Christmas not Xmas!

by hibiscusfire 405 Replies latest jw friends

  • jaffacake
    jaffacake
    Get to know Jesus.

    Hib

    Love ya' honey

    Matthew 7:3-5 (

    “Why do you observe the splinter in your brother’s eye and never notice the plank in your own? How dare you say to your brother, let me take the splinter out of your eye, when all the time there is a plank in your own? Hypocrite! Take the plank out of your own eye first, and then you will see clearly enough to take the splinter out of your brother’s eye.”

    I am the only one on this thread you promised to respond to, and I am still waiting. That's how the JWs treat me too - I'm getting a complex .

  • Tigerman
    Tigerman

    I'm going to make an assumption here and state that it appears that most, if not all of the posters who are so opposed to Hibiscus' argument, were once JW's. As one who was never a JW it is very plain to see the damage done to you by the WTS as it's philosophy continues to erode you from the inside out. I truly hurt for you ( and my loved ones who are JW's ) and I think you had better come to grips with it all before it's too late.

    Or am I just being too sensitive?

  • jaffacake
    jaffacake

    Dear all,

    I know Hibiscus started this thread, but perhaps enough is enough. What do you say we let her have the last word, and lets all move on? May I quote something from The Watchtower of all things to make my point:

    it-1 p. 429 Cheek

    Jesus had given his disciples counsel: "You heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye and tooth for tooth.’ However, I say to you: Do not resist him that is wicked; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other also to him." (Mt 5:38, 39) Here Jesus was not teaching pacifism or denying the right of self-defense from bodily harm, but he was teaching that a Christian does not need to pay back blow for blow, retaliating, taking vengeance. He was inculcating the principle of avoiding quarrels by not replying or reacting in kind. A slap on the cheek is not intended to injure physically but only to insult or to provoke into a fight. Jesus did not say that if someone strikes a Christian on the jaw, he should get up off the floor and hold the other side of his face for a target. What Jesus was saying was that if anyone tried to provoke a Christian into a fight or argument by either slapping him with an open hand or stinging him with insulting words, it would be wrong to retaliate. This is in harmony with the statements of the apostles, giving further emphasis to this principle.—Ro 12:17-21; 1Pe 3:9.

  • jaffacake
    jaffacake

    Tigerman

    I am a Christian who has never been a JW. I happen to agree with Hibs personal opinion about the spelling of words, as mentioned in an earlier thread. But that is my personal preference.

    With respect to you, and her, that is not the primary reason why this thread has become so argumentative. That is more to do with behaviour in expressing a view in an insulting and dogmatic way.

    Whether an opinion is right or wrong is not the issue. At issue, is the idea of not allowing others to hold a different opinion. And scolding them in a superior way not in accordance with my understanding of Christianity.

  • jaffacake
    jaffacake

    Whoops, I jumped back in after suggesting allowing Hibs the last word. Hibiscus, whatever you post next, I promise not to respond.....

    See you on another thread........Peace!

  • John Doe
    John Doe
    I'm going to make an assumption here and state that it appears that most, if not all of the posters who are so opposed to Hibiscus' argument, were once JW's. As one who was never a JW it is very plain to see the damage done to you by the WTS as it's philosophy continues to erode you from the inside out. I truly hurt for you ( and my loved ones who are JW's ) and I think you had better come to grips with it all before it's too late.

    Or am I just being too sensitive?

    You appear to be making an attempt at a reasonable position, so I will respond in kind. First of all, do you realize the condescension in your paragraph here? Is this condescension intentional? I will give you one from a nother point of view--see if you can spot the problem.

    I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that those posting in favor of Hibiscus's argument have been mentally damaged by a lack of eduction and instruction in critical thinking. The damage done to you by main-stream, puritanical, fundamentalist religions is clear. I realy empathize your situation, and all who have an inability to reason, and I think you better come to grips with the truth before you make huge mistakes and condemnations.

    Or, am I just being too right?

    Now, do you see how this sort of language is grandiose and not warranted when you haven't even met the people with whom you're discussing? Go back and count how many posts in which people have tried to respectfully present information that was contrary to HIbiscus's view, and how she responded every time with non-sequitur tomfoolery, and even eventually resorted to ad hominum nonsense. Once she went to these levels, no one here in their right mind will take anything she says as being worth anything--when you are unreasonable you lose all credibility.

    I can appreciate your feelings, as such feelings are almost always emotionally based, and I can testify first-hand about how hard emotional feelings are to overcome and analyze legitimately. The problem is, sir, that both you and Hibs are approaching this thinking that you are in the right and are unwilling to see your own mistakes no matter how tactfully they are revealed. If you can prove me wrong in anything I've said here, or even logically suggest I'm wrong, I welcome you to try. Unlike many, I welcome opposing viewpoints so I can analyze and either strenghten, or replace my stance, and I am not opposed to saying when I am wrong. G'day.

  • Tigerman
    Tigerman

    John Doe . . .your earlier posts and this last one verified what I said above . . .you just don't realize it.

  • John Doe
    John Doe

    Please explain. My ears are open.

  • Tigerman
    Tigerman

    John . . .with all due respect, maybe some other time. I just don't feel like discussing anything right now. I think Jaffa is right. Let's give Hibiscus the last word.

  • John Doe
    John Doe

    Whenever you're ready.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit