Suzanne’s Post, Fact, Fiction, Christian? Let’s Come Together!

@suzianne said
You seem to be seeing through their artful dodger techniques. Not everyone does, and they count on those who flock to them to spread their little fictional stories.

What "fictional stories" are you talking about?

@pettytalk said
Sanctimonious? That's Donald Trump's nickname for his primary opponent, De Santis.

The word still has utility, regardless of how Donald Trump uses it.

@suzianne said
(I think I like this kid.)

You seem to be seeing through their artful dodger techniques. Not everyone does, and they count on those who flock to them to spread their little fictional stories. I've never played that game, and so they reserve their harshest words for me in response.

What's the phrase? Water off a duck's back. Yes, that's it.

The phrase is appropriate. I can only reduce it to a lower denominator, by saying that water always seeks the path of least resistance. What I mean is this. Since they cannot go for the ball, which is more difficult for them to refute, they seek the path of going for the person.

What's easier than name calling? Children often resort to such shenanigans. And there you have it, their path of least resistance.

However, in dealing too often with these name-callers, there's the danger that we too will be tempted to lower ourselves to their level, and start to call them names too. I still have, in a frame, all the names any child can use in reprisal, right next to my fancy list of big words. I just added, sanctimonious.

@pettytalk said
However, in dealing too often with these name-callers, there's the danger that we too will be tempted to lower ourselves to their level, and start to call them names too. I still have, in a frame, all the names any child can use in reprisal, right next to my fancy list of big words. I just added, sanctimonious.

The word "sanctimonious" is an adjective, and an apt descriptor at that. It's hardly a "big word". And it's not "name calling".

Suzianne often portrays herself as morally superior - as a follower of Jesus - to other people ~ in this case, followers of Jesus who have conservative and traditional values.

This is the exact situation where the adjective "sanctimonious" is the correct word choice.

@suzianne said
I think you gave up your right to judge Christian quality a long, long time ago.I think you're also participating in a little "piss-taking".Your own "modesty" is somewhat lacking as well.And "self-righteousness"? Now that's a good one.

I think you gave up your right to judge Christian quality a long, long time ago.

I think I am commenting on your judgemental character on the forum rather than your "Christian quality". As a Christian, are you taught to judge others? I don't think you are.

I think you're also participating in a little "piss-taking".

Nope. The post you are responding to is completely serious: one adult talking to another.

Your own "modesty" is somewhat lacking as well.

If you believe this, then so be it

And "self-righteousness"? Now that's a good one.

It's an evaluation offered in good faith.

@pettytalk said
Just a rough estimate!

“Thousands” of people have “taken the bait” of your username “Petty Talk” and thousands of times you have gotten “a kick out of it”?

@fmf said
The word "sanctimonious" is an adjective, and an apt descriptor at that. It's hardly a "big word". And it's not "name calling".

Suzianne often portrays herself as morally superior - as a follower of Jesus - to other people ~ in this case, followers of Jesus who have conservative and traditional values.

This is the exact situation where the adjective "sanctimonious" is the correct word choice.

And yet you have supported posters here talking about the difference between walking the walk and talking the talk. This, for Christians, obviously not for you, is where the rubber meets the road, so to speak. I have no time or patience for faux Christians who cannot be bothered to actually follow Jesus' commandment to "love thy neighbor". They talk and talk, yet they do nothing. In fact, they despise people who are not like them. These are those who pray in public, that they might be seen as pious, but it is literally all talk. In private, all they care about is themselves. These people are, in a word, fraudulent "Christians".

You are so eager to jump on me for anything so that you might somehow be justified in your attacks. You pay no heed to what is actually going on. This is a pattern that you've displayed as long as I've been in this forum.

And so you bring out what you seem to think is a "big gun", your use of "sanctimonious", to convince anyone within the sound of your voice that this fully describes me. So many of your own posts on this website have been self-serving in the extreme, and yet you still think you've got me by the short hairs.

Unbelievable.

@suzianne said
And yet you have supported posters here talking about the difference between walking the walk and talking the talk. This, for Christians, obviously not for you, is where the rubber meets the road, so to speak. I have no time or patience for faux Christians who cannot be bothered to actually follow Jesus' commandment to "love thy neighbor". They talk and talk, yet they do ...[text shortened]... t is actually going on. This is a pattern that you've displayed as long as I've been in this forum.

You are so eager to jump on me for anything so that you might somehow be justified in your attacks. You pay no heed to what is actually going on. This is a pattern that you've displayed as long as I've been in this forum.

You are sounding a bit paranoid and narcissistic.

@suzianne said
And so you bring out what you seem to think is a "big gun", your use of "sanctimonious", to convince anyone within the sound of your voice that this fully describes me. So many of your own posts on this website have been self-serving in the extreme, and yet you still think you've got me by the short hairs.

I just call it as I see it.

@suzianne said
And yet you have supported posters here talking about the difference between walking the walk and talking the talk. This, for Christians, obviously not for you, is where the rubber meets the road, so to speak.

I think some discussion of issues seen through the prism of Christian teaching would make a nice change from relentless theology and people channelling dasa.

@suzianne said
I have no time or patience for faux Christians who cannot be bothered to actually follow Jesus' commandment to "love thy neighbor". They talk and talk, yet they do nothing. In fact, they despise people who are not like them. These are those who pray in public, that they might be seen as pious, but it is literally all talk. In private, all they care about is themselves. ...[text shortened]... serving in the extreme, and yet you still think you've got me by the short hairs.

Unbelievable.

This is nothing but a chest-beating caricature. I have met loads of Christians who have traditional conservative values in various parts of the world, including Americans. The notion that such people can't possibly be followers of Jesus is ridiculous. You sound like the counterparts of Marjorie Taylor Green talking about Democrats.

@suzianne said
And so you bring out what you seem to think is a "big gun", your use of "sanctimonious", to convince anyone within the sound of your voice that this fully describes me. So many of your own posts on this website have been self-serving in the extreme, and yet you still think you've got me by the short hairs.

Your use of "sanctimonious", to convince anyone within the sound of your voice that this fully describes me.

People can decide for themselves, I think.

@fmf said
You are so eager to jump on me for anything so that you might somehow be justified in your attacks. You pay no heed to what is actually going on. This is a pattern that you've displayed as long as I've been in this forum.

You are sounding a bit paranoid and narcissistic.

This kind of reply is just a trite cop out and a dodge from a valid critique of your character.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
This kind of reply is just a trite cop out and a dodge from a valid critique of your character.

There's no "dodge". I'd call it paranoid rather than valid. But if you think it's valid then that's your prerogative.

@fmf said
There's no "dodge". I'd call it paranoid rather than valid. But if you think it's valid then that's your prerogative.

You have a habit of bouncing back critiques of your character.