Christians could and did. Can JWs? Do they? (page 6)

Terry

Feigning respect while commiting a disrespectful act is rather blatant disrespect. It is even disrespectful that you believed I would fall for the pretense of respect. Your attempt to convert this discussion is not any kind of respect I am familiar with ever experiencing before.

You have successfully demonstrated the act of interpretation!

Feigning respect is a pejorative characterization of my straitforward statement.

In a nutshell you've demonstrated why a simple statement cannot directly communicate anything.

Thank you for proving my point.

Further, your state of mind and your emotional reaction to a respectful other point of view is quite revealing.

You seem to feel you are not only disrespected, but, bullied as well when others don't simply agree without opposition. This is curious.

Do you imagine that a Discussion group consists of people agreeing with you somehow?

I'm puzzled by your knee-jerk responses.

The remedy for wrong ideas is better ideas.

Persuasion works better than labeling.

I sought to INCLUDE your point of view without damning you.

I must say your awkward analyses of my contribution are most exclusionary and unnecessarily personal.

Could you be overly sensitive to criticism?

ANewLeif

You didn't disagree with me, you arrogant ....

You agreed with me, remember? Do I have to copy and paste it for you? You also tried to change the subject. That was very disrespectful of you. If you had disagreed with me and posted your disagreements you would have been discussing my thread subject. You wouldn't have been changing my thread subject to another.

Disagreement is not disrespect. Changing the thread subject by "broadening the discussion" in such a way that discussion is raised which is totally off-topic is disrespect.

ANL

Terry

You didn't disagree with me, you arrogant ....
You agreed with me, remember? Do I have to copy and paste it for you? You also tried to change the subject. That was very disrespectful of you. If you had disagreed with me and posted your disagreements you would have been discussing my thread subject. You wouldn't have been changing my thread subject to another.
Disagreement is not disrespect. Changing the thread subject by "broadening the discussion" in such a way that discussion is raised which is totally off-topic is disrespect.
ANL

It takes TWO to make an argument and you are most willing to create the very "change of thread" by your impulsive contributions.

If disagreement is not disrespect and I plainly offered no disrespect it is most miraculous of you to create this very disrespect out of thin air. By doing so the thread broadened into an off-topic rant on your part of defensive lower lip trembling when no such response was engendered by my contribution.

If you have a dictionary nearby you might want to consult it for the word "arrogant".

Wikipedia is always a good source!

Often people who are arrogant are not aware of their own behavior or don't want to recognize they are arrogant. A person can be arrogant but not show it externally to others due to their thoughts, actions and emotions.
A strongly arrogant person will usually try to downplay other people's achievements or ideas in order to make themselves appear better. Arrogant people will even ignore or downplay good ideas from others, as they cannot accept that others might have better ideas than themselves. This makes reasonable communication difficult and arguments impossible to resolve fairly as the arrogant person will not accept the other person's point of view, no matter how logical/intuitive or correct it is, because the arrogant person is really having an emotional argument about his own arrogance.

Since you seem unable to continue without engaging in name calling it seems most appropriate to ask you to check your premises before labeling others unfairly. Surely this is not unreasonable.

jelcat8224

ANewLeif: You started a subject discussing JW's, yes that is true. However, you are discussing them as to whether or not they are "Christians". It is only fair that the guidlines for what defines "Christianity" would be discussed, (and not just your guidlines but those of others, including Terry) Right? It seems here that YOU are the one changing the subject by taking it in an argumentative defensive direction. This is a DISCUSSION board, which means that there will be dissagreements and other viewpoints. JW's may not seem "christain" to you but to those of us who have LIVED it, that is just not the case. We make no excuses for the WTS. We agree that their doctrines, prophecies, and rules are, as you so delicately put it, hores***t. What we are trying to say is that those following these guidelines are for the most part, honesthearted people who believe in Christ, his sacrifice, his mediation, and that he redeems them form their sins. And to touch on it once again, why are you so stuck on the fact that they don't pray to Jesus? GOD is the creator and the almighty and the one who gives life and death ... Not JESUS!

RAF

JC8224 : And to touch on it once again, why are you so stuck on the fact that they don't pray to Jesus? GOD is the creator and the almighty and the one who gives life and death ... Not JESUS!

Ooops that's not really what the bible is saying !!!
without Christ (= maturity to me) nothing would have come to life ... / and without Christ (= still maturity) we are in trouble and are keeping on leading whatever is really good, to death.

But maybe when talking about Christianity we do forget about separating the OT and the NT (that's a also one of the JW teaching trouble) Christ is God's posterity ... so if any stick to what is God (= everything by essence to me / including the troubles related to everyonces free will and by then their own egos) ... any do not really understand what means Christ (to me = God's own maturity / the lord in God - wich actually deserves the title of Lord).

That's why Christ's message is very simple (nothing to be confused about) / that's why he had to be presented/personified as the unic son of God (the posterity) and a son of man (an example for us) ... So if any absolutely wants to go farest than the message in forgeting about what Christ really means ... This one is a lost sheep. (at everybody's possible human cost - and for the JW's like for instance suicides for those who are exausted or those who followed the JW teaching about the blood issu )
But it's not the end anyway ... They still have eyes, ears and a brain to get the point at some point (bad fruits = bad fruits / wrong doctrine = wrong doctrine but about this part you have to meditate about it without having any autority but Christ himself or itself = maturity).

daystar

ANL

How very serious you are! And apparently intimidated by Terry.

He makes some good points that, although you are apparently either unable to or unwilling to see them, are very relevant to what you are discussing here.

Terry

I think we just got off on the wrong foot. See below:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/132791/1.ashx

SixofNine

Changing the thread subject by "broadening the discussion" in such a way that discussion is raised which is totally off-topic is disrespect.

Man, I'm wracking my brain here trying to remember which long time poster would get hung up on something so pedantic as this? Any ideas?

Dejavuesially,

Six

TopHat

Do most Christians worship the Father like Jesus did, or do they almost exclusively worship Jesus?

Yadda, Most Christians believe Jesus IS GOD

RAF

Do most Christians worship the Father like Jesus did, or do they almost exclusively worship Jesus?
Yadda, Most Christians believe Jesus IS GOD

yep ... and it's not a detail (it's like the king told you, my son is now the king ... but you keep on looking at the son like the prince).

Christians could and did. Can JWs? Do they?

Share this