Is it the Message, or the Men?

[TLFisher]

Originally Posted by OBW

Another way to put it is that it is the message, but without the men, the message is suspect or fails. So it also must be the men.

The example I'd like to bring forth is when brother Ron spoke on Mark 11:25 in November 2012.

"Whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone, so that your Father who is in heaven will also forgive you your transgressions."

By itself, the verse is a positive verse. yet in the context of the person speaking it I have had this thought, "does that mean Ron had forgiven John Ingalls for John's perceived wrongdoings by which Ron co-wrote A Response to Recent Accusations or had Ron forgiven Steve Isitt for his perceived wrongdoings through which Ron called Steve "a man of death" and the most evil speaker on the internet?"
If there is forgiveness, you would think there would be some form of communication to those brothers indicating forgiveness. Ron could easily visit John at his home in Anaheim. In his visits to the NW, Ron could easily check with the brothers how to get right with Steve. I don't forsee either happening which is why just like Barrack Obama, all I hear is lip service from the man giving the message. For the record, I would dearly love to be proven wrong and for reconciliation between Ron and John and between Ron and Steve.

By comparison when the Living Waters publication existed in which Bill Mallon, Stephen Kaung, John Ingalls, Max Rapoport, Vern DeFromke, and Paul Kerr were contributors. In which of what happened in Anaheim 1977/78, for Max to work with these brothers, I deduced there must have been forgiveness on Max's behalf.