- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
25 May 12
Originally posted by FMFI know g75 will admit fallibility of the JW opinions in one post, and state warnings in the next as if they are infallible. I suppose this is just his being human. He is clearly very sincere about this. What is trivial IMO is the issue of what "generations" means and the notion that what it means is really important.
With respect, JS357, I find your suggestion that this is all "trivial" a little baffling. robbie and galveston75 persistently use their self-professed 'expertise' in interpreting the bible [e.g. earlier on this thread robbie said "let those with real Biblical knowledge exercise their expertise"] in order to variously condemn, denounce, pour scorn on fellow Chris ...[text shortened]... lives based on biblical interpretation. I don't see how all this is "trivial" at all.
25 May 12
2 edits
Originally posted by JS357Well I suppose your several posts on what you consider "trivial" about this is serving to deflect from what is not really so trivial about it, at least in the context of [some of the causes of] the frequently 'them and us' dynamic between Christians on this forum. I assume it's inadvertent on your part.
What is trivial IMO is the issue of what "generations" means and the notion that what it means is really important.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
25 May 12
Originally posted by FMFI see one post of mine mentioning "squabble", and the rest of my posts on the triviality implied by the use of that word, are in response to you. It is out of our mutual respect that I responded to your concerns.
Well I suppose your several posts on what you consider "trivial" about this is serving to deflect from what is not really so trivial about it, at least in the context of [some of the causes of] the frequently 'them and us' dynamic between Christians on this forum. I assume it's inadvertent on your part.
25 May 12
Originally posted by JS357I think it does a disservice to several posters here to characterize the discussion here as a "squabble". That is my concern.
I see one post of mine mentioning "squabble", and the rest of my posts on the triviality implied by the use of that word, are in response to you. It is out of our mutual respect that I responded to your concerns.
25 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFWhat is rather refreshing from the thread is the acknowledgement by those who have
galveston75 claimed here back in April that materials like The Watchtower are "God inspired".
taken an independent stance, Rank Outsider, JS357 etc and who have exposed the
vitriol (to the extent of being concerned about it) levelled against myself and the Gman
on the flimsiest of grounds and the petty squabbling of posters like FMF and divejester,
refreshing to have it acknowledged by others although we've known it all along.
25 May 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieVitriol!? 😞
What is rather refreshing from the thread is the acknowledgement by those who have
taken an independent stance, Rank Outsider, JS357 etc and who have exposed the
vitriol (to the extent of being concerned about it) levelled against myself and the Gman
on the flimsiest of grounds and the petty squalling of posters like FMF and divejester,
refreshing to have it acknowledged by others although we've known it all along.
Have you been dipping into the well of tabloid journalism again?
25 May 12
Originally posted by JS357Everything all of us are doing here now is being human.
I know g75 will admit fallibility of the JW opinions in one post, and state warnings in the next as if they are infallible. I suppose this is just his being human. He is clearly very sincere about this. What is trivial IMO is the issue of what "generations" means and the notion that what it means is really important.
What characteristic of his humanity is he showing up when he does that?
25 May 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf it is true that Rank Outsider and JS357 feel I deserve condemnation for "vitriol" then that is rather disappointing because I think my posting is relatively unflappable, firm but measured, and not particularly inclined towards gratuitous insults. Tenacious, maybe. Robust. Stubborn, and perhaps even a little dull. But not "vitriolic". Looking back on this thread, I don't really see any vitriol on my part at all. But if, as you suggest, posters like Rank Outsider and JS357 are picking me and my posts out from all the vicious hurling of insults that does go on on this forum and are saying that I represent a degree of vitriol that deserves special mention, then I am frankly baffled. But, they are a couple of posters who command respect.
What is rather refreshing from the thread is the acknowledgement by those who have
taken an independent stance, Rank Outsider, JS357 etc and who have exposed the
vitriol ...
25 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFRank Outsider mentioned vitriol in general levelled against myself and the Gman, i think
If it is true that Rank Outsider and JS357 feel I deserve condemnation for "vitriol" then that is rather disappointing because I think my posting is relatively unflappable, firm but measured, and not particularly inclined towards gratuitous insults. Tenacious, maybe. Robust. Stubborn, and perhaps even a little dull. But not "vitriolic". Looking back on this thre mention, then I am frankly baffled. But, they are a couple of posters who command respect.
your personally more inclined to squabble! My point was that it was refreshing to have
this aspect pointed out, as i have tried to do in the past against allegations of playing
the victim card which you yourself have expressed on more than one occasion, hard to
argue when its an independent perspective though, isn't it.