Open Discussions About The Paranormal

by The wanderer 113 Replies latest jw friends

  • IP_SEC
    IP_SEC
    The Hillary_Step is a bottleneck .
    thinner at the top than at the bottom.

    Discribes the old chap quite well eh? alt

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    The last time hillary and I hooked up he was quite fit..Give him a guitar and he will blow you off the planet..LOL!!...OUTLAW

  • IP_SEC
    IP_SEC

    *psst* it was just a joke. i wouldnt know hs if passed gas and blew me off the planet.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    IP_Sec..LOL!!..We got some funny people on this board..Ya gotta love it!!...OUTLAW

  • The wanderer
    The wanderer

    Dear Hilliary_Step:

    Normally, when I finish with a discussion I never
    return for any reason. However, Blueblades sent me
    a personal message to see your commentary and I
    complied because of my trust in his judgment.

    Personally, I thought it was an exceptional
    commentary (the second one) which answered
    the question and overtook the discussion
    in a positive manner.

    My thoughts are, if reply's such as your last
    commentary were on a more frequent basis
    you would bring up the level of dis-
    cussion regarding almost any matter.

    Just my opinion ...

    Respectfully,

    Richard

    (The Wanderer)

  • bluebell
    bluebell

    i must admit to being very sceptical about the paranormal, so i just choose not to share in those threads.

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Outlaw,

    Bwa-Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!!..HS you are such a trouble maker!..I near spit a beer on the screen!..LOL!!...OUTLAW

    HS

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Wanderer,

    Normally, when I finish with a discussion I never return for any reason.

    Can you not hear the arrogant tone in that statement? Read it again as others would see it. When you finish with a discussion, is it over or just your part in it? Perhaps in this conundrum is the answer to many of the issues that you have raised.

    However, Blueblades sent me a personal message to see your commentary and I complied because of my trust in his judgment.

    You seem to make a classic error in dealing with these discussion Boards, that is, concluding that what you see is what you get. These Boards are one-dimensional and it is the source of most of its problems when we allow our minds to interpret this one dimension into three. Those whose judgments you question, may indeed be the ones who have the most to give. I thank Blueblades for his peaceful intent.

    Personally, I thought it was an exceptional commentary (the second one) which answered the question and overtook the discussion
    in a positive manner.

    Shaking head.....you are still not seeing this clearly Wanderer. What is 'positive' in your eyes in a discussion may not actually be positive from the point of truth and honesty in a debate. You still seem to be submerged in the WTS thinking that has its adherents believe nonsense for the sake of 'unity' within the congregations. If someone stands up for themselves in the congregation and says, 'NO, this is wrong!', are they viewed as 'positive'? Are they, as the WTS would have us believe wrong in making such statements and that everybody should play nicely in the sandpit for the sake of a 'good witness'?

    Many people on this Board are new to the subject of opinions, having had theirs stifled for years. They may become vociferous and combatitive in the display of such opinions but I celebrate this, this is the beginning of their journey of mental freedom.

    My thoughts are, if reply's such as your last commentary were on a more frequent basis you would bring up the level of dis-
    cussion regarding almost any matter. Just my opinion ...

    You are entitled to your opinion, as long as it does not come attached with condescending and repeated instructions as to how we should conduct ourselves during discussions, and it is at this point that I entered conversation with you on the thread with AlanF.

    HS

  • BlackSwan of Memphis
    BlackSwan of Memphis
    Many people on this Board are new to the subject of opinions, having had theirs stifled for years. They may become vociferous and combatitive in the display of such opinions but I celebrate this, this is the beginning of their journey of mental freedom.

    I realize this was meant for Wanderer. I just wanted to say, this is exactly what I got out of your post.

    And this is exactly what I had not quite thought of. And many of us here are at the beginning of that journey.......

  • The wanderer
    The wanderer

    Dear Hill:

    I understand your perspective on matters, however,
    my perspective regarding topics of discussion
    are just that.

    They are topics of discussion not debates. Notice,
    the blurb or headline of the web thread "Open
    Discussions About The Paranormal."

    Design of The Intended Article

    Since mentioning to me on past occasions how you
    felt about the color scheme and the "Watchtower"
    approach format regarding the articles I will
    explain the why?

    Target Audience

    I think it is safe to conclude that most individuals
    on this board were either Jehovah's Witnesses, former
    Jehovah's Witnesses or associated and familiar with
    the Watchtower Society in some manner.

    Hence, therefore, the idea of formatting the articles
    similar to what they were seeing in the magazines was
    partly done for purposes of spoofing (parody) and partly
    for added shock value.

    The difference in The Wanderer's articles is that it
    allows audience participation whereas the Watchtower's
    questions always ended with what they wanted the
    reader to conclude in their magazines.

    Anyway, my approach to individuals on this board is
    to build bridges of communication and not to construct
    walls of division. I have friendly relationships on this
    board.

    Respectfully,

    Richard

    Just because a person chooses to "Wander" does not mean he is lost. -The Wanderer

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit