Know what makes me terribly sad about some on these forums?

by Derrick 90 Replies latest jw friends

  • dedalus
  • dedalus


    Did you or did you not write the following?

    I think it is a good and fair question. I haven't read all the responses yet, but it seems that some are skirting the question.

    You say that Derrick asked a good question when others said he asked a dumb question. If that's not defending him, I don't know what is.

    Again, you jump to extremes.

    It's "extreme" to say that you defended him? It's "extreme" to say I don't understand a post? And I jump to extremes "again"? What past incidents are you referring to?

    Not expecting meaningful answers to any of this. I mean, I very carefully explained why I disagreed with you, but none of that's worth addressing, evidently.


  • chachasmum

    I hate this war

  • Derrick

    For anyone interested in unsensational fact, I have not been to this forum SINCE MY LAST REPLY TO THIS TOPIC maybe 5 days ago. This is a classic and predictable response from a few bashers to claim I "hit and run" when in fact I replied to this topic, then castigate me for an absence. Believe it or not, I don't live on this forum. I have a life outside this forum and cannot visit more than once a week.

    Next, any intelligent individual who has any experience with forums recognizes that a poster does not have to prove they are not a hit-and-runner by following up with a reply such as, "I have read your responses and simply don't have anything further to add." That is considered a waste of bandwidth and rather rude.

    The expectation is that no social contract exists to reply without being labeled a "hit and run" type. The obvious reason is that if you had to reply to your posts no matter what, but it wasn't sufficient to reply "I can't think of anything to add at this point" (a waste of bandwidth), then you might NEVER POST. The expectation is that the initial post is sufficient in itself. For example, if I post "I believe in democracy," to which you reply, " then you are a complete and utter moron," and I fail to reply to you, then am I a "hit and runner"? Remember, if I simply reply, "I'm not going to qualify your comment!!!!" then you will accuse me of wasting bandwidth. You would have likely said, "Derrick, why did you even bother to post? If you were going to post, you should post a rebuttal to the accusation that you are a complete MORON for believing in democracy. Furthermore, YOU created the post and so YOU have the burden to prove democracy is something worth believing in!"

    One is NOT required to anticipate whether your post might generate replies, and abstain from posting if one thinks it's possible that someone will post something where you can't think of any to say in response.

    In fact, although I'm preaching to the choir, suffice it to say that lack of response is showing respect for others if one cannot think of a response!

    Suppose I sat there reading this topic and thought, "this is impossible! These people have absolutely no understanding of the teachings of JWs!" QUESTION: Should I flame the board by posting that as a reply? Should I simply post "I'm not going to qualify your idiotic responses" and then be accused of promulgating the very disruptive verbal tactics that many used over the years on this and other forums to start flame wars? And yet remaining silent is used as an excuse to attack me. For example, you post "I think democracy is the best way of life because ............." and I reply, "You are a total moron as usual! None of what you said has any logic to it! Democracy has failed because............." Then, five days later, you return and read my reply with a sigh, scratching your head. So you decide it's a waste of time to reply, and that anything you say will simply cause a firestorm to erupt. As a result, I post "YOU are obviously a hit and run poster, OR it is more likely you know my argument against democracy is RIGHT and you're too chicken sh*t to post a rebuttal! That figures!."

    But I keep forgetting the hypocricy of many here -- it's OKAY for them to do the very things that I'm criticized for doing because of course they are far superior to myself.

    And predictably, because I decide to criticize poor netiquette in this rather lengthy reply, you will use that to further attack rather than addressing my post.

    Replies I'll never get...

    "Derrick, it hadn't even dawned on me that you were gone between your last reply to this topic, and today! Sorry for the rash accusations that you hit and run!"

    "Derrick, whenever I post and feel for any reason that people make stupid or thoughtless replies, I don't respond and YES, they accuse me of being a hit and runner! So I know exactly what you're talking about."

    My continued stance on the worldwide destruction doctrine...

    The current Watchtower leadership IMO has engaged in manipulation of words on this teaching to keep the rank and file in line, WITHOUT actually teaching that non-JWs will be exterminated.

    If people in this religion refuse to simply tell their leadership "I'm going to do my best in the ministry knowing that the Bible says 'God is love' and those who are not reached with this vital message will be treated with perfect love, so all the speculation about non-JWs dying at Armageddon is inappropriate," then these people are not showing the spirit of true Christianity. The whole idea of reform is to remove those from leadership that use scare tactics to scare people into putting in more hours, attending every meeting each week at practically all costs, and donating more than they can afford to the Society's coffers.

    You are simply WRONG that the official teaching of JWs is that only JWs will survive Armageddon. The fact that the majority of Earth's population is not reached with the vital message is proof. Many haven't even heard of JWs! New generations keep coming as years go by who have never even heard of the Bible let alone Christianity! Your hurling insults that the Watchtower leadership is so bloodthirsty that they believe these innocents are going to die for not hearing a message from a manmade religious group isn't going to make it so. It's sort of like someone hating the heads of some big company because they mismanaged it, so they keep comparing those persons to Hitler or Saddam Hussein. They can make all the comparisons in the world and basically make complete idiots of themselves because those types of comparisons are based on out of control emotions and failure to reason in an emotionally agitated state of mind.

    You can keep villifying the Watchtower leadership all you want, and attack those like myself that try to point out both the positive and negative about these men, and even claim that I'm evil or insane of both for trying to remain balanced. It's no different than claiming that some news correspondent on CNN is "another wannabe Hitler who supports the molestation of children" simply because he refuses to claim that your personal enemy is literally evil. We see this all the time.

    If you say as an extreme example, "I believe the governing body has a torture chamber where they rape children, it's accessed through a hidden passage way from their conference room." and I say "I believe that is pure HOGWASH!" then it is your right to say, "your denial of what I just said proves that YOU are an evil child molester that ought to be locked up for life!!!!!!!!!" Far as I'm concerned that is just par for the course in this rabid civilization. And, you can claim that I'm engaging in "hit and run" because I remain silent and decline to defend myself -- you might even followup by saying, "the fact you didn't defend yourself when I accused you of being an evil child molester only proves that I'm right!!!!!!!!!!!!"


  • Derrick

    By the way:

    When I post on NETSCAPE 7.02 all the linefeeds are stripped out of my post, leaving one big paragraph. I switched to Internet Explorer to post this message.

    So, you critics really should have said, "Derrick, why are you posting on Netscape again when you know it creates one big paragraph?" instead of jumping on this glitch to hurl more insults?



    Hey Derrick,blah-blah-blah-blah-blah..ect..ect.. Do you ever say anything that has real meaning?.Not since I`ve been here..If you don`t know anything about dubs,don`t preach to us.Your an idiot....Your accussed of being a hit and runner? I wonder why? You are a hit and runner....You won`t bother answering any of the questions put to you,because you can`t..So what do you do? Bleeter on about things that have nothing to do with questions asked about ridiculousness of your thread ....A quote from Derrick,about something he obviously knows nothing about:"You are simply wrong that the official teachings of the JW`s is that only JW`s will survive Armageddon"..Are you really that stupid?..I mean,Are You Really That STUPID?!!..Dub kids are taught from childhood,only JW`s will survive armageddon....At least have a basic understanding of the religion before you open your mouth and pretend to preach to us..We know our lessons well,as many of us have had them beaten into us...I leave you with this one thought:"It is better to appear stupid than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"...OUTLAW

  • anti-absolutist

    Thank you very much, OUTLAW!!!!!

    I was getting a really bad headache after reading Derrick's lengthy post, but your comments made it go away. Thanks again.

    I don't want to seem rude to you, Derrick, but man, you must have driven your mom crazy when you were growing up. You talk and talk and say nothing. You are really that brain-dead that you suggest we are morons here because we are didn't ASSUME you were using Netscape.

    You are the perfect example of a person who has such low self-esteem, that he constantly has to put down other people in order to try to make himself feel better. You are not even fooling yourself. I would like to introduce you to my ex-wife. You guys would hit it off great!!!!

    Brad P.S. I love OUTLAW's last sentence.... BRILLIANT!!!!


    Hey anti-absolutist,thanks for the kind words..I would love to take credit for that last line,but I believe it belongs to Mark Twain..He dosen`t mind if I borrow it now and again though,LOL!.....OUTLAW

  • dedalus

    Hey Derrick, it hadn't even dawned on me that you were gone between your last reply to this topic, and today! Sorry for the rash accusations that you hit and run!

    Sincerely, I'm sorry, okay? You didn't deserve me accusing you of a hit and run. Obviously, for whatever reason, your post struck a chord with me, and I'm touchy about being ignored, which isn't your fault. I hope you'll reply to what I'm about to write, though. I mean, we both agree that this issue is important, right?

    :You are simply WRONG that the official teaching of JWs is that only JWs will survive Armageddon.

    Derrick, if what you say is true, please explain the following quotes:

    "Every kind of terror will be used to destroy the evil world--cloud bursts, lashing rains, overflowing floods, earthquakes, giant hailstorms and a rain of fire. There will be terror on the land, terror in the sea and terror in the air. With shocking surprise Armageddon will catch all those persons outside the New World society." -- From Paradise Lost to Paradise Regained, 1958, p. 207.

    "On Satan's side will be all the rest of mankind, more than 99.9 percent, as we read, 'The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.' That includes all the governments of the world together with their supporters, the commercial, religious and social institutions. Even the professedly Christian organizations? Yes, because all such that are making themselves friends of the world are making themselves enemies of God." -- Watchtower 10/15/58, p. 614-5.

    "Do not conclude that there are different roads, or ways, that you can follow to gain life in God's new system. There is only one. There was just one ark that survived the Flood, not a number of boats. And there will be only one organization--God's visible organization--that will survive the fast-approaching ‘great tribulation.’ It is simply not true that all religion lead to the same goal … You must be part of Jehovah’s organization, doing God’s will, in order to receive his blessing of everlasting life." – You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth, 1982, p. 255.

    "Never forget that only God’s organization will survive the end of this dying system. Act wisely, therefore, and make plans for life eternal by building your future with Jehovah’s organization." – Watchtower 7/15/84, p. 20.

    "Only Jehovah’s Witnesses, those of the anointed remnant and the ‘great crowd,’ as a united organization under the protection of the Supreme Organizer, have any Scriptural home of surviving the impending end of this doomed system dominated by Satan the Devil. (Revelation 7:9-17; 2 Corinthians 4:4) They will make up the ‘flesh’ that Jesus Christ said would be saved through the worst tribulation in human history." – Watchtower 9/1/89, p. 19.

    "The masses of people facing annihilation if they fail to respond to the good news include out unbelieving relatives, neighbors, workmates, schoolmates, and acquaintances. But our concern is to reach out to ‘all sorts of men’ in imitation of God, who manifested his love for the entire world by giving his Son, Jesus Christ, as a ransom for all (John 3:16). We must zealously invite all to flee to God’s place of safety. By fully carrying out the preaching work, we can avoid bloodguilt." – Kingdom Ministry, September 2000, p. 1

    You write:

    :Your hurling insults that the Watchtower leadership is so bloodthirsty that they believe these innocents are going to die for not hearing a message from a manmade religious group isn't going to make it so.

    No, but so far as I can see, the Watchtower's own words make it so. "Only Jehovah's Witnesses ...", "only God's organization," "More than 99.9 percent ..." And "innocents" can't just include those remote indigenous tribes of wherever that no one reaches -- innocents also must refer to children, right? But "unbelieving schoolmates" will be "annihilated," too, according to a recent KM. A lot of people have a big problem with that, Derrick.

    I wonder how you explain all this, Derrick. I'm not speculating about secret torture chambers in the back corridors of the GB's offices. I'm quoting just exactly what they said, what's on public record, so please don't make me out to be some rabid hatemonger. Really, all I want to know is how do you explain what seem to me to be a very explicit teaching, a doctrine, and not any sort of subtle "manipulation of words to keep the rank and file in line."

    Looking forward to your response, whenever it's convenient for you ...


  • unclebruce

    Hey Derrick,

    What you really need are some thinking lessons from Farkel and posting lessons from OUTLAW

    That way you'd have punchy insightfull posts worth reading

    But alas - you'll brand me deficiant and go on mistaking long windedness and half baked ideas for cogent posting

    unclebruce, not one to surf encyclo-myopic posters gladly.

Share this