|
AGUEST SAID
I totally and vehemently echo what all others have stated to you, dear Glad (good morning and peace to you!). Indeed, I hope you not only consider reconsidering your participation here, but your potential as a moderator. As someone who I've always found not only to be tolerant, but balanced, and able to remain neutral when the matter calls for it, your's is one personality that I personally thought would prove quite beneficial as a moderator here. Which is why you were considered.
I would also like to comment on the following:
Quote: Attempting to be supportive of something that I don’t believe in, and at the same time making opposing comments, is a conflict of interests.
Yes, I don't see how one can do that, actually. I can, however, see how one can be supportive of SOMEONE, without necessarily supporting of someTHING (i.e., their beliefs). Take the U.S. Presidency, for example. I am sure that while they may not have voted FOR the incumbent... or his position or platform, there are those who have no problem supporting the President because he IS the President - the "office" versus the person holding office, in spite of what such a person believes. Even so, the person should be open to having their beliefs questioned, yes, if such questions are in earnest... an attempt, perhaps, to understand... versus just tear down.
Love can do that, allow someone to be supportive of another in spite of differences in beliefs. Take the matter of homosexuality, for example (and I don't mean that for purposes of discussing homosexuality - not going on that ride). One may not believe in it but, say, that have a loved one who IS homosexual. What MUST they do, versus what CAN they do? MUST they oppose the loved one's lifestyle? Or CAN they simply accept that one as they are... and their CHOICES... and just LOVE them? Or say one's child chooses to marry someone one doesn't like or wish them to. MUST one oppose the union? Or CAN they simply accept and support their child and his/her CHOICE... and just LOVE them?
Quote: It is one thing for fellow believers to discuss and question the details of their belief, but remarks from a non-believer can appear to be an attempt to damage what you share and value; to be seen as not genuine inquiry but sabotage.
I think that it depends, dear one, on WHO is making such remarks. Coming from some, it should be totally understandable if their remarks are taken so. If a demonstrated track record for arguing simply for argument's sake, or merely trying to stir up controversy because thoughts, ideas, and issues are being raised/discussed that are unacceptable to the person, then such a one really shouldn't get all "who me??" when their antics are called out. Certainly if one is discussing elsewhere what they INTEND to do/cause - how can such a one publish their intent and then take issue when that intent is commented upon?
But if one's inquiry IS borne of a genuine desire to KNOW, then where is the place for suspicion? It helps to know the one inquiring, of course. But so long as there's never been any BASIS to RAISE suspicion (and one's childhood and/or other experiences do not necessarily provide a valid basis - just because one couldn't trust ONE adult as a child doesn't mean one cannot trust ANY; in the same vein, just because one couldn't trust ONE set of beliefs... or the teachers/fomenters of such... as a child, or even older... doesn't mean one cannot trust ANY. Both are very short-sighted, IMHO, and often leave the untrusting one lacking in some way or another)... one should be given the benefit of the doubt.
To say, though, something to the effect of, "Well, my parents/the elders/WTBTS GB lied to me as a JW and so ALL adults lie about faith/belief" is ridiculous. It's like not eating bread as an adult because your parents/elders/WTBTS GB told you "bread" was "bad." THEY lied. Doesn't mean EVERYONE does... or is.
Quote: It is understandable that you want a place where you can be among like minded people to discuss thing that matter to you.
Well, yes, but that wasn't the impetus for this place; the impetus was being unable to do so elsewhere, although their were like-minded folk there. Unfortunately, the UNlike-minded could not handle that. I find it interesting, however, that some of those unlike-minded folk still feel the need to come/be where we ARE. When you ask such ones what they're looking for, they deny looking for anything. If there's nothing, then one has to ask "Then why are you HERE, if not to learn what we ARE discussing?" In spite of the many responses to the contrary and that attempt to communicate disinterest, though, MY logical... and RATIONAL... mind says, "Either you ARE here because you ARE interested... or with to HELP those who are interested... or your are here to start trouble." Because there really is no other reason.
What is... curious... to ME... is the observable reluctance of some to ADMIT that, while they may not accept/believe/grasp all... they ARE interested, to a greater or lesser degree. They HAVE to be... else, again, why COME here? I just don't get the lack of honesty, intellectual or otherwise... and so I had to ask just "what's going on." And here is what my Lord explained to ME:
Many have unresolved issues with being excluded from something. For many, this is the result of having been raised JW children who, due to the tenets of the WTBTS, were often excluded from activities and topics regularly engaged in by their non-JW peers. That exclusion left them with a feeling of inferiority (and rightly so!), which feelings have not yet been conquered. To the contrary, whenever they feel left out, not a part, even perhaps prohibited or restricted from something "others" have a part in/access to... those feelings not only rise up... but with a "need" to "fight" that which causes them. What they don't understand is that is it not the activity, topic, or presenter of them that causes them this need: it is the dichotomy of their early WTBTS indoctrination that they have not yet fully disspelled. That indoctination is one that says, on the one hand, "You MUST belong, and here is the criteria/conduct/belief/understanding that MAKES you belong... and any who DON'T have it is inferior" while saying on the other hand "You must NOT belong to such criteria/conduct/belief/understanding and if you DO... you are inferior."
You MUST be "in the know" as to THIS... or be considered "inferior," but you must NOT be "in the know" as to THAT... or be considered "inferior." Because of this, they learned early to feel "left out", either by NOT conforming... or by rejecting activities/topics of their peers... and that feeling is anathema to them.
And then... here we come along. Too much for some with those unresolved issues to handle. Because we represent ALL that was "wrong" with their upbringing!
But... we truly are NOT the enemy! And we're not dangerous... unless one considers truth dangerous... and many... MANY... do. They can't accept it as to their own selves, let alone God and Christ. But that truly is all we're offering: truth. For a frickin' change. That one cannot (yet) RECOGNIZE truth... perhaps because they've been lied to SO much and for SO long... does not negate truth, though.
Quote: With hindsight I did not fully understood the purpose of the member only sections and therefore did no shown the respected that I should have.
Ahh, dear Glad... And I think you mean the "Walking By Faith" section OF the Members Only section... but I totally understand and I think all here do. We don't want it to be EXCLUSIVE, dear one, but merely a safe place... refuge, if you will, for those who wish to TO be able to share what they feel compelled to... as received from God/Christ/the Spirit. Of course, it MIGHT be subject to challenge. I mean, if someone posted there that God/Christ/the Spirit told THEM to... say... shut down another site, or "go after Muslims" (which I had a relative actually tell me - he was young and so extremely immature and so impressionable and had been listening to radical "christian" friends "rant" about the "dangers" of Muslims in our communities on his college campus and then somehow interpreted THAT as "Christ telling" him such... sigh... but PRAISE JAH I was able to reason with him WHY would Christ even WANT such a thing - what had any Muslims done to HIM... or anyone he KNEW??... so he managed to calm down and leave off that line of thinking... again, praise JAH)... I would absolutely challenge such. Because it is not meant to be a place where folks can just "spout" revelation - there has to be SOME indication that it DID come from Christ... and so it has to stand up to testing, should that be necessary. Because all inspired expressions DON'T originate with God. Some originate with some "other" spirit.
Quote: Commenting on how the forum is run is not my brief.
Which is why your "turn" was SO confusing to me; I had never seen you "go there" before, ever (although, perhaps you have elsewhere but, again, I've never seen that from you). Both dear tec (peace!) and I had NO reservations about you because of that. While we certainly knew that you would engage, inquire, even oppose BELIEFS, I didn't see where you were the kind to take issue with the purpose or administration of the site. So, I was quite taken aback ("Huh? What's THAT all about?!").
I realize that perhaps your love for dear tec... and perhaps me (as you indicated previously) may have prompted you to have more than the usual concern, if that were NECESSARY, but I can't see where it was or is. Neither of us are doing anything differently than we did on a previous site. We both have shared what we received from our dear Lord. So, I personally became concerned for YOU, that perhaps you were allowing yourself to "succumb" to unnecessary fears but in YOUR mind and heart by others. Because you truly ARE concerned, it's totally understandable that others, whose agenda is NOT love and concern, but, again... inability to "conquer" feelings of exclusion, etc., might use that quality in YOU to exploit YOUR good nature. Of course, that may not be the case at ALL... but the track record, yours AND others... make it easy for ME to believe it plays a part to SOME degree, if not a great degree.
And so, again, I truly hope you reconsider; however, I also totally understand if you are unable to do that. You USED to sign off with the comment "May you gods be with you" or something like that, dear Glad. That suggested to me that one's gods/beliefs WEREN'T a problem for YOU... that you COULD accept such differences. And so, again, I am surprised... and a bit saddened... at the "change". But... I understand... and accept... it.
May the undeserved kindness and mercy of MY God and Father, the MOST HOLY One of Israel, JAH of Armies, and the love and peace of His Son and Christ, the HOLY One of Israel, JAHESHUA, the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah) be upon you... TRULY... if YOU wish it... and to time indefinite!
Again, peace to YOU, and I remain, always...
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
Shellama
|