeed ...

And I will pray that people take the snippets they read on the Internet and make a sincere effort to
look at them in full context before jumping to any conclusions - or worse - before using those
snippets as the basis for unflattering innuendo or slander.

smn

Stephen Nagler <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

... and your answer to my "yes or no" question is ...?

My answer is what is 'C' upto and thriving on in your scenario ?

What does your faith tell you about judging people in fairness?

"You shall do no injustice in judgment. You shall not be partial to the poor, nor honour the person
of the mighty. In righteousness you shall judge your neighbour. " NKJ Leviticus 19:15

If you call for a judgement on another, with another, through faith, is this a calling in the
righteousness of a true believer?

Have you ever considered why a doctor is only referred to as 'practicing' medicine. Why don't they
perfect their skills; after all, they call themselves doctors and they 'have' graduated. Surely they
shouldn't keep seeking to self improve if they have become perfected in their learning?

Every Christian I know, apart from Jesus, is still striving and practicing their faith.

Now, as a practicing Christian I think that you will have to go to my tutor on this one. He won't
mind me referring you to Him, He doesn't charge and has all the time you need to teach you. It's
quite a sacrifice He's made for you and I, that all His learning and wisdom will come freely. You
can knock on His door any time of the day or night. In a way which is acceptable to you, he will
answer your yes/no question when you call on Him.

Carol T

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 10:24:21 -0500, Carol T wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

Stephen Nagler <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

... and your answer to my "yes or no" question is ...?

<Biblebabble snipped>

"The Untruthful have a difficult time answering 'yes' or 'no' questions"... Andrew B. Chung MD/Phd

--
Steve

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

(doe) said:

In theory .. if one were to WISH to slander another .. one would actually falsify a post to make it
look as if the victim IN FACT .. did .. make the post .. thereby making him LOOK .. as if .. he
WERE a .. bad guy ..

...............

That could happen? Really? Not on a usenet newsgroup. No way!

smn (who knows *exactly* what doe is talking about)

[email hidden] (doe) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Off Topic - Question for Christians

Quoted message said:

And I will pray that people take the snippets they read on the Internet and make a sincere effort
to look at them in full context before jumping to any conclusions - or worse - before using those
snippets as the basis for unflattering innuendo or slander.

In theory .. if one were to WISH to slander another .. one would actually falsify a post to make
it look as if the victim IN FACT .. did .. make the post .. thereby making him LOOK .. as if .. he
WERE a .. bad guy ..

True Christians in fact have their hands tied .. by the very fact they would NOT .. 'stoop so
low' .. ?

We don't need to. We have God's armor and His sword and His might. Our hands are far from tied.

Look at what Bob Pastorio and Steve-nospam has been reduced to:

Little fearful shadows flitting from one dark corner to the next to avoid the light.

Servant to the humblest person in the universe,

Andrew

--
Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-Certified Cardiologist
heartmdphd.comheartmdphd.comOpen ↗

--
Who is the humblest person in the universe?

makeashorterlink.commakeashorterlink.comOpen ↗

What is all this about?

makeashorterlink.commakeashorterlink.comOpen ↗

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 17:49:23 -0500, Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
(in message <[email hidden]>😉:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden] (doe) wrote in message news:<20040210140801.04510.00001856@mb-
m10.aol.com>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: Off Topic - Question for Christians

Quoted message said:

And I will pray that people take the snippets they read on the Internet and make a sincere
effort to look at them in full context before jumping to any conclusions - or worse - before
using those snippets as the basis for unflattering innuendo or slander.

In theory .. if one were to WISH to slander another .. one would actually falsify a post to make
it look as if the victim IN FACT .. did .. make the post .. thereby making him LOOK .. as if ..
he WERE a .. bad guy ..

True Christians in fact have their hands tied .. by the very fact they would NOT .. 'stoop so
low' .. ?

We don't need to. We have God's armor and His sword and His might. Our hands are far from tied.

Look at what Bob Pastorio and Steve-nospam has been reduced to:

Little fearful shadows flitting from one dark corner to the next to avoid the light.

Arrrrghhhhh! The Light! The Light! I can't stand it!

You crack me up, Chung :-)

Oh, and it hasn't been Steve-nospam for months... it's Steve-nochung now :-) Then again, I guess
they're both the same :-)

--
Steve no-chung

Who is the humblest person in the universe? According to Chung, God :-) ROTFL! "I'm Humble!
Worship Me!"

Weeding the Lord's Vineyards Since 2003

Stephen Nagler <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

On 10 Feb 2004 08:45:18 -0800, [email hidden] (Carol T) wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>>> Actually no. I weas asking a hypothetical. It had nothing

to do with

Quoted message said:

moral equivalents.<<<<<<<<<<<

Well that is good then because this hypothetical scenario would not exist with a true Christian, so
it has no need of an answer at all.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>>>>>> Bust since yuo mentioned it - there is ABSOLUTELY no moral

equivalent to pedophilia.<<<<<<<<<<<

How do you measure this? What if I told you that the mother whose child was attacked by the
paedophile was trying to pick up her life and make some sense of it around the medical records were
accessed. Maybe work would have improved the lives of the child and the mother, to the extent that
the extra money would have allowed the family to move away from the evil and make a new start, new
life, new school, so the child could finish her education? How would the second betrayal be any less
than the first? Either way the mother fails to protect her child, again and again and again and the
child's hurt goes on and on. The hurting is insurmountable because betrayal of such a nature leads
somewhere to further hurt.

Do you still believe that there is no 'moral' equivalent to paedophilia, that the true scale of
hurt is irrelevant when there is hurting such as this? The important thing is the gravity with
which the moral crime is _felt_, that there is no injustice served on any patient at all. All
hurting in another person is hurt, it's magnitude is of little importance to someone who feels it
with that person.

I believe that for any doctor, that allowing the betrayal of patient trust is a moral crime above
all other crimes if they fail to understand its gravity, as they simply cannot know or undo the
likely harm that they could cause. How do doctors help other doctors to understand the agonies they
could be inflicting on patients if they have no equal measure of moral standards amongst them, and
no way of understanding how the pain feels?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Is it OK for "A" to bear false witness against his or her

neighbor "B"

Quoted message said:

if "A" has accepted Jesus?<<<<<<<<<<<

What does Jewish law say about this?

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." Exd 20:16

"Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy neighbour." Deu
5:20

If you accept Jesus, you also accept what he taught through what he learned as a Jew; but He also
taught us that we are all sinners, and because He loved us so much He asked His Father (our God) for
our forgiveness, paid for with His sacrifice.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>>> Absolutely. And I would similarly be beside myself if a

patient

Quoted message said:

betrayed that trust.<<<<<<<<

Yes, I agree and can empathise with how you would feel; but as the educated party in the partnership
it is up to you to take on board your patient's failings in not understanding the effects of that
betrayal on their doctors. Otherwise, the grieved doctor should use his/her skill to mask their
feelings, because the needs of their patients and others are always greatest. It's a heavy burden to
carry, but you should carry it with grace; society allows you the status that goes with it (all paid
for by your predecessors in their hard work, as future generations of doctors will carry your
earnings).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>>>>>> Well, looking at the allegations *in context*, it

was found that there wasn't any basis to even proceed to a hearing. The case was closed.<<<<<<<<<

But I suspect that the doctor concerned was left feeling that the matter caused him a lot of hurting
which went unresolved, unanswerable and unpunished, resulting in a lot of hurtful anger.
Fortunately, doctors can rise above this sort of thing if they understand the power of forgiveness
and love that a loving father has taught them. It's also fortunate that our doctors are taught to
such a high standard, that they can grasp some of the complex situation they find themselves in and
make some sense of them, and even use such experiences to teach future doctors.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>>>>>> before using those

snippets as the basis for unflattering innuendo or slander.<<<<<<<<<

Words can only hurt you if you allow them to, the devil thrives on this because people who are
hurting can be manipulated, for him it's all good fun (look back through the posts of those who
allow him to dance with them).

We have Jesus to give us the strength to put him behind us! If through Jesus you eventually find
your way back to your faith, then you can take comfort in the great things the Jewish faith has to
teach its children and the wisdom it contains to help you over come the evil which attacks you.

Focus on the love your Lord has for you with the love you have for Him with all your heart,
mind, and soul. This will be your blessing and for your children, they are the seeds of your
continuing faith.

There is power in what you are, if it is taken with the understanding of God's ways...

"No man shall be able to stand against you; the Lord your God will put the dread of you and the fear
of you upon all the land where you tread, just as He has said to you." NKJ Deu 11:25

What a great gift you have been given for yourself, your children, and their children.

Carol T