mmmmmmmm thanks Poopsie
The Issue is Not that God WANTS Us to Suffer...
by AGuest 404 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
AGuest
May you all have peace!
Dearest tec (peace to you, dear one!), I understand. I don't like when it seems to be getting personal, either. I think NVL and I have a kind of respect for each other that prevents us from taking real offense. We are similar in that we both are certain of what we believe and will defend it, if called upon to do so. We are different in that I like to stick to the facts of what is said, almost with a kind of OCD... while NVL appears to think it's okay to "summarize", even when such summations leave a great deal out. No worries, though - I think we can "handle" one another. If, on the other hand, you're speaking of my interchange with Michelle, I'm sorry, truly, but I can't speak to that with you... and I cannot apologize.
Dearest Stonewall (peace to you!) - Oh, yeah, baby! Dear NVL is "all that AND a bag of chips, IMHO!" No, seriously, I just thought that if I answered him, truthfully and based on what he asked, he would eventually "hear" me. I am not so sure anymore. And, well, it's been a really slow week for me (actually, slow year, with this new job, which I am NOT used to at all)... and so I do happen to have a LOT of time on my hands. So... here I am.
Dearest Poopsie (peace to you, dear one!), yeah, I cannot deny that some ego has gotten involved. It didn't start out that way for me, though, truly. I really thought dear NVL was saying, "Hey, show me what you're on about, let ME see/hear, so that I can know that you're either right or wrong," and so took that seriously. By the time I figured out he really wasn't serious (which, I admit, I should have done LONG before now)... I was in... probably too deep. I got concerned that people would believe that what he was saying I said was indeed what I said. Since it really isn't about me at all, I shouldn't have let myself get so involved. My sincere apology to you... and the board... for that. Oh, and thanks for the snacks - they came in handy when I was startin' to fade - LOLOLOLOLOL!
Dearest NobleLodge (the greatest of love and peace to you, as well, dear one!)... and I can testify that dear Poopsie does in fact share snacks (see above)!
Thank you, all, and again, peace to you!
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
SA
-
tec
If, on the other hand, you're speaking of my interchange with Michelle, I'm sorry, truly, but I can't speak to that with you... and I cannot apologize.
No, not at all. Also no need to apologize to me at all, for anything. I'm too sensitive and worried about the both of you. (You and NVL) But if you have an understanding for one another, than that is between the two of you, and I won't be so sensitive :)
Tammy
-
AGuest
your last reply to me certainly sounds gracious enough...
It was not intended to be gracious, Michelle, truly. To the contrary. So, if that's what you got from it, you really should read it again and discern what my intent was.
however I would like to correct your clumsy attempt at misdirection.
You can attempt to...
I was never a JW...I thank God and the dedicated prayers of friends for that. I was also told on the second visit by the lady that accompanied my elaine in the book study, that I should read the NT as well as the study books that were provided.
You assume I assumed I know something about you, Michelle. I do not. You rarely cross my mind. In this case, I couldn't remember WHAT you were or where you had/have been. Thus, my specific comment was:
"Perhaps. Tell me, though, what easily led YOU there... and/or to whatever city of spiritism you happened to find yourself in?"
I was never a bahai...though I was attracted to what I perceived as love amongst themselves. And as a matter of fact when I commented publicly about my attraction to them I was rebuked for what I had said.
And my comment was:
"And what led you, let me see if I remember, I think it was the Ba'Hai faith that you went into after? So, you didn't go in. Okay. Obviously, I didn't KNOW; hence, the words "I think." But that question would be the same: what "attracted" you... TO... them? And, again, what led YOU to the spiritistic harlot's whose teet you're sucking from now?" The latter which I notice you didn't respond to at all...
Of course when talking to you of this "truth" that you knew nothing about you quickly "twisted" it around to suit yourself and made an arguement out of it.
What are you speaking of, Michelle. First, you want to tell me what I heard/knew when I was in the WTBTS... although you admit you were never in yourself... but apparently YOU know? As I stated, I do not recall specifically when I first heard the term "Body of Christ." My SINCERE recollection is that I heard it first from my Lord. IF I had heard it before (and I do NOT recall that I did), it did not mean the same thing to me as it does now... not at all (and I would wager that most, if not every, ex-Witness here would say the same thing). Now, perhaps that's because the term only appears twice in the Bible... and the WTBTS tends to stick to their specific 30 or 40 verses. which these are not ordinarily a part of.
In your eagerness to "put me in my place" you suggested that satan rebuked me for falling for a false religion...why that even sounded reasonable to you I have no idea...
Eager? I don't even want to have an interchange with you, let alone have to put you in your place. You tire me with you "I love you" while throwing out stinging, biting words. I used to never know which "head" I was going to have to deal with. Now I do - kissy head first, then biting one. Every time. Every single time. And I've grown weary of it.
As for my suggesting that Satan rebuked you... for falling for a false religion? I must admit that I have absolutely NO clue as to what you're speaking of and given that a house divided against itself cannot stand, no, that doesn't sound reasonable at all. Now, you may be referring to a typo or faux pas somewhere (and I have NO clue where), but if I made that statement (and I cannot fathom that I have) it was certainly NOT intended. So, again, I have no idea what you're talking about or referring to and truth be told, I don't really want to know... because it would mean continuing this discussion with you, which I don't want to do. Because I cannot keep up with your two heads... and I no longer wish to.
anyway...I'm the kind that does leave the whole flock in order to seek out the lost sheep...what kind are you?
I'm the kind that would never presume to think that I am the man [of the house] who owns the flock or whose sheep it is to be sought out... but that I am just a servant of that man... and thus a servant to the one and to the flock... and so if that man ever says to ME, his servant, "Go, call my sheep and say to them, the Man of House has said..." I will go... without hesitation. And say it just as he has directed me. Even if the sheep choose not to hear. And if that meant a sheep was found... then ALL praise and glory would go to the Most Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies, the Man of the House... and to His Son and Christ, my Lord and the master whose voice I listen to, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH.
love michelle
SA sadly shakes head...
-
myelaine
dear AGuest...
I don't expect anyone to read everything I've written but if you are going to refer to a previous post of mine in your tangent I would expect that you might do your homework in reading your own responses to me in said thread...
If you couldn't take the initiative to read the NT when you started out with the JW's...why are we to believe that you were seeking truth at all?...
I've become tiresome to you?...I've rarely even spoken to you in 6 years on this site...and when I had PMed a long time ago about 3 baruch you wanted me to post it so everyone could hear you pontificate at great length without answering my question...(no I don't care what you have to say about it now)
I'm sorry that you have become obsessed with yourself...jude 12-13...you've also become paranoid, it seems, you can find even the simplest question that I ask you food for your persecution complex...
love michelle
-
-
notverylikely
This is what you heard her say. This is not what she said. She said her Lord directed her to show you that this particular scripture is good. Not that its the ONLY scripture that's good.
Fair enough. Since no other scripture has been identified as good, we should not use it then.
Same as when she said she wasn't going to use scripture - she meant WITH YOU.
First, it's not your place to tell me what she meant. Second, the conversation was in the context of everyone, not just me, my dear.
But I would ask you to consider, that whenever someone accuses you of twisting their words, that it isn't because they're backed into a corner (maybe sometimes, but certainly not everytime), that it is because what you summed up is not what they meant.
Sure. If I didn't get the meaning they have every opportunity to clear it up and show where I missed it. Accusing me of quoting out of context and being deceitful without being able to actually show a single example certainly is bullshit, however.
But as shown in the examples above, you are often misunderstanding.
I've been accused, but it has yet to be shown :)
I'm only posting to show what I've observed, my friend. I'm not attacking or accusing.
Of course, I never thought you were.
-
notverylikely
NVL: the evident demonstration of reality THOUGH NOT YET BEHELD. Look who stopped short this time...
[Obviously, it was NVL, again, as shown by]:
Nice try, but I already admitted I did not read completely. I am sure Jesus would want you to forgive and forget since I admitted my error. So, fail.
[Here, dear NVL literally asks one thing, then turns around and says, "No, I asked "X". SA, unfortunately, is a bit pendantic and so quoted what NVL actually asked, literally.]
Sorry, kid. You don't get to just use brackets to say what you want it say I did, you actually have demonstrate it. So....fail.
Dear NVL (peace to you!), again, you're good... but not THAT good because, like many a man you can't remember conversations, let alone what you said in them. Fortunately, I've been blessed with a "gift" inherent in most women and that is we can virtually recall a discussion between us and a man almost verbatim.
Sure. In that case, you should absolutely be able to show, verbatim, where I was deceitful, quote the conversations. You don't have to remember. It's on the forum. I mean, this is basic stuff. Surely you can go ahead and show that. I have only asked at least three times and ou have yet to show it. I am not sure what your "gift" has anything to do with this conversation since it it visible for all to see. Since you have yet to show a single quote, you again....fail. Apparently your only gift is a 100% failure rate.
So, look, let's move on, shall we? I mean, the discussion has become so muddled (because you don't remember half of what YOU say and practically NONE of what I've said), that there really no benefit any longer... to anyone.
Oh, fuck no. You accuse me of being a deceitful liar and you want to back out now? Oh fuck hell no. This conversation is not in any way muddled. You keep trying to change the conversation, and it might be muddled in your head, but when YOU accuse me of being a liar, you better damn well prove it or apologize.
So prove it. Nut up or shut up.
And peace.
-
notverylikely
Fortunately, I've been blessed with a "gift" inherent in most women and that is we can virtually recall a discussion between us and a man almost verbatim.
It's just something that we can "do."
Now, you can deny that... and "science" might refute it, but I BET you if you were to take a poll of the men and women on this site, heck, in the world, this "gift" is one of the reason BOTH will say to you, "Never argue with a woman."
I know, I know... it just isn't IN you to concede to a woman - it's just not... well, manly.
Because I am, after all, a woman, and like most of us, I can "worry a bone to death," too, when I put my mind to it.
Awwww.....look who's using gender to try and back out of calling me a liar and to try to assert ovarian superiority.
If you are an example of woman, it's no wonder you lord had no female apostles. Fortunately there are way better people, women AND men, out there, that do not suffer from ovarian delusions like you do.
BTW, don't forget, you have called me a liar many times and have yet prove it. Put up or shut up.
-
notverylikely
NVL thinks Shelby's a sweetheart.
She totally is and I DO think that. I will not, however, let ANYONE get away with calling me a liar. And my golf game went well. It got up to 89F here.
