Frank Walton Recognized He Was Wrong!

Frank Walton removes material out of a "concern for losing his blogsite". See what Austin Cline said about Walton, who has asked people to send Ed Babinski spam emails. What do you Christians think of Walton's tactics here? Is it acceptable in Christian circles?

Is poisoning the well acceptable if a Christian does it to God's glory?.

18 comments:

Robert O'Brien said...

Mr. Loftus:

I think Frank Walton has a lot of growing up to do. His comments concerning you are low brow and juvenile.

Robert O'Brien said...

Mr. Loftus:

I just got done reading some of the things you said about Paul Manata and I fail to see how you can claim the moral high ground here.

Despite your protestations to the contrary, I think you were attempting to use psychology to score a point against him instead of as a tool to heal, and that is wrong; you are no better than Frank Walton.

Jason said...

Mr. O'Brien:

Mr. Loftus does not begin to reach the depths that Mr. Walton has descended to.

John W. Loftus said...

Frank Walton has been banned from this Blog, he knows it, and he continues to break the rules by posting here. I just deleted his comment. Rules. That's what he objects to. And he doesn't care about them when they come from me. Here's why he's banned read this.

John W. Loftus said...

When you deal with someone like Walton you seem to wallow in shit. I'm sorry for that, but I want to expose him for what he is just in case someone doesn't already know. This will probably be the last time I write anything about him.

John W. Loftus said...

O'Brian, you've fallen for it. Did you not read this?: "...after Paul had basically harrassed me for weeks." Would you please look for somewhere on this Blog where I treat people with such disrespect, until or unless thay do so with me, and point it out for all to see?

John W. Loftus said...

O'Brian, answer my initial question: What do you Christians think of Walton's tactics here? Is it acceptable in Christian circles?

allisondubois.blogspot.com said...

Hey Frank,
How come you don't post your silly face on your blog? I'll bet it's cause your face looks like how a fart smells.

Anonymous said...

Frank Walton is ignorant, illogical, and immature. He distorts and mangles what people say in order to attack them. I think it is pointless to try to reason with him.

Brooks

Sandalstraps said...

What do you Christians think of Walton's tactics here? Is it acceptable in Christian circles?

I certainly hope not, but I can't speak for the entire religion. Of course, in certain circle, anything is considered justified. The first Europeans to arrive in North America traded firearms to the indigenous tribes who converted to Christianity, but not to those who had not. For them, the distribution of firearms was an appropriate evangelical tool.

I can't reduce an entire religion to a single position on any issue, but I can say that those who use such distasteful methods engage in a form of conversational terrorism which should be roundly and unequivocally condemned as counter to the ways of Jesus, and unacceptable.

Daniel said...

Frank has never directly answered the question, "are you a Christian?" to my knowledge. Perhaps he would care to indulge us here.

In other news, here are the emails I sent him that sent him into mental spasms.

Joe E. Holman said...

I've been out and about lately and only just now read the links provided by John on these Frank Walton and Paul Manata characters. I am speechless, utterly speechless!

That Paul Manata guy is sick, mentally sick, newly made believer or not. That was some of the sickest stuff I've ever read next to the stories of serial killers and rapists. John was right. That is pure evil, twisted evil!

Walton's website was horrible, nothing but hatred and slander. He needs to re-title it, "The Mudslinger Blog." It made my stomach turn. The nastiness, the ill-tempered malice was unreal.

I never thought I'd say it, but these two make J.P. Holding appear as kind and tolerant as a Universalist retardate!

No intelligent individual deserves that kind of treatment, much less John Loftus, an especially nice person who is very tolerant of people who disagree with him.

Just ignore this Walton fool. His type discredits themselves so royally that the only people who will see it as credible are teenagers and belligerent internet trolls who have nothing better to do than trash someone.

Everyone get a good look at this sorry breed, they are the graffiti on the bathroom walls of humanity!

(JH)

John W. Loftus said...

I read through Daniel Morgan's recent link here, where he explained the e-mail exchanges he's had with Walton. At the bottom he tells us that there is a Blog dedicated to Frank Walton. See it here.

Daniel said...

John,

I think you meant:

See it HERE.

John W. Loftus said...

Yes, Danny.

Robert O'Brien said...

Mr. Loftus:

I identify myself as a Platonic Theist these days, so your question was not really directed at me. However, I already wrote that I think what he posted about you was wrong.

As for Paul Manata, I do not know what the harassment you are referring to entailed, so I can't say whether or not I think your response was warranted.

John W. Loftus said...

O'Brien, thanks. You can do a search here in our archives and see for yourself how Manata taunted me, and you can do a search on either Walton's or Manata's blogs for my name to see how they have both treated me. Compare the dates of the posts, and you'll see for yourself. I'm just too tired of all this shit to do it myself, but it's all there for anyone to plainly see.

[In the initial link here to "Paul Manata's Ugly Past...." I predated it to February, even though I posted it in the middle of May, after Manata had brought it up again (see the other dated links and you'll know my post was after theirs). I did this to place it way back in our archives for reference the next time it came up, as I did with "Poisoning the Well, which I wrote last week. Apart from those two posts, everything is dated correctly.

Robert O'Brien said...

Thanks Mr. Loftus. I'll take a look.