Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2006 20:52:43 GMT -5
I am terribly sorry about the way you were treated. It was not your fault, and in my opinion you have every right to be upset about how you were treated. Adults should have more integrity. You were an innocent child, you could not control the adults aroubd you, and you are NOT responsible for what happened then. Now, as an adult, you are in control of your life and you can protect yourself from evil people.
Have you ever read a book called *Mean Girls*? Also, *Queen Bees and wanna Bes*?
Being a mean girl is a common social phenomenon, my mother is one.
She actually tormented one Poor woman in a Wednesday night bible study into multiple suicide attempts! the woman was not very mentally stable to begin with, but my mother was a ringleader in tormenting her. Sadly, every other female in the meeting, as well as the sister workers took part in ostracizing this woman, marginalizing her and making her feel bad.
This type of woman particularly enjoys excluding their target from things, for some reason it makes them very happy.
Anyway,sorry about the abuse, I hope you heal well and never suffer this again.
|
|
|
Post by wince on Jun 17, 2006 20:52:50 GMT -5
Yes, I'm aware it was redirected towards me personally. So why am I being scolded for redirection? Double standard if I ever saw one... No, you seem to be ignorant of your own actions, I think you are redirecting a double standard, in a personal way.
|
|
|
Post by Once again on Jun 17, 2006 21:17:57 GMT -5
Yes, I'm aware it was redirected towards me personally. So why am I being scolded for redirection? Double standard if I ever saw one... You are very good at this. It was not redirected at you. It was directed at you from the first response. The redirection is all you. You have attempted to redirect it with the skill of a Jedi Knight! Damn, you are a master at it. I'll bet you are a great spin doctor as well.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 17, 2006 21:26:09 GMT -5
If you say so. You can't discuss the topic, so go ahead and attack me.
|
|
Following your lead
Guest
|
Post by Following your lead on Jun 17, 2006 21:43:03 GMT -5
If you say so. You can't discuss the topic, so go ahead and attack me. Let's see what gems you have contributed to the topic (2x2s and cults): "...protect the system at all costs. Well done." "Then your feathers got ruffled for nothing, and you have nothing about which to be so defensive." "I'm glad I'm not the only one who insists that the workers be held accountable for their actions." "Yes, I'm aware it was redirected towards me personally. So why am I being scolded for redirection? Double standard if I ever saw one..." "If you say so. You can't discuss the topic, so go ahead and attack me." I can discuss the topic. You haven't. You have attacked posters. And then complained when they defend themselves. I thought you were playing the ass in the chat room. I see now I was in error.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 17, 2006 21:49:56 GMT -5
I can discuss the topic. You haven't. You have attacked posters. And then complained when they defend themselves. I thought you were playing the ass in the chat room. I see now I was in error. 1) you have not discussed the topic - so stop patting yourself on the head 2) I attacked nobody. The comment "protect the system" is not an attack. Perhaps you need to learn the difference between what is and what is not an attack. Read up on "ad hominem" sometime... ...and the system is still being protected at all costs.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 17, 2006 21:59:44 GMT -5
I'm glad I'm not the only one who insists that the workers be held accountable for their actions. It would seem that those who have argued with me do not agree that the workers should be held accountable for their actions. My comment about "protecting the system" was valid.
|
|
|
Post by Not quite on Jun 17, 2006 22:17:27 GMT -5
1) you have not discussed the topic - so stop patting yourself on the head You are in error on this point. I don't have to read up on it at all. You statement was the definition of an ad hominem attack. The poster made a statement to the effect that people have to give permission to others before they can control their lives. Instead of addressing the point being made you implied that the writer was defending the system. You attempted to nullify the point by discrediting the source. So regarding your second point - you are also in error.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 17, 2006 22:24:47 GMT -5
Do you believe that the workers should be held accountable for their actions?
|
|
|
Post by mrtindrucvionging on Jun 17, 2006 22:47:38 GMT -5
Ignore the children Edgar. They lack the ability, maturity, and experience to know how a lost love can take years to get over. And how often pain (and other negative emotions) keep returning--UNTIL the healing is completed. The 2x2's aren't a callous group of individuals. And I'm sure there are many who know what the loss would mean to them...and therefore, can relate to all that you (and others) lost because of what took place. Losing our illusions of the perfection of our faith--is shocking and distressful--when it takes place. But the reality is that our first love should be for God: and the reality of that love remains--even when the illusions have been worn away. While the love and service and years that you gave to others may now appear to have been a loss on earth--God still remembers them. And I'm sure others still remember you. And wish everything could have worked out differently (for all involved). Now hold on one stinking minute... Why is it that as soon as someone demonstrates a sense of humor, even if it is strange, they are suddenly children? I sincerely doubt that the purpose of this thread has been lost as the result of a little playful banter. I'm hardly a child and contrary to your assertion, I do have the capacity to understand the heartache of parting from 2x2ism, whether voluntarily or by force. Lighten up a little. Humor can be therapeutic. Learn to live a little. If smells like goose goop, then it must be a goose!
|
|
|
Post by My beliefs on Jun 18, 2006 0:28:36 GMT -5
Do you believe that the workers should be held accountable for their actions? I believe that everyone, including friends, workers and posters on this message board should be responsible for their actions and, when confronted with those actions, be willing to either stand up and defend them or acknowledge the folly of their ways rather than redirecting the questions and avoiding the answers. I believe that you did resort to an ad hominem attack when you attempted to cast doubt on the validity of the poster's response by suggesting it was done to "support the system" rather than address the point being made when s/he indicated people should take responsibility for their actions and not blame the workers for controlling them. I also believe that although the preceding sentences are grammatically correct that each has far too many words and should have been reduced to multiple shorter sentences.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 18, 2006 0:39:01 GMT -5
I believe that everyone, including friends, workers and posters on this message board should be responsible for their actions and, when confronted with those actions, be willing to either stand up and defend them or acknowledge the folly of their ways rather than redirecting the questions and avoiding the answers. Finally... a direct answer to a simple question. Nathan and prue could take notes from you. I'm sorry you are so hung up on the "redirection" bit. I'm sure you would find the topic conversable if you could stick to it, rather than trying to pick me apart. But, I'm sure you have your own agenda, which probably includes protecting the system, as that seems to have put a burr under your saddle. If I'm wrong, I'm sure you'll come unglued and let me know. I believe that you did resort to an ad hominem attack when you attempted to cast doubt on the validity of the poster's response by suggesting it was done to "support the system" rather than address the point being made when s/he indicated people should take responsibility for their actions and not blame the workers for controlling them. The key word here is "control." If a worker controls a friend, it is not the friend's fault, and the friend does not have to blame themselves for the actions of the worker. You seem to believe otherwise, so perhaps you want to protect the system. If I'm wrong, I'm sure you'll come unglued and let me know.
|
|
|
Post by Consistency on Jun 18, 2006 1:45:11 GMT -5
I'm sorry you are so hung up on the "redirection" bit. I'm sure you would find the topic conversable if you could stick to it, rather than trying to pick me apart. But, I'm sure you have your own agenda, which probably includes protecting the system, as that seems to have put a burr under your saddle. If I'm wrong, I'm sure you'll come unglued and let me know. Another fine set of ad hominem attacks. Ignore the point and instead say I am unable to stick to the point, I am protecting the system, I have a "burr under my saddle", or that I have my own adgenda. But at last we know what to expect. You then continue along the same line and state that if I do let you know that it will be because I have "come unglued", i.e., am mentally unsable, therefore how can anything I say be even worth considering. This is BS and you know it. Certainly the friend does not have to blame himself for the action of the worker. That is the worker's responsibility. But the frind is responsible for their actions. Control is something that an individual has to give up. You cannot control me unless I let you. Why would anyone let someone control them? That depends on what they get out of it. A sense of belonging? Friendship? Sex? Power? Cessation of pain? Acceptance? Eternal life? Wealth? Pleasure? In general, whatever it takes. Very little for some and all but impossible for others. Depends on how needy the person is. But at least you are addressing the point here and not simply saying I am protecting the system or losing my mind. I spoke too soon!! You cover your bases and use the old ad hominem! And again we hear your old refrain. If I come back and say you are wrong it must be because I have come unglued. Before, I failed to even ask this because I assumed the answer. Do you know the meaning of Argumentum ad hominem? Either you do and still have to resort to this logical fallacy because you have nothing else or you have no idea and feel that questioning my stability and motives is somehow strengthening your argument. It is not.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 18, 2006 9:20:35 GMT -5
So what we hear you saying is that you have come unglued?
|
|
|
Post by Nice try on Jun 18, 2006 9:27:54 GMT -5
So what we hear you saying is that you have come unglued? No. It does point out that while you accuse others of never answering questions or sticking to any topic that you are not any different. Without the power to edit and censor you can be seen for what you are. Thanks for the entertainment.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 18, 2006 9:33:52 GMT -5
You're quite welcome. Now go get some more glue. Your seams are showing.
|
|
|
Post by Clearly on Jun 19, 2006 13:48:06 GMT -5
You're quite welcome. Now go get some more glue. Your seams are showing. As a longtime reader I am somewhat surprised by Ilylo's lack of response to this thread. As soon as faced with simple concrete answers, which he expects from everyone, he reverted to the same tactics that he dispises in Nathan. I think we can all imagine the outrage if Nathan responded as he did.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 19, 2006 13:55:02 GMT -5
As a longtime reader I am somewhat surprised by Ilylo's lack of response to this thread. I responded several times. You must have missed it. As soon as faced with simple concrete answers, which he expects from everyone, he reverted to the same tactics that he dispises in Nathan. And what "simple concrete answer" was I faced with?
|
|
|
Post by ex-teenager on Jun 19, 2006 13:56:01 GMT -5
You were about to give up ilylo, then you came back for more!
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 19, 2006 13:56:50 GMT -5
My comment about "protecting the system" was in response to the comment about (this is paraphrased) not holding the workers accountable for their actions. My comment somehow is seen as an attack.
I think it has been viewed as an attack by those who prefer that the system be protected at all costs.
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Jun 19, 2006 15:10:58 GMT -5
Reality: Romans were experts at killing and making it a slow and torturous death. You could look up historically how and why they did this to understand the horrendous way Jesus died. By the time they were finished with some, their intestines would come out their sides as the pieces of bone tore out chunks of flesh. Mel Gibson’s rendition, I think, at least concerning the beating, has been the most historically true movie I’ve ever seen on the death of the Lord. I know what the point of the torture was. But you have read the bible as well. People with intestines hanging out do not walk and carry a large timber. The mutilation was not enough to be even mentioned in any of the books. As to the historical accuracy, no one knows just what Jesus was subjected to so it would be difficult to judge whether it was the most accurate or not. Unless I am mistaken the bible mentions the fact that not a bone in his body was broken. How exactly does that match with the movie version? I see the slap. I stand corrected. But it was not in silence that he was led away. He answered some of the questions. So you take no responsibility for your actions? This seems unbelievable to me. I am not just talking about sin but everything. You kill someone. Oh well, you are a sinner and, because of Jesus, it isn't your fault. Somehow this doesn't seem right. Thank You. Why would you deny the suffering of our Lord and try to make it seem like less than it was? I said nothing of broken bones. That is also a prophecy: John 19:36 YOU WROTE: “But it was not in silence that he was led away. He answered some of the questions.” You are correcting Isaiah, the prophet and holy man of God? Who said: 13Behold, my servant shall act wisely; he shall be high and lifted up, and shall be exalted. [glow=red,2,300]14As many were astonished at you-- his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of the children of mankind-- 15so shall he sprinkle many nations;[/glow] kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which has not been told them they see, and that which they have not heard they understand.
But if a holy man’s words come true, he is the real thing: Deut 18:22when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Jun 19, 2006 15:14:38 GMT -5
WHOEVER WROTE THIS CHANGES ALIASES, SO I DON'T REMEMBER WHO IT WAS: “But it was not in silence that he was led away. He answered some of the questions.”
Is 53:7 - He was oppressed, and he was afflicted,yet he opened not his mouth;like a lamb that is led to the slaughter,and like a sheep that before its shearers is silent,so he opened not his mouth.
Christ's, Jessi
|
|
|
Post by qwest on Jun 19, 2006 15:46:15 GMT -5
My comment about "protecting the system" was in response to the comment about (this is paraphrased) not holding the workers accountable for their actions. My comment somehow is seen as an attack. I think it has been viewed as an attack by those who prefer that the system be protected at all costs. Your comments are quite shallow, as the scope of the system is NOT easily perceived by you....the system may well be under the direct control of God, AS everything else is. But that being said, why not consider the advise of Gamiliel , when he adised his co-pharisies, to let it 'rest'...as if it is of God, HOW can you fight a system, that is in His will to use as He sees fit. I know of no other system, that secretly and openly has followed the way He brought to this earth....if this be the system that YOU accuse others of following and ''protecting'' [but I fail to see where the system needs MY help in defending it, as I would be a fool to think that God is indeed the only defender He needs and if I fail, He will raise up another people that will trust Him.... and OBEY Him.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 19, 2006 15:53:17 GMT -5
...and you lead off with a personal attack because...?
|
|
|
Post by qwest edit on Jun 19, 2006 15:53:28 GMT -5
My comment about "protecting the system" was in response to the comment about (this is paraphrased) not holding the workers accountable for their actions. My comment somehow is seen as an attack. I think it has been viewed as an attack by those who prefer that the system be protected at all costs. Your comments are quite shallow, as the scope of the system is NOT easily perceived by you....the system may well be under the direct control of God, AS everything else is. But that being said, why not consider the advise of Gamiliel , when he adised his co-pharisies, to let it 'rest'...as if it is of God, HOW can you fight a system, that is in His will to use as He sees fit. I know of no other system, that secretly and openly has followed the way He brought to this earth....if this be the system that YOU accuse others of following and ''protecting'' [but I fail to see where the system needs MY help in defending it, as I would be a fool to think that God needs me as a defender and.... that God [alone] is indeed the only defender He needs, and if I fail, He will raise up another people that will trust Him.... and OBEY Him.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 19, 2006 15:54:16 GMT -5
...and you lead off with a personal attack because...?
|
|
|
Post by Jessi on Jun 19, 2006 16:38:37 GMT -5
Did Gamaliel's wisdom in this matter prevail?
Jesus' salvation is for individual souls and He tells us to go out and make other disciples. That includes engaging error.
So, going out and making disciples and all that stuff about being a soldier for Christ . . . this was not preparing for spiritual battle?
Isaiah 59:17 & Ephesians 6:10Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might. 11Put on the whole armor of God, that you may be able to stand against the schemes of the devil.
I DO BATTLE WITH THE BLURRED LINES OF THE DEVIL. WORKS/GRACE/SYSTEM, GRACE/WORKS/SYSTEM.
12For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
SATAN LOVES IT WHEN DELUDED PEOPLE BELIEVE IN OTHER DELUDED PEOPLE AND HAVE NOT TOTAL DEPENDENCE ON THE ALMIGHTY.
17and take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God,
WHICH IS THE BIBLE. THE BIBLE TELLS THE TRUTH. ONLY THOSE WHO ARE CHOSEN BY GOD CAN UNDERSTAND SPIRITUAL THINGS OF GOD BECAUSE WE ARE BORN OF GOD (I John 3:9).
Are you a Christian? Are you born of God? Were you chosen from before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4)?
CHRIST'S FOREVER AND EVER JESSI
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jun 19, 2006 16:40:04 GMT -5
Jessi,
qwest apparently depends on a system.
|
|