back at waydale, i had to leave, for almost a year, due to what i call "a mini nervous breakdown"
i was really "attacked" for speaking about what happened to me regarding vpw
i just could not handle it, i was speaking it out to fellow wayfers, i thought they would get it
but i've come a long way
thank you god, thank you twi blue coffee mug, thank you paw, thank you former researcher orange cat, thank you so many people, i can't begin to tell you
Personal attacks have been made not only on those who support and/or value certain aspects of what they experienced or learned in TWI.
They have been made on those who have described great hurts that were done to them.
So if we work hard to justify attacking those we don't agree with...
we give license to others to hurt further those who have already been hurt.
If you don't accept some things as gospel...and there are things I dont...that's cool. In many cases...or most...but not all...our relationships are purely cyber.
But that also is part of the reason not to attack...
calling someone a liar, fool, crazy, having their head up their ***,
Do you know someone well enough to know they are wheteve you call them?
Oh, it's all in fun, satirical, a big joke, so its OK...
Well, jokes can hurt. If that is the least of you're intent, does it hurt the other person less?
I found that out a few nights ago.
Wisdom, I guess. If we could never joke or satirize, where would we be?
But why not back off, if someone says, in one way or another, they are hurting?
I dunno.. so what's the big difference between attacks, whether they are personal or impersonal?
There isnt really one, of course. I dont think we have seen anyone describe an impersonal attack on themselves. An attack by its nature is going to be personal. I believe that dmiller and others of us use the redundant "personal" modifier to emphasize how much it hurts those we refer to. For example, openly denying someones testimony of a very personal hurt such as abuse is going to be very personal. Calling someone an *** or a fool or looney for what they believe is going to be very personal. And this applies in either case no matter how much we try to mask our words behnd the excuse of satire or parody or joking.
What we are really talking about, I think, is the difference betwen attacking someone, which by its nature is personal, and disagreeing with what they say, perhaps very strongly, without calling them a liar or crazy or worse.
And there is that intent factor again. If I openly deny someone's abuse story, for example, calling them a liar, and hurt them in that way, the hurt doesnt go away if I say, "Well, I didn't mean it that way, so if you feel hurt, it's your problem not mine". I would think that makes it even worse.
Thanks for the info on quoting But I'm such a newcomer at these things that I don't get it yet. I'll probably refer back to it as I work on figuring it out.
I'm not envious of the Corps or think less of myself because I'm not Corps at all. It just kind of perturbs me that as far as discussion goes there doesn't seem to be many of them who seem to have figured out that it's a good thing to hold on to the good from the old days. I don't have any problem remembering that in PFAL we were encouraged to learn how to work God's word so that we could check the truth of it out for ourselves. The group I came through gave that principle faint lip-service at best. When I think of the best of the Corps I think that they were taught to handle the issues I've faced and done better, but I don't hear many who can handle the real "blood and guts" issues like we talk about here and can frame them within IT IS WRITTEN. To tell you the truth, I wanted to provoke them by pointing out that a lowly intermediate class grad can do it.
As far as not allways agreeing with you, I'll just talk "out" from my previous sharing and say, I'd only have a problem with it if I wanted you to be my beeotch. :) ( That joke is absolutely not intended as a thinly veiled attack of any kind, I just mean that to not be o.k. with a well intentioned difference between us would be wrong on my part .)
IRISHEYES & EXCATHEDRA
Wow, thank you so very much for the sharing and the sentiment, I'm floored and sadened by your Corps experience (I don't think you said Corps excathedra but it sounds like you were around it at least) and I'm sure many others feel the same way you do. I don't know when it all started to go bad, but I'm sure it was before the date of my first twig fellowship; 40th anniversary sunday. It's just that I'm really hoping you're holding on to the spaghetti in spite of all that was nasty. (If I don't use the analogy right, I hope you get what I mean.)
This I know for sure, that God is aware of every little bit of compromised darkness that His people had to suffer through and that he'll make it O.K. in the end. I'm just glad for both your tender and kind hearts.
The last king that he picked is our exceeding good news, he's tender and kind and he never has, or ever will hurt his people with one spoonful of rotten spaghetti sauce. Someday he'll come and reveal the hidden wisdom of wickedness that has hurt so many.
The Internet is Serious Businessdefinition: A phrase used to remind those who voluntarily leave the house that being mocked on the Internets is, in fact, the end of the world.
I love this video! Although he uses some coarse language, he's very funny yet makes some valid points, and sadly he's right about how too many Christians are (as well as Moslems and Jews). This should make us more aware of how we present our message.
The page also has comments that were made in response to the video. Some felt that religion itself, or belief in God, was the problem, while others rightly concluded that that was not the point of the video. It's not religion itself but how some people practice it that is bad. Unfortunately, not enough "real Christians" speak up about it. One of the comments even made a point of saying that "no real Christians have anything to say." Another comment responded by saying:
...the reason there are no "real" Christians having anything to say, is that the number of real Christians, who engage in discourse on such subjects, is smaller than the number of hairs on a turtle......A true Christian?? A true Muslim?? A true Jew??? These are constructs, of individual perception, and do not actually, physically, exist in time and space for longer than brief, unquantifiable moments.....
Only one "real Christian" posted anything worth while:
I'll say though that extreme radicals in each religion are given the most press...hands down...by a landslide...without a doubt... which makes just about every religion look completely bums-up loonytoons. I'll say straight up that those people who hold those "GOD HATES [WHOEVER]" signs speak for no one but themselves and plainly haven't read or remotely understood their Bible. ALL the rest of us agree on that, and yet THEY get all the press and people cite them constantly as the "example" of the Christian, which is nonsense, plain as day. Meanwhile, those that honestly follow the Bible (for real) and contain a good bit of faith, but a good bit of reason as well are generally ignored by the media (and such) and wind up looking at the whole debate and getting horribly frustrated and depressed at the unfairness of it all. Personally I'm a career scientist and a Christian... and generally people--when they hear it--go "What? You must be a lousy Christian/scientist!" (you can pick which) Ridiculous! Not all of us have given the matter no thought. See C.S.Lewis, etc.
In rhyme with what has been commented here already, my "beef" is not with those who disapprove of my religious beliefs. My beef is with those who deliberately (or ignorantly) LIE about it in order to discredit it in a [conscious or unconscious] attempt to justify their philosophy. I'm not talking about revealing charlatans; that's fine. I'm not talking about revealing cults; that's fine. I'm talking about accusing a religion of being false or wrong based on only those charlatans and cults.
One more comment that I feel like mentioning:
An atheist will cite one religion after another for inciting war after war... and I will not argue with that. I will argue that the religious/spiritual belief system that a person chooses to believe is the single most important decision of his/her life. This is a decision that defines the character of a person and the purpose of his/her entire life. Naturally dissent here causes problems. Attempting to erase this dissent by erasing religion is identical to attempting to erase racial discrimination problems by eliminating all but one race... I don't think I need to say more about that...
This man's comments were well thought out and well articulated. He is a great example of how we should respond to "religion bashing" that is so common these days. And (getting back to the thread's topic) both the video and his response are excellent examples of "attacking" ideas and attitudes, rather than just attacking the people and being insulting but not contibuting anything constructive.
I don't think I blamed anyone for being unsympathetic. there's always the option to keep one's mouth shut instead of calling someone a liar just because their experience taints one's fond memories.
That is one way to avoid attacking someone, even if this is a sugar coated way of putting it to the choir. In my case, there is a very well known case of (anonymous) TWI testimony dealing primarily with something I did not experience or witness, and I have no basis to refute it based on that alone. However, the same item contains a testimony about another subject which contradicts directly something I did witness, plus having the first hand testimony of the person who did experience it to confirm that contradiction. Still, I haven't detailed that publically, even though the person I would be "calling a liar" is not around as far as I know.
Of course, there would also be the option of keeping one's mouth shut instead of calling someone a fool or liar just because their experience is not the same as one's own, even though it has been hurtful.
But usually people who whine about someone attacking them after they said something stupid...
Just wants to be able to continue to say whatever the heck they want... without having someone call them on it.
All the while they get to continue to say whatever they want - and personally attack other people...
But it's somehow different.
Yep.
You may have a point, but you mention something I think is one of the problems...people deciding on their own that someone is being stupid, presumably giving themselves license to make sure everyone knows that person is stupid.
Judging whether someone is whining is subjective as well. If someone tells of themselves being hurt very deeply, and someone else calls them a liar, that is a very personal attack IMO. Not doing so doesnt mean we believe what was said. But if we think there is the slightest chance the person is being truthful, we risk hurting them more by saying that they are "whining" about being attacked.
There are a lot of personal attacks that take place here.
Some people bear such resentment and hatred toward TWI that all they can do is attack and lash out and name call and condemn. Their reactions to the problems within TWI cause them to do bad things in kind. Yet, they are blind to what they are doing because they have adopted an egotistical attitude that everyone else must think exactly like they do.
Like it or not, people in TWI were Christians, our brothers and sisters in Christ. Like it or not, VPW and LCM were Christians, our brothers in Christ. Yeah, they did some bad things, so let the stone throwing commence. Oh, yeah, we've all done bad things.
I was in TWI for over 12 years. Yeah, there's a lot of memories tied to TWI. Yeah, I was angry, angry at LCM and the BOT. Yeah, I was disappointed at plagarism and adultery being carried on by people in charge.
I don't hate anyone from TWI. I don't hate LCM. You want to know something, I actually pray for the man. I pray for the Wierwille family. I pray for Rosalie Rivenbark. I pray for Harve Platig. I pray for John Lynn. I pray for Chris Geer. I pray for John Schoenheit. They are all my brothers and sisters in Christ. Whether I disagree with what they do or say or teach, they are still members of the body of Christ (and I don't care if you think my words are too similar to the way TWI used them).
If I harbor anger and resentment and hatred, then I would be no better than those I condemn. So, personal attacks are ungodly and to use TWI terminology, contrary to the Word. I don't care if you don't like TWI terminology, carrying around bitterness and resentments are contrary to God's Word.
It is better to say the doctrine was wrong than to accuse someone of deliberately teaching error, because you can't know a person's thoughts unless he/she tells you. It is better to disagree with an opinion than to attack the intelligence or pedigree of the one offering an opinion.
We are all grownups here, I presume. We can logically, sanely, and intelligently analyze what someone says without resorting to name calling and belittling that person.
Like it or not, VPW and LCM were Christians, our brothers in Christ. Yeah, they did some bad things, so let the stone throwing commence. Oh, yeah, we've all done bad things.
I don't disagree with you on what you say about attacks. I'm just wondering how you know VPW and LCM were christians. I know they said they were, but their fruit indicates otherwise.
The reality is that no matter how much Proof one has that something happened it will never be enough for some parties.
The reality is that no matter how much Proof one has that something didn't happened it will never be enough for some parties.
There are people in this world who only feel alive when in the midst of controversy
There are people in this world who are busily shoveling unnecessary controversy out of their lives.
That is why you see me here less and less.
There are so many of you that I love dearly both from meeting you personally and/or from our cyberspace relationship. But the futility of trying to make the blind see and the deaf hear has worn me down.
Name calling does no good on either side ultimately we are all individually responsible for what we say and believe and as long as there are two sides to the issue there will always be diehards in either camp.
Granted a few may be "converted" to a new viewpoint but those with agendas of their own will likely never change --SIGH--
I agree with the "Templelady". Most posters seem to have an anger management problem of some degree or another. Surprisingly for me, I find less animosity amongst my Islamic "friends" in Africa. Here, supposed Christians are always at each others throats. Why, I don't know, except bitter past experiences never seem to be resolved.
When are people going to wake-up and see who their enemy really is? You are playing a fools game with words, convinced the truth lies within your self-righteous sacrifice and 'intellectual' thoughts. In the process, you are destroying yourselves and each other.
I'm just wondering how you know VPW and LCM were christians. I know they said they were, but their fruit indicates otherwise.
Surely you are not suggesting we need some proof we all know we just except it because they said so it was their experience ,who are you to question it? Isn't that how you said it works or is there a different standard when it comes to people you don't like?
Name calling does no good on either side ultimately we are all individually responsible for what we say and believe and as long as there are two sides to the issue there will always be diehards in either camp.
Right on this point and right that it goes on on both (or more) sides. And the same people will immediately claim, "that's not a personal attack". I just saw this flash up again.
Okay, so this is off topic...but I really hope you are doing well!!!
I can't tell by their fruit because they manifested both good and bad fruit.
I only know that Gods promise in his Word, that those who believe in Jesus Christ will be saved, apply to everyone including VP and LCM.
not arguing with that OM. if it's true, I'll see them one of these days.
I was wondering more what's the point of proclaiming vpw and lcm christians while chiding people for being angry, like that makes those men more worthy of prayer than the guy next door who fixed my gate just to be nice. none of us knows if they were christian or not. vpw and lcm aren't my brothers just because we were in the same cult and they made the rules.
anger is one of the steps you have to go through when you deal with loss. being told not to be angry at someone who hurt you because they're christian is like telling someone don't be angry at uncle for touching you because he's family and we don't tell on family. so biblefan dave believes we all have a responsibility to sweep it under the carpet and not be angry because anger makes you do bad things... well, what bad things?
I'm just curious. I had a lot of years of people telling me what I should do for my own good, so if someone thinks I should forgive someone and tells me dude's my brother so get over it, I want to know why. there must be some logic in there somewhere beyond being in the same cult.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
10
16
18
14
Popular Days
Dec 20
45
Dec 5
26
Dec 6
24
Dec 7
21
Top Posters In This Topic
Lifted Up 10 posts
potato 16 posts
Bumpy 18 posts
JeffSjo 14 posts
Popular Days
Dec 20 2007
45 posts
Dec 5 2007
26 posts
Dec 6 2007
24 posts
Dec 7 2007
21 posts
polar bear
Anywho, getting back to Ds original post.
I think we just have to ignore those who don't want to accept the fact there were and are some serious problems with twi and their policies.
There are some good folks around here.
WW was right when he said sometimes we've got to be a little thick skinned.
And D- you are always welcome around my campfire.
Edited by polar bearLink to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i'm sorry i haven't really followed this thread
back at waydale, i had to leave, for almost a year, due to what i call "a mini nervous breakdown"
i was really "attacked" for speaking about what happened to me regarding vpw
i just could not handle it, i was speaking it out to fellow wayfers, i thought they would get it
but i've come a long way
thank you god, thank you twi blue coffee mug, thank you paw, thank you former researcher orange cat, thank you so many people, i can't begin to tell you
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
One of my points.
Personal attacks have been made not only on those who support and/or value certain aspects of what they experienced or learned in TWI.
They have been made on those who have described great hurts that were done to them.
So if we work hard to justify attacking those we don't agree with...
we give license to others to hurt further those who have already been hurt.
If you don't accept some things as gospel...and there are things I dont...that's cool. In many cases...or most...but not all...our relationships are purely cyber.
But that also is part of the reason not to attack...
calling someone a liar, fool, crazy, having their head up their ***,
Do you know someone well enough to know they are wheteve you call them?
Oh, it's all in fun, satirical, a big joke, so its OK...
Well, jokes can hurt. If that is the least of you're intent, does it hurt the other person less?
I found that out a few nights ago.
Wisdom, I guess. If we could never joke or satirize, where would we be?
But why not back off, if someone says, in one way or another, they are hurting?
It doesnt mean we are wrong...or right.
We can be wrong and hurt.
We can be right and still hurt
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bumpy
And THIS may be the place to do it!
http://www.commontables.org/
Then, a nice friendly round of "poker"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
There isnt really one, of course. I dont think we have seen anyone describe an impersonal attack on themselves. An attack by its nature is going to be personal. I believe that dmiller and others of us use the redundant "personal" modifier to emphasize how much it hurts those we refer to. For example, openly denying someones testimony of a very personal hurt such as abuse is going to be very personal. Calling someone an *** or a fool or looney for what they believe is going to be very personal. And this applies in either case no matter how much we try to mask our words behnd the excuse of satire or parody or joking.
What we are really talking about, I think, is the difference betwen attacking someone, which by its nature is personal, and disagreeing with what they say, perhaps very strongly, without calling them a liar or crazy or worse.
And there is that intent factor again. If I openly deny someone's abuse story, for example, calling them a liar, and hurt them in that way, the hurt doesnt go away if I say, "Well, I didn't mean it that way, so if you feel hurt, it's your problem not mine". I would think that makes it even worse.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JeffSjo
Hi everyone, this is jeffsjo
WAYSIDER
Thanks for the info on quoting But I'm such a newcomer at these things that I don't get it yet. I'll probably refer back to it as I work on figuring it out.
I'm not envious of the Corps or think less of myself because I'm not Corps at all. It just kind of perturbs me that as far as discussion goes there doesn't seem to be many of them who seem to have figured out that it's a good thing to hold on to the good from the old days. I don't have any problem remembering that in PFAL we were encouraged to learn how to work God's word so that we could check the truth of it out for ourselves. The group I came through gave that principle faint lip-service at best. When I think of the best of the Corps I think that they were taught to handle the issues I've faced and done better, but I don't hear many who can handle the real "blood and guts" issues like we talk about here and can frame them within IT IS WRITTEN. To tell you the truth, I wanted to provoke them by pointing out that a lowly intermediate class grad can do it.
As far as not allways agreeing with you, I'll just talk "out" from my previous sharing and say, I'd only have a problem with it if I wanted you to be my beeotch. :) ( That joke is absolutely not intended as a thinly veiled attack of any kind, I just mean that to not be o.k. with a well intentioned difference between us would be wrong on my part .)
IRISHEYES & EXCATHEDRA
Wow, thank you so very much for the sharing and the sentiment, I'm floored and sadened by your Corps experience (I don't think you said Corps excathedra but it sounds like you were around it at least) and I'm sure many others feel the same way you do. I don't know when it all started to go bad, but I'm sure it was before the date of my first twig fellowship; 40th anniversary sunday. It's just that I'm really hoping you're holding on to the spaghetti in spite of all that was nasty. (If I don't use the analogy right, I hope you get what I mean.)
This I know for sure, that God is aware of every little bit of compromised darkness that His people had to suffer through and that he'll make it O.K. in the end. I'm just glad for both your tender and kind hearts.
The last king that he picked is our exceeding good news, he's tender and kind and he never has, or ever will hurt his people with one spoonful of rotten spaghetti sauce. Someday he'll come and reveal the hidden wisdom of wickedness that has hurt so many.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
irisheyes
Nickels and quarters or the hard stuff?
BTW, I'll pass on the website AND the butter.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nero
I said it on the other thread and so I guess I'll say it here too:
The Internet is Serious Business (profane):
http://www.encyclopediadramatica.com/index...erious_Business
The Internet is Serious Business definition: A phrase used to remind those who voluntarily leave the house that being mocked on the Internets is, in fact, the end of the world.
Why? Because it's true!
Edited by NeroLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Clarke
I love this video! Although he uses some coarse language, he's very funny yet makes some valid points, and sadly he's right about how too many Christians are (as well as Moslems and Jews). This should make us more aware of how we present our message.
The page also has comments that were made in response to the video. Some felt that religion itself, or belief in God, was the problem, while others rightly concluded that that was not the point of the video. It's not religion itself but how some people practice it that is bad. Unfortunately, not enough "real Christians" speak up about it. One of the comments even made a point of saying that "no real Christians have anything to say." Another comment responded by saying:
Only one "real Christian" posted anything worth while:
This man's comments were well thought out and well articulated. He is a great example of how we should respond to "religion bashing" that is so common these days. And (getting back to the thread's topic) both the video and his response are excellent examples of "attacking" ideas and attitudes, rather than just attacking the people and being insulting but not contibuting anything constructive.
Edited by Mark ClarkeLink to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
That is one way to avoid attacking someone, even if this is a sugar coated way of putting it to the choir. In my case, there is a very well known case of (anonymous) TWI testimony dealing primarily with something I did not experience or witness, and I have no basis to refute it based on that alone. However, the same item contains a testimony about another subject which contradicts directly something I did witness, plus having the first hand testimony of the person who did experience it to confirm that contradiction. Still, I haven't detailed that publically, even though the person I would be "calling a liar" is not around as far as I know.
Of course, there would also be the option of keeping one's mouth shut instead of calling someone a fool or liar just because their experience is not the same as one's own, even though it has been hurtful.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nero
Going out on a limb...
But usually people who whine about someone attacking them after they said something stupid...
Just wants to be able to continue to say whatever the heck they want... without having someone call them on it.
All the while they get to continue to say whatever they want - and personally attack other people...
But it's somehow different.
Yep.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
You may have a point, but you mention something I think is one of the problems...people deciding on their own that someone is being stupid, presumably giving themselves license to make sure everyone knows that person is stupid.
Judging whether someone is whining is subjective as well. If someone tells of themselves being hurt very deeply, and someone else calls them a liar, that is a very personal attack IMO. Not doing so doesnt mean we believe what was said. But if we think there is the slightest chance the person is being truthful, we risk hurting them more by saying that they are "whining" about being attacked.
Edited by Lifted UpLink to comment
Share on other sites
JeffSjo
It's a complicated topic, I try to focus on whether or not the topic is worth it. (The trouble that is)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Biblefan Dave
There are a lot of personal attacks that take place here.
Some people bear such resentment and hatred toward TWI that all they can do is attack and lash out and name call and condemn. Their reactions to the problems within TWI cause them to do bad things in kind. Yet, they are blind to what they are doing because they have adopted an egotistical attitude that everyone else must think exactly like they do.
Like it or not, people in TWI were Christians, our brothers and sisters in Christ. Like it or not, VPW and LCM were Christians, our brothers in Christ. Yeah, they did some bad things, so let the stone throwing commence. Oh, yeah, we've all done bad things.
I was in TWI for over 12 years. Yeah, there's a lot of memories tied to TWI. Yeah, I was angry, angry at LCM and the BOT. Yeah, I was disappointed at plagarism and adultery being carried on by people in charge.
I don't hate anyone from TWI. I don't hate LCM. You want to know something, I actually pray for the man. I pray for the Wierwille family. I pray for Rosalie Rivenbark. I pray for Harve Platig. I pray for John Lynn. I pray for Chris Geer. I pray for John Schoenheit. They are all my brothers and sisters in Christ. Whether I disagree with what they do or say or teach, they are still members of the body of Christ (and I don't care if you think my words are too similar to the way TWI used them).
If I harbor anger and resentment and hatred, then I would be no better than those I condemn. So, personal attacks are ungodly and to use TWI terminology, contrary to the Word. I don't care if you don't like TWI terminology, carrying around bitterness and resentments are contrary to God's Word.
It is better to say the doctrine was wrong than to accuse someone of deliberately teaching error, because you can't know a person's thoughts unless he/she tells you. It is better to disagree with an opinion than to attack the intelligence or pedigree of the one offering an opinion.
We are all grownups here, I presume. We can logically, sanely, and intelligently analyze what someone says without resorting to name calling and belittling that person.
David
Link to comment
Share on other sites
potato
I don't disagree with you on what you say about attacks. I'm just wondering how you know VPW and LCM were christians. I know they said they were, but their fruit indicates otherwise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
I wrote something that was semi funny and changed my mind...
Edited by chockfullLink to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
The reality is that no matter how much Proof one has that something happened it will never be enough for some parties.
The reality is that no matter how much Proof one has that something didn't happened it will never be enough for some parties.
There are people in this world who only feel alive when in the midst of controversy
There are people in this world who are busily shoveling unnecessary controversy out of their lives.
That is why you see me here less and less.
There are so many of you that I love dearly both from meeting you personally and/or from our cyberspace relationship. But the futility of trying to make the blind see and the deaf hear has worn me down.
Name calling does no good on either side ultimately we are all individually responsible for what we say and believe and as long as there are two sides to the issue there will always be diehards in either camp.
Granted a few may be "converted" to a new viewpoint but those with agendas of their own will likely never change --SIGH--
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bumpy
I agree with the "Templelady". Most posters seem to have an anger management problem of some degree or another. Surprisingly for me, I find less animosity amongst my Islamic "friends" in Africa. Here, supposed Christians are always at each others throats. Why, I don't know, except bitter past experiences never seem to be resolved.
When are people going to wake-up and see who their enemy really is? You are playing a fools game with words, convinced the truth lies within your self-righteous sacrifice and 'intellectual' thoughts. In the process, you are destroying yourselves and each other.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Surely you are not suggesting we need some proof we all know we just except it because they said so it was their experience ,who are you to question it? Isn't that how you said it works or is there a different standard when it comes to people you don't like?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I can't tell by their fruit because they manifested both good and bad fruit.
I only know that Gods promise in his Word, that those who believe in Jesus Christ will be saved, apply to everyone including VP and LCM.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lifted Up
Right on this point and right that it goes on on both (or more) sides. And the same people will immediately claim, "that's not a personal attack". I just saw this flash up again.
Okay, so this is off topic...but I really hope you are doing well!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
potato
not arguing with that OM. if it's true, I'll see them one of these days.
I was wondering more what's the point of proclaiming vpw and lcm christians while chiding people for being angry, like that makes those men more worthy of prayer than the guy next door who fixed my gate just to be nice. none of us knows if they were christian or not. vpw and lcm aren't my brothers just because we were in the same cult and they made the rules.
anger is one of the steps you have to go through when you deal with loss. being told not to be angry at someone who hurt you because they're christian is like telling someone don't be angry at uncle for touching you because he's family and we don't tell on family. so biblefan dave believes we all have a responsibility to sweep it under the carpet and not be angry because anger makes you do bad things... well, what bad things?
I'm just curious. I had a lot of years of people telling me what I should do for my own good, so if someone thinks I should forgive someone and tells me dude's my brother so get over it, I want to know why. there must be some logic in there somewhere beyond being in the same cult.
Edited by potatoLink to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Hi, MO!!
Good to see you.
Glad to hear you are doing well.
OK---Enough of that
Let's whine some more.
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.