I would like some feedback on what I said in post #62 but because of you guys and your soap opera crap I guess it's not going to happen. By the way, Bramble, disagreeing does not equal stalking. If you think it does, the dictionary disagrees with you and the moderators also disagree with you.
Something occurs to me. When in TWI, we all KNEW what we believed. Not necessarily so those other groups. Back in the late 70s I would hear people selling TWI by saying, "If you ask 10 way believers any specific question about faith and practice, all 10 would say the same thing, but if you asked 10 people from a Christian denomination the same question, then you might get 10 different answers". The flip side is that 10 robots can't be wrong, but that's a different can of worms.
Perhaps the people who are ex Catholic, ex Baptist, etc. have just as much to get off their chests and out of their systems as we do, but because those groups are so much larger than TWI, there isn't as much common ground to focus on as there is in TWI. For us, EVERYBODY sat through pfal, EVERYBODY at one time or another had corps leadership, EVERYBODY went to at least 1 ROA, and on down the line. Did these other groups have things that EVERYBODY did? If not, would that make it more difficult to organize ex followers?
Websites or no, I'm guessing that ex Catholics, Baptists, whatever have done what many of us have done: either abandoned Christianity altogether, or moved on to another group.
My opinion??? I think John is right. (see the BOLDED part of his quote) :)
Do you and Bramble really enjoy being victims as much as you appear to. You were 'victims' in TWI and now here you are being 'victimized' again just because someone disagrees with you (despite the fact the you initiate the confrontation just as often as not).
Well, from where I look, the scene plays out like this...
1) somebody posts something I strongly disagree with
2) I post my disagreement
3) the poster I disagree with takes my post personally and off we go
Disagreeing is an option at GSC. It's OK. For you as well as myself. Recently on the open forum I posted my opinion/speculation on a thread and someone came back with "you have a lot to say for someone who doesn't know what he's talking about". That's insulting, right? I responded but not angrily. Dude's got a right to his opinion.
That was what I was leading to in my post where I recalled going to the Jefferson memorial earlier this week. I wish I could remember it verbatim, but TJ was adamant that both sides of any discussion about religion should be freely allowed. I think Rascal and Bramble and others don't want to allow any free discussion which disagrees with their 'gospel'. Sure, I can be insulting, but so can they.
A year or so ago, one of the mods in a PM said that there's 2 ways to deal with adversarial posters: 1) complain to the mods, and 2) break out the brass knuckles (deal directly with that poster). I've never once complained to the mods about any other poster. I think their lives are easier if we can police ourselves.
Let me give u a clue it"s not and no one has to
address any of your post.
I've never thought it was about me. If I really felt it was all about me I would "take my ball and go home"...just abandon this place. But Templelady painted this rose colored, little-house-on-the-prairie ish picture of how virtuous it would be if Jean and I would stop our "self destructive ways" and basically agree with everybody else and that this would get us all the attention we could possibly want. I couldn't resist making fun of that one.
In a different day that I lived I would just would of said
kiss my grits.
Again, you have too many rules; if kiss my grits is how you really feel, then you have every right to act on that.
Today I think I will pray the scales come off your eyes and God
quote: A victim with poor grammatical skills THANK you very much
IMO you are correct. You can indeed get your point across no matter how you spell. A few years ago Abigail posted to me that my posts would be easier to read if I would use paragraphs better...and she was right. I was relatively new to the internet and spent the first year or more saying to myself, "Duh, WOW! I'm on the INTERNET! That's ME on that post! Duhhhh, GOLLY!"...kinda like that. As such, I was oblivious to certain aids and amenities concerning written communication.
My opinions are whatever they are, then as now, but (bottom line) I DO feel that using paragraphs better has made me an even MORE effective communicator. I think if you were more diligent to spell and punctuate better then you, too, would do an even BETTER job of expressing your pov. REdiculous??? Now THAT is annoying. I'm sure I'll get desensitized eventually, but as I said, you can indeed get your pov across with or without a spell checker.
A victim with poor grammatical skills THANK you very much :)
Hee hee heee haaaww... I appologize but I found that funny!
I do have a bit of a demented sense of humor tho... :P
Ok so I don't really want a war but I am wondering how does this:
quote: Imagine, maybe there is more to our healing than just moving on. Maybe there are layers, levels that need to be examined each one at a time, only to be seen and presented as the previous layer has been examined and addressed.
See the pain; be the pain. IMO pain is OK as long as it's used in moderation.
Qualify as an opposing opinion? With a little tweaking I can see it...
I do understand Johns belated but welcome explanation concerning his comment but I fail to really see the opposing opinion part.
But then again I really fail to see the opposing opinion in the comment concerning "grammer" as well. Perhaps someone would care to enlighten me on how that post was in any way shape or form an "opposing opinion". It was an opinion but it was at the very least off topic and rude and at the worst a personal attack. (I'm not saying that it was the latter as I have already stated that I believe it was the former. I am giving the benefit of the doubt on that comment.)
But now I see this:
Do you and Bramble really enjoy being victims as much as you appear to. You were 'victims' in TWI and now here you are being 'victimized' again just because someone disagrees with you (despite the fact the you initiate the confrontation just as often as not).
Once again I am compelled to ask the question, where is the opposing opinion? Rascal was talking about layers of habit patterns that needed to be peeled away to get back to correct and healthy thinking. Bramble was agreeing with her. Where is the "victim" in that? And on a side note, isn't this thread titled; "Why is there an Ex-TWI site?" Is not each poster expected to some degree respond to the title question? Is that not what Rascal did? So what is the big problem here? Some disagree, ok so disagree without making personal attacks and move on. That is considered polite civilized adult behavior. It is something I learned by the time I was five years old. Don't force me to pull Rodney K!ng out of my pocket!
quote: A victim with poor grammatical skills THANK you very much
IMO you are correct. You can indeed get your point across no matter how you spell. A few years ago Abigail posted to me that my posts would be easier to read if I would use paragraphs better...and she was right. I was relatively new to the internet and spent the first year or more saying to myself, "Duh, WOW! I'm on the INTERNET! That's ME on that post! Duhhhh, GOLLY!"...kinda like that. As such, I was oblivious to certain aids and amenities concerning written communication.
My opinions are whatever they are, then as now, but (bottom line) I DO feel that using paragraphs better has made me an even MORE effective communicator. I think if you were more diligent to spell and punctuate better then you, too, would do an even BETTER job of expressing your pov. REdiculous??? Now THAT is annoying. I'm sure I'll get desensitized eventually, but as I said, you can indeed get your pov across with or without a spell checker.
Good post John. Now had the first comment concerning the grammatical idea been stated in this manner perhaps there wouldn't be a tiff going on right now. Just perhaps.
Once again I am compelled to ask the question, where is the opposing opinion? Rascal was talking about layers of habit patterns that needed to be peeled away to get back to correct and healthy thinking. Bramble was agreeing with her. Where is the "victim" in that? And on a side note, isn't this thread titled; "Why is therean Ex-TWI site?" Is not each poster expected to some degree respond to the title question? Is that not what Rascal did? So what is the big problem here? Some disagree, ok so disagree without making personal attacks and move on. That is considered polite civilized adult behavior. It is something I learned by the time I was five years old. Don't force me to pull Rodney K!ng out of my pocket!
For one, I disagree with the idea that renewing your mind to the Word is an habit pattern that needs to be peeled away to get back to correct and healthy thinking. I believe that thinking about the Bible IS correct and healthy thinking. And I disagree with John that Rascal can still get her point across with poor punctuation. Anyone who has sat through PFAL knows how a couple of misplaced commas can alter the intent of a sentence. And, finally, I don't see why all of you seem to think that Rascal is incapable of standing up and speaking for herself (including Rascal).
I actually wasn't referring to myself as one of the stalking victims, Jean. I don't think my experience in TWI was anything as dark as some other women on this site, plus I feel that I can pretty much take care of myself on a forum. This little dust up is small potatoes compared to some.
I was thinking about several women who have had stalkers on this site in the past year or two and made an observation.
I 'm certainly not the only one who has seen it--why don't you, Jean, address the other posters on this thread who have popped up in defence of Rascal, hmmm?
But I can see how you could think I was referring to myself, since you have taken upon yourself to question my presence on a thread, and have made insults to me in the past.
ON TOPIC:
I think this little bruhaha illustrates one of the Way Doctrin layers we came away with--The belief that We, Way Believers, the Knowers of Truth since it hasn't been known since the First Century Church, spiritual authoritays in all matters, with all people, have the right to demand that people conform to our standards of thinking and action.
I think we are seeing 'I AM the Authoritay!' layer still firmly in place in some people. Leadership in TWI did not back down or say they were wrong EVER in my experience. What they do is of God.
For one, I disagree with the idea that renewing your mind to the Word is an habit pattern that needs to be peeled away to get back to correct and healthy thinking. I believe that thinking about the Bible IS correct and healthy thinking. And I disagree with John that Rascal can still get her point across with poor punctuation. Anyone who has sat through PFAL knows how a couple of misplaced commas can alter the intent of a sentence. And, finally, I don't see why all of you seem to think that Rascal is incapable of standing up and speaking for herself (including Rascal).
Very good, dialogue...this we can work with. Thank you Jean for responding to my questions.
I didn't get the impression that anyone was talking about the "renewed mind" or "thinking about the Bible" as a habit pattern that needed to be changed. I know that I personally have a habit pattern of asking God's advice on darn near everything, and of thinking about the Bible and scriptures that are relevent to any given situation regularly. So if these items were to be placed into the "bad" habit column then I would also disagree with that placement. But as I said I did not get the impression that anyone was doing that. Perhaps if you did you can show me where. I have been known to miss things.
I am beginning to understand that you have a major problem with poor grammer. I do agree that there have been times when a poster's grammer has made it difficult for me to understand what they were trying to get across. (Although I must say that I have never had a problem with Rascal's grammer) My mother was an English major in college prior to the USA's involvement with WWII which changed her priorities. Hence proper English, both spoken and written were a necessity in our household. However, we were also expected to be polite. I therefore strongly disagree with the manner in which you addressed Rascal's grammer because it was rude. I do not see this as "standing up" for Rascal, she's a big girl and can do that for herself if she so chooses. I see this as reproof and correction to you for your lack of love concerning her in this matter. If this is the type of love that you learned from your stint in TWI then your "leaders" should be called to account for it.
I see no need to reference PFAL in this thread. I learned English from people who were far more qualified than VP to teach it correctly.
And finally, people that "stand up" for others on these boards whether it be Rascal or someone else do so because they love that person. It is true that Rascal is my friend and I would do anything for her or any of my other friends. But she is more than just a friend. The both of you fall into another catagory as well. You are both children of the most High God! You are both members of the same household. I would stand up for anyone that fit into that catagory if I felt that they were being wronged and yes I would expect you to do so also. You may disagree with Rascal's personal opinion as much as you like and I will defend with my life your right to do so, but you have no right to personally attack any member of the house of God. Furthermore no one has the right to attack you in similar manner. Which is why I had to ask those questions.
You were told by several people that your comment was rude. But you chose to ignore that reproof. So now I am saying it again, it was rude. No one launched a personal attack on you or John. Temple Lady's post and Brambles post were not addressed to anyone, if you chose to apply the contents to yourself then you applied them because you felt that they fit. (If the shoe fits!)
Bottom line: You were given reproof, you should have corrected yourself and simply appologized. But you chose not to do so. Now there are accusations and cr@p flying everywhere and the household on this thread is in confusion, hurt and undue anger. You have the power and Godly responsibility to correct this problem, the question is "Will you chose to do so?"
I actually wasn't referring to myself as one of the stalking victims, Jean. I don't think my experience in TWI was anything as dark as some other women on this site, plus I feel that I can pretty much take care of myself on a forum. This little dust up is small potatoes compared to some.
I was thinking about several women who have had stalkers on this site in the past year or two and made an observation.
I 'm certainly not the only one who has seen it--why don't you, Jean, address the other posters on this thread who have popped up in defence of Rascal, hmmm?
But I can see how you could think I was referring to myself, since you have taken upon yourself to question my presence on a thread, and have made insults to me in the past.
Since I quoted Eyesopen and was clearly responding to her, once again you're reading something into one of my posts that wasn't there, and once again I'm going to suggest that you read my posts carefully so you understand what I'm trying to say.
You were told by several people that your comment was rude. But you chose to ignore that reproof. So now I am saying it again, it was rude. No one launched a personal attack on you or John. Temple Lady's post and Brambles post were not addressed to anyone, if you chose to apply the contents to yourself then you applied them because you felt that they fit. (If the shoe fits!)
Bottom line: You were given reproof, you should have corrected yourself and simply appologized. But you chose not to do so. Now there are accusations and cr@p flying everywhere and the household on this thread is in confusion, hurt and undue anger. You have the power and Godly responsibility to correct this problem, the question is "Will you chose to do so?"
Actually, from my point of view, Rascal was given reproof that she (and you) chose to diregard because she (and you) think the way it was phrased was rude. No one has claimed that anything I said was untrue.
Jean, please understand that what I say is not out of anger or accusation. I just think that what I suggest is a simple solution so that we may all continue with the actual topic on the thread without this back and forth bickering.
Actually, from my point of view, Rascal was given reproof that she (and you) chose to diregard because she (and you) think the way it was phrased was rude. No one has claimed that anything I said was untrue.
Now that is an interesting point of view. I have never looked at spelling and grammer correction as "reproof" but as correction. But it wasn't just Rascal and I that thought that your comment was rude. But that is neither here nor there. No I do not claim that your comment was correct or incorrect but, sometimes we all mispell or type so fast that our grammer gets lost in translation, similar to the mistake that you made in the quote above that I highligted in bold type. Everyone can make mistakes, and correcting someones grammer is not a bad thing. My issue is in the manner that you said it. That's all.
Since I quoted Eyesopen and was clearly responding to her, once again you're reading something into one of my posts that wasn't there, and once again I'm going to suggest that you read my posts carefully so you understand what I'm trying to say.
QUOTE 'Do you and Bramble really enjoy being victims as much as you appear to. You were 'victims' in TWI and now here you are being 'victimized' again just because someone disagrees with you (despite the fact the you initiate the confrontation just as often as not).'
I never said that I, Bramble,was being bullied and stalked. I'm not, and if I was I would raise a stink--the soap opera forum doesn't scare me. I was actually thinking of Rascal, TL( issue in the past) and Exxie, who has had some pretty nasty confrontations over time.
I've never thought it was about me. If I really felt it was all about me I would "take my ball and go home"...just abandon this place. But Templelady painted this rose colored, little-house-on-the-prairie ish picture of how virtuous it would be if Jean and I would stop our "self destructive ways" and basically agree with everybody else and that this would get us all the attention we could possibly want. I couldn't resist making fun of that one.
I have gone back and reread my post, #68, just to make sure---
And sure as shootng I NEVER mentioned johniam, jeaniam, eyesopen, rascal, bramble or any other poster by name.
As was pointed out by another poster--obviously the shoe must fit in some degree or why would you feel a post, posted in response to a post not generated by you or jeaniam, would in any way refer to either of you????
One of my points was that people who fit the categories I was speaking about have an overwhelming need to be the center of attention--no matter how negative the attention might be. Clearly, I am sad to say, you and jeaniam fall into this group--else why would you claim your names were attached to a post that was describing negative characteristics???
I have NEVER demanded at any time, on any thread, that a poster agree with me on any subject.
And I challenge you to find a post where I specifically told you or jeaniam, not to post or to only post viewpoints that agree with mine.
And BTW, why don't you learn how to spell or at least install a spelling program on your computer?
Reproof? It must be great to fellowship with you guys! Do you critique every tiny little thing, every imperfection just glares, distracting you etc? All done out of love and concern, perfecting the saints and all that?
I think I'm having a flash back!
I didn't start this one Jean--you put it out there on a public forum and people responded. Quite revealing.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
21
17
22
25
Popular Days
Jun 23
47
Jun 26
31
Jun 28
23
Jun 14
21
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 21 posts
johniam 17 posts
doojable 22 posts
Eyesopen 25 posts
Popular Days
Jun 23 2007
47 posts
Jun 26 2007
31 posts
Jun 28 2007
23 posts
Jun 14 2007
21 posts
johniam
I would like some feedback on what I said in post #62 but because of you guys and your soap opera crap I guess it's not going to happen. By the way, Bramble, disagreeing does not equal stalking. If you think it does, the dictionary disagrees with you and the moderators also disagree with you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
My opinion??? I think John is right. (see the BOLDED part of his quote) :)
Edited by dmillerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Danny
I know I should never do this.
John what the F why do have to insult posters?
Why is it about you?
Let me give u a clue it"s not and no one has to
address any of your post.
In a different day that I lived I would just would of said
kiss my grits.
Today I think I will pray the scales come off your eyes and God
can help clean your heart.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I see what you mean Temple lady...lol
Well said way sider...WELL said :)
Hmmm indeed Bramble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Danny
Thanks Templelady.
You do put it so well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeaniam
Do you and Bramble really enjoy being victims as much as you appear to. You were 'victims' in TWI and now here you are being 'victimized' again just because someone disagrees with you (despite the fact the you initiate the confrontation just as often as not).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
A victim with poor grammatical skills THANK you very much :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: I know I should never do this.
Why shouldn't you? You have too many rules.
John what the F why do have to insult posters?
Why is it about you?
Well, from where I look, the scene plays out like this...
1) somebody posts something I strongly disagree with
2) I post my disagreement
3) the poster I disagree with takes my post personally and off we go
Disagreeing is an option at GSC. It's OK. For you as well as myself. Recently on the open forum I posted my opinion/speculation on a thread and someone came back with "you have a lot to say for someone who doesn't know what he's talking about". That's insulting, right? I responded but not angrily. Dude's got a right to his opinion.
That was what I was leading to in my post where I recalled going to the Jefferson memorial earlier this week. I wish I could remember it verbatim, but TJ was adamant that both sides of any discussion about religion should be freely allowed. I think Rascal and Bramble and others don't want to allow any free discussion which disagrees with their 'gospel'. Sure, I can be insulting, but so can they.
A year or so ago, one of the mods in a PM said that there's 2 ways to deal with adversarial posters: 1) complain to the mods, and 2) break out the brass knuckles (deal directly with that poster). I've never once complained to the mods about any other poster. I think their lives are easier if we can police ourselves.
Let me give u a clue it"s not and no one has to
address any of your post.
I've never thought it was about me. If I really felt it was all about me I would "take my ball and go home"...just abandon this place. But Templelady painted this rose colored, little-house-on-the-prairie ish picture of how virtuous it would be if Jean and I would stop our "self destructive ways" and basically agree with everybody else and that this would get us all the attention we could possibly want. I couldn't resist making fun of that one.
In a different day that I lived I would just would of said
kiss my grits.
Again, you have too many rules; if kiss my grits is how you really feel, then you have every right to act on that.
Today I think I will pray the scales come off your eyes and God
can help clean your heart.
Just curious, who is God going to help?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: A victim with poor grammatical skills THANK you very much
IMO you are correct. You can indeed get your point across no matter how you spell. A few years ago Abigail posted to me that my posts would be easier to read if I would use paragraphs better...and she was right. I was relatively new to the internet and spent the first year or more saying to myself, "Duh, WOW! I'm on the INTERNET! That's ME on that post! Duhhhh, GOLLY!"...kinda like that. As such, I was oblivious to certain aids and amenities concerning written communication.
My opinions are whatever they are, then as now, but (bottom line) I DO feel that using paragraphs better has made me an even MORE effective communicator. I think if you were more diligent to spell and punctuate better then you, too, would do an even BETTER job of expressing your pov. REdiculous??? Now THAT is annoying. I'm sure I'll get desensitized eventually, but as I said, you can indeed get your pov across with or without a spell checker.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Hee hee heee haaaww...
I appologize but I found that funny!
I do have a bit of a demented sense of humor tho... :P
Ok so I don't really want a war but I am wondering how does this:
quote: Imagine, maybe there is more to our healing than just moving on. Maybe there are layers, levels that need to be examined each one at a time, only to be seen and presented as the previous layer has been examined and addressed.
See the pain; be the pain. IMO pain is OK as long as it's used in moderation.
Qualify as an opposing opinion? With a little tweaking I can see it...
I do understand Johns belated but welcome explanation concerning his comment but I fail to really see the opposing opinion part.
But then again I really fail to see the opposing opinion in the comment concerning "grammer" as well. Perhaps someone would care to enlighten me on how that post was in any way shape or form an "opposing opinion". It was an opinion but it was at the very least off topic and rude and at the worst a personal attack. (I'm not saying that it was the latter as I have already stated that I believe it was the former. I am giving the benefit of the doubt on that comment.)
But now I see this:
Do you and Bramble really enjoy being victims as much as you appear to. You were 'victims' in TWI and now here you are being 'victimized' again just because someone disagrees with you (despite the fact the you initiate the confrontation just as often as not).
Once again I am compelled to ask the question, where is the opposing opinion? Rascal was talking about layers of habit patterns that needed to be peeled away to get back to correct and healthy thinking. Bramble was agreeing with her. Where is the "victim" in that? And on a side note, isn't this thread titled; "Why is there an Ex-TWI site?" Is not each poster expected to some degree respond to the title question? Is that not what Rascal did? So what is the big problem here? Some disagree, ok so disagree without making personal attacks and move on. That is considered polite civilized adult behavior. It is something I learned by the time I was five years old. Don't force me to pull Rodney K!ng out of my pocket!
Edited by EyesopenLink to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Good post John. Now had the first comment concerning the grammatical idea been stated in this manner perhaps there wouldn't be a tiff going on right now. Just perhaps.
Edited 'caus i still caint spel nun neethr!
Edited by EyesopenLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Eyes: When Jean said they were 'victims' she was referring to them saying they were being "bullied and stalked".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Thank you John that clears up that dilema for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeaniam
For one, I disagree with the idea that renewing your mind to the Word is an habit pattern that needs to be peeled away to get back to correct and healthy thinking. I believe that thinking about the Bible IS correct and healthy thinking. And I disagree with John that Rascal can still get her point across with poor punctuation. Anyone who has sat through PFAL knows how a couple of misplaced commas can alter the intent of a sentence. And, finally, I don't see why all of you seem to think that Rascal is incapable of standing up and speaking for herself (including Rascal).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
I was thinking about several women who have had stalkers on this site in the past year or two and made an observation.
I 'm certainly not the only one who has seen it--why don't you, Jean, address the other posters on this thread who have popped up in defence of Rascal, hmmm?
But I can see how you could think I was referring to myself, since you have taken upon yourself to question my presence on a thread, and have made insults to me in the past.
ON TOPIC:
I think this little bruhaha illustrates one of the Way Doctrin layers we came away with--The belief that We, Way Believers, the Knowers of Truth since it hasn't been known since the First Century Church, spiritual authoritays in all matters, with all people, have the right to demand that people conform to our standards of thinking and action.
I think we are seeing 'I AM the Authoritay!' layer still firmly in place in some people. Leadership in TWI did not back down or say they were wrong EVER in my experience. What they do is of God.
Right.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Very good, dialogue...this we can work with. Thank you Jean for responding to my questions.
I didn't get the impression that anyone was talking about the "renewed mind" or "thinking about the Bible" as a habit pattern that needed to be changed. I know that I personally have a habit pattern of asking God's advice on darn near everything, and of thinking about the Bible and scriptures that are relevent to any given situation regularly. So if these items were to be placed into the "bad" habit column then I would also disagree with that placement. But as I said I did not get the impression that anyone was doing that. Perhaps if you did you can show me where. I have been known to miss things.
I am beginning to understand that you have a major problem with poor grammer. I do agree that there have been times when a poster's grammer has made it difficult for me to understand what they were trying to get across. (Although I must say that I have never had a problem with Rascal's grammer) My mother was an English major in college prior to the USA's involvement with WWII which changed her priorities. Hence proper English, both spoken and written were a necessity in our household. However, we were also expected to be polite. I therefore strongly disagree with the manner in which you addressed Rascal's grammer because it was rude. I do not see this as "standing up" for Rascal, she's a big girl and can do that for herself if she so chooses. I see this as reproof and correction to you for your lack of love concerning her in this matter. If this is the type of love that you learned from your stint in TWI then your "leaders" should be called to account for it.
I see no need to reference PFAL in this thread. I learned English from people who were far more qualified than VP to teach it correctly.
And finally, people that "stand up" for others on these boards whether it be Rascal or someone else do so because they love that person. It is true that Rascal is my friend and I would do anything for her or any of my other friends. But she is more than just a friend. The both of you fall into another catagory as well. You are both children of the most High God! You are both members of the same household. I would stand up for anyone that fit into that catagory if I felt that they were being wronged and yes I would expect you to do so also. You may disagree with Rascal's personal opinion as much as you like and I will defend with my life your right to do so, but you have no right to personally attack any member of the house of God. Furthermore no one has the right to attack you in similar manner. Which is why I had to ask those questions.
You were told by several people that your comment was rude. But you chose to ignore that reproof. So now I am saying it again, it was rude. No one launched a personal attack on you or John. Temple Lady's post and Brambles post were not addressed to anyone, if you chose to apply the contents to yourself then you applied them because you felt that they fit. (If the shoe fits!)
Bottom line: You were given reproof, you should have corrected yourself and simply appologized. But you chose not to do so. Now there are accusations and cr@p flying everywhere and the household on this thread is in confusion, hurt and undue anger. You have the power and Godly responsibility to correct this problem, the question is "Will you chose to do so?"
Edited by EyesopenLink to comment
Share on other sites
Jeaniam
Since I quoted Eyesopen and was clearly responding to her, once again you're reading something into one of my posts that wasn't there, and once again I'm going to suggest that you read my posts carefully so you understand what I'm trying to say.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jeaniam
Actually, from my point of view, Rascal was given reproof that she (and you) chose to diregard because she (and you) think the way it was phrased was rude. No one has claimed that anything I said was untrue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Jean, please understand that what I say is not out of anger or accusation. I just think that what I suggest is a simple solution so that we may all continue with the actual topic on the thread without this back and forth bickering.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Now that is an interesting point of view. I have never looked at spelling and grammer correction as "reproof" but as correction. But it wasn't just Rascal and I that thought that your comment was rude. But that is neither here nor there. No I do not claim that your comment was correct or incorrect but, sometimes we all mispell or type so fast that our grammer gets lost in translation, similar to the mistake that you made in the quote above that I highligted in bold type. Everyone can make mistakes, and correcting someones grammer is not a bad thing. My issue is in the manner that you said it. That's all.
Edited by EyesopenLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
QUOTE 'Do you and Bramble really enjoy being victims as much as you appear to. You were 'victims' in TWI and now here you are being 'victimized' again just because someone disagrees with you (despite the fact the you initiate the confrontation just as often as not).'
You mentioned my name, Jean. Did you forget???
Edited by BrambleLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
I never said that I, Bramble,was being bullied and stalked. I'm not, and if I was I would raise a stink--the soap opera forum doesn't scare me. I was actually thinking of Rascal, TL( issue in the past) and Exxie, who has had some pretty nasty confrontations over time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
I have gone back and reread my post, #68, just to make sure---
And sure as shootng I NEVER mentioned johniam, jeaniam, eyesopen, rascal, bramble or any other poster by name.
As was pointed out by another poster--obviously the shoe must fit in some degree or why would you feel a post, posted in response to a post not generated by you or jeaniam, would in any way refer to either of you????
One of my points was that people who fit the categories I was speaking about have an overwhelming need to be the center of attention--no matter how negative the attention might be. Clearly, I am sad to say, you and jeaniam fall into this group--else why would you claim your names were attached to a post that was describing negative characteristics???
I have NEVER demanded at any time, on any thread, that a poster agree with me on any subject.
And I challenge you to find a post where I specifically told you or jeaniam, not to post or to only post viewpoints that agree with mine.
Edited by templeladyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
Reproof? It must be great to fellowship with you guys! Do you critique every tiny little thing, every imperfection just glares, distracting you etc? All done out of love and concern, perfecting the saints and all that?
I think I'm having a flash back!
I didn't start this one Jean--you put it out there on a public forum and people responded. Quite revealing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.