- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121534
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYes, yes, robbie; let's see if the all powerful site mods can protect the JW's from this terrible victimisation by questioning 😕
I have also alerted his posts hopefully he will leave you in peace or he will be forced to
do so. Creepy or what?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 08
- Moves
- 121534
05 Dec 12
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFA least you are not being 'shunned' again.
But what about the sexual content of your PM? On reflection, don't you think it might have been just a little bit "creepy"?
I am definitely in the shun-zone at the moment; I feel quite honored in strange sort of way.
05 Dec 12
3 edits
Originally posted by Proper KnobWhether i actually agree with him or not is entirely irrelevant as to whether it has
[b]did you take the time to find out what Galveston meant?
I did. I asked him numerous specific questions for which he gave point blank answers. I asked him if the Holy Spirit had directly communicated with anyone within the JW organisation, he replied yes. I then asked if this communication would have been with members of the Governing Body, he r laims, i'm an atheist remember i don't believe in God. I'm asking if you agree with him.[/b]
actually transpired or not (the governing body of Jehovah's witnesses being
recipients of the Holy spirit) and is why your questions appear to me to be naught
but contentiousness.
As i have pointed out all Christians are recipients of Gods Holy spirit which would
include the governing body of Jehovahs witnesses, all Christians have a source of
communication from God in the form of the Bible and so yes, i am forced to
conclude, on the basis of this evidence that yes, his words are true. If you have
evidence to the contrary you may produce it, so far, you have produced one
argument, essentially flawed, with reference to the idea that those who are
recipients of Holy spirit should somehow be infallible, you have not stated how this
idea originated nor produced references to a precedent, but hey, why provide
evidence when contentiousness will do? Id be careful you may be metamorphosing
into an FMF/divesgeester hybrid, spiritually bereft and creepily given to stalking
other users. Heaven forbid that it should happen to you.
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat this seems to boil down to, robbie is that you have no evidence that God is actually acting specifically or exclusively through your organisation or through its Governing Body. You are simply asserting the fact that you feel certain you are right and citing your own interpretations of religious literature that support your own interpretation of God's alleged specific or exclusive endorsement of your organisation and its Governing Body.
Whether i actually agree with him or not is entirely irrelevant as to whether it has
actually transpired or not that (the governing body of Jehovah's witnesses being
recipients of the Holy spirit) and is why your questions appear to me to be naught
but contentiousness.
As i have pointed out all Christians are recipients of Gods Holy spirit ...[text shortened]... reft and creepily given to stalking
other users. Heaven forbid that it should happen to you.
05 Dec 12
let's have a scavenger hunt for this thread: first to complete these tasks wins.
1. find the first person to post something off topic
2. find the first person to post in insult.
3. count how many times the topic was changed.
4. Optional: find a sane person in the 21st century that still thinks women are supposed to be subservient to men because God or because anything.
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSorry, but you've missed the point of my question again. I'm beginning to think it's deliberately so, but i'll spell it out one more time.
Whether i actually agree with him or not is entirely irrelevant as to whether it has
actually transpired or not (the governing body of Jehovah's witnesses being
recipients of the Holy spirit) and is why your questions appear to me to be naught
but contentiousness.
As i have pointed out all Christians are recipients of Gods Holy spirit whic ...[text shortened]... reft and creepily given to stalking
other users. Heaven forbid that it should happen to you.
Firstly let's clear this up, i'm not 'stalking' anyone, in fact no one is 'stalking' anyone on this forum. It's a public forum, people are entitled to ask questions to anyone they see fit as long as those questions are within the ToS. For goodness sake, you belong to an organisation in which it's members turn up on peoples doorstep uninvited handing out literature. You put the literature out there, we can ask questions. I don't see what the issue is.
Now back to my point -
I understand what you're saying about all Christians having communication with God in the form of the Holy Spirit through the Bible. I get that. But that is not what i'm asking and it is not what Galveston was saying. He explicitly stated that God, through the Holy Spirit, was communicating directly with members of the Governing Body. I'll repeat that so there will be no confusion, he explicitly stated that God, through the Holy Spirit, was communicating directly with members of the Governing Body.
All i'm interested in is if you agree with him? It's a yes or no, you either do or you don't?!
Originally posted by Proper KnobOn the matter of stalking I beg to differ, but of course that is a side issue. I
Sorry, but you've missed the point of my question again. I'm beginning to think it's deliberately so, but i'll spell it out one more time.
Firstly let's clear this up, i'm not 'stalking' anyone, in fact no one is 'stalking' anyone on this forum. It's a public forum, people are entitled to ask questions to anyone they see fit as long as those question d in is if you agree with him? It's a yes or no, you either do or you don't?!
understand what you are saying and as i have pointed out all Christians are
recipients of the Holy spirit. It has been your folly to once again limit the actions of
this Holy spirit in some way. Being a recipient of the Holy spirit is a direct
communication from God because its easy to establish Biblically that he withholds it
from those whom he deems unworthy for some reason. That God does not give
them visions or does not communicate with them aurally is not to say that they are
not recipients of the Holy spirit or that God does not communicate with them directly,
because the Holy spirit does not operate in this way, although it could. You should
have taken the time to understand how it is perceived that the Holy spirit operates
and then it would have been a fairly mundane affair to ascertain from Galveston
what he actually meant by 'direct communication', instead of it being assumed. Half
the time on this forum is spent simply hacking ones way through a forest of
assumptions.
btw nice to see your friend FMF is branching out now that his iniquity has been
brought to the forums attention, a sideline i know, but nice, never the less.
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobiegalveston75 assured me in his PM that he was going to have me banned from the web site. It doesn't seem to have happened. Did he show you the PM he sent me?
On the matter of stalking I beg to differ, but of course that is a side issue.
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI'm not limiting anything, all i have done is asked Galveston some questions, which to his credit, he gave point blank answers to and then asked you if you agree with what he said. As per usual with you i have to go on a merry goose chase trying to get a simple answer out of you.
On the matter of stalking I beg to differ, but of course that is a side issue. I
understand what you are saying and as i have pointed out all Christians are
recipients of the Holy spirit. It has been your folly to once again limit the actions of
this Holy spirit in some way. Being a recipient of the Holy spirit [b]is a direct
communica ...[text shortened]... quity has been
brought to the forums attention, a sideline i know, but nice, never the less.[/b]
I've assumed nothing, remember it wasn't too long ago Galveston claimed that the writers of JW literature are inspired like the writers of the Bible (remember that thread? you went all strange claiming that you couldn't remember things and couldn't tell who was correct and who wasn't). So when Galveston has previously claimed that the writers of JW literature are inspired like the writers of the Bible and now adds that God is communicating with members of the Governing Body via the Holy Spirit, i think it's painfully obvious what it is he's claiming.
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobiebtw nice to see your friend FMF is branching out now that his iniquity has been brought to the forums attention, a sideline i know, but nice, never the less.
On the matter of stalking I beg to differ, but of course that is a side issue. I
understand what you are saying and as i have pointed out all Christians are
recipients of the Holy spirit. It has been your folly to once again limit the actions of
this Holy spirit in some way. Being a recipient of the Holy spirit [b]is a direct
communica ...[text shortened]... quity has been
brought to the forums attention, a sideline i know, but nice, never the less.[/b]
You've lost me here?
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by Proper Knobreally Baldric?
I'm not limiting anything, all i have done is asked Galveston some questions, which to his credit, he gave point blank answers to and then asked you if you agree with what he said. As per usual with you i have to go on a merry goose chase trying to get a simple answer out of you.
I've assumed nothing, remember it wasn't too long ago Galveston claim ...[text shortened]... rning Body via the Holy Spirit, i think it's painfully obvious what it is he's claiming.
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by Proper Knobafter it was pointed out that he had singled Galveston out as a recipient of his
[b]btw nice to see your friend FMF is branching out now that his iniquity has been brought to the forums attention, a sideline i know, but nice, never the less.
You've lost me here?[/b]
attentions he has now decided to branch out and contribute to other threads in what
may be an attempt to cover his tracks with his bushy fox like tail.
05 Dec 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn the 72 hours leading up to when galveston75 said "heading out of town for 2 days. See yall later....", I posted on about a dozen different threads across three forums addressing over 20 different posters.
after it was pointed out that he had singled Galveston out as a recipient of his
attentions he has now decided to branch out and contribute to other threads in what
may be an attempt to cover his tracks with his bushy fox like tail.