Many of the ex's (and some of the H's) recognize that salvation is not dependent the church they attend. What I don't unerstand is when some like Hank point that out... and give some liberty to the H's because of the view that salvation is NOT dependent upon the church a person attends... than some of the ex's get all upset and rag on Hank about being slippery etc.
Lark, have you ever been reunited with an old Holdeman friend and all you could do is just stand there and say hi and smile and feel kind of like an idiot because they aren’t allowed to shake your hand?
Kevin... I have witnessed this happening to my parents from the third grade on up. I sat as a child listening on the stairs as my grandparents and other relatives harassed my parents concerning their leaving the Holdeman church. Walking through the room glancing over at my mom and seeing the tears glistening in her eyes... feeling the tension in the air. Knowing but not realizing that this would forever change the relationship between my H relatives and my parents reaching down to all of the generations of my family. My life was forever changed. I cried when my H grandma died... not so much because of the loss of her life... but recognizing that I really never got to know her.. all of this due to people not being able to recognize that a person can be saved without having to belong to a particular church.
So.. no.. I have not been seated at my own seperate table. I was placed in the horrible position of having to choose where I would sit at. Loving my parents and desiring to honor them while at the same time wanting to go and have fun, playing with my cousins. And again... all of this over the idea of people not being able to recognize that a person's salvation is not dependent upon what church they attend.
Kevin.. from what I understand of Hank's posts.. is that he believes that salvation is not dependent upon what church a person attends. I understand that he believes that the whole excommunication bit is wrong. However.. he chooses to love the Holdemans in spite of their error in this area.
Hank.. Have I stated what you believe correctly or not?
>>Kevin.. from what I understand of Hank's posts.. is that he believes that salvation is not dependent upon what church a person attends.<<
Lark, I really don't care what Hank thinks. The fact is that the Holdemans do believe that salvation is dependent upon which church a person attends. If you want to love that go ahead.
Lark, it has nothing to do with Salvation. There are numerous wonderful believers in the h church that I know personally. No one has questioned the status of individual souls.
Some people have a great need to be accepted by everyone. Others prefer to deal in the truth, and not hide behind rhetoric and doublespeak.
Kevin.. I agree with you that many of the Holdemans do not differentiate between their salvation and their church. There are SOME that do recognize this difference. If we automatically choose to judge ALL Holdemans the same, then we add to the problem just like many of them do to the ex's.
edited.. to clarify my thought a bit more.
This message has been edited by larkagain on Jul 12, 2008 9:36 PM
Lark, here's another great example from pastor Doug.
I really believe that Hank is trying to find his way through the maze without bitterness.....
See, he uses the truth: Hank is trying to find his way....without bitterness.
But by subtly using this in the context of the thread, he infers (and judges) that anyone who chooses to speak the truth (call spade a spade) is therefore bitter. This is very common among holdeman folk.
i don't know why these guys have such a great need to be accepted by those who, behind their backs, condemn them and do not consider them brethren. I guess (to paraphrase Brent) they still have not overcome their government.
I really don't care what Hank thinks. The fact is that the Holdemans do believe that salvation is dependent upon which church a person attends. If you want to love that go ahead.
Kevin, bingo.
No matter how much he can quote Menno and how much he thinks that Johnny is just "misunderstood" or "lost in translation" the fact remains. As a group, they have condemned others to hell by excommunication. Even Hank. He can fellowship with a few of those connected enough to travel (conveniently during revivals) but he is lying to himself when he thinks that they fully accept him as a brother in Christ.
Now, Hank, forgive me if you feel I'm picking on you. I'm trying to explain to Lark my contention with some of your writings. I appreciate your feelings of fellowship with many Christians of many denominations. I have had wonderful fellowship with some h people and have some dear friends who love the culture and plain lifestyle afforded by their church. What I am discussing is flaws in the system perpetuated by men who are unwilling to speak the truth.
This message has been edited by twinspapa on Jul 12, 2008 10:07 PM
Lark, You will never fully understand until you yourself are shunned. Wonderful that with the love of God that you are trying. I don't fully understand the Holdeman, (GASP! Should be read same as always: I MAY not... )thought I did until I started to reason scripture with the Mennonite Brethren. Friendships dissolved overnight. I now understand how it is possible to have so many reasons to not be part of them that it seems like you never give the same reason twice. I have found that it is in every church and every reason that I left the MB I have seen in our current church save one, yet. But he himself is pushing the book that tells the people to not be satisfied until he is gone! But you are looking in the wrong place for understanding. Look for peoples hurt. God's people indeed do perish for the lack of knowledge. Churches have much to say, but precious little of what they say is in the Word.
Oh my, shall we have a pity party for Peter and Kevin because they were only shunned little Mennonite boys after they were expelled, when other parents and governments sexually abuse and neglect and abandon and even sacrifice and murder their children. But here it just that the Holdemans won't eat with them or shake their hand of whom they don't even agree with anymore anyhow. You guys have to much God damned time on your hands.
I was considering Amberly Thiessen story the other day and how she can get up on a stage of the world and acknowledge her heritage and background without embarrassment and bitterness, and has beautifully shown how she has overcome the obstacles of not knowing and being raised around the music she now loves and performs. I know one thing, if she had been raised with bitter parents being on a site like this, or if she had been on it herself, she wouldn't be one iota a far along in her dreams and art as she is today. This site is a curse and the furthest thing from a blessing I know of.
It has been a great hindrance and time squanderer in my own life and pursuits that it sometimes seems I'm in to deep and out of time to overcome it and the other potentially bitter things in my life. If it wouldn't be for other things I have great faith in myself about and some of the terrible things I've overcome and the belief I have to face my errors straight on, The Church of Cog in Christ exholdeman Mennonite would be my greatest and bitter down fall. And I still ain't out of the woods with it yet. But I'm here to face this site with things like I've just written, and learn quickly, and then be gone righteously.
Peter and Kevin, you are being maliciously misquoted, i.e., misquoted and deliberately misunderstood because of puffed up self-righteousness and an overwhelming agenda.
>>Oh my, shall we have a pity party for Peter and Kevin because they were only shunned little Mennonite boys after they were expelled,<<
Actually, Brent, I should probably thank the Holdemans for any shunning they might have done. If anything it created more incentive on my part to not associate with them and seek out a new life with regular, real people.
Jesus, as a man , was a liberal, Brent. I’m a liberal too and would have probably gotten along well with him.
Brent, I have a feeling that you are probably one of those "real", "regular" people and if I ever happen to travel close to where you live it is my intention to look you up and share a cup of coffee.
Just a quickie; Peter, so I display a "judgmental" attitude and infer that others are "bitter" ?
uh, no, Hank, that was Doug.
Brent, you are so far off base I won't even bother defending that post. Your religion has completely blinded you from seeing the point Kevin or I were making. Actually Brent, many times I have said that personally I really haven't been hurt by the holdies. I haven't lived near any for 20 years and only see them every few years.
So I'm not on a pity party at all. My life is wonderful.
However, as a MAN, I am required to stand for justice, defend the weak and the hurt, and expose injustice.
This message has been edited by twinspapa on Jul 13, 2008 10:52 AM
If I was to make a comment on Brent's post it would probably be the equivalent of standing in front of the firing squad but I guess I'll take my chances.
Brent, maybe I'm a few bricks short, but I still don't understand what you mean by overcoming this forum. Either you enjoy the dialogue and/or derive some benefit from it or you don't, in which case you would cease from monitoring it. Evidently you are thinking it is a hindrance in your life and I can understand that for the reasons you stated and probably many other reasons, but I just don't see it as something that has to be overcome.
<<<
Oh my, shall we have a pity party for Peter and Kevin because they were only shunned little Mennonite boys after they were expelled, when other parents and governments sexually abuse and neglect and abandon and even sacrifice and murder their children. But here it just that the Holdemans won't eat with them or shake their hand of whom they don't even agree with anymore anyhow. You guys have to much God damned time on your hands.
>>>
Apparently, Brent denies, or is not aware of the complexity of needs of the human spirit. Brent seems to be be unaware that who we are as humans is our connectedness, our acceptance, our families, our culture, where we came from, who we belong to. Even in the old old days, when death and torture were acceptable, exile was considered a powerful punishment. Most professionals assert that emotional abuse is every bit as harmful as physical abuse. Brent seems to be denying all this. And yet, Brent does not heed his own preaching, because he has bitched and whined ad-nauseum about the abuse he has taken on this forum. Wow Brent, did it really hurt you? Poor baby!
<<<
I was considering Amberly Thiessen story the other day and how she can get up on a stage of the world and acknowledge her heritage and background without embarrassment and bitterness, and has beautifully shown how she has overcome the obstacles of not knowing and being raised around the music she now loves and performs. I know one thing, if she had been raised with bitter parents being on a site like this, or if she had been on it herself, she wouldn't be one iota a far along in her dreams and art as she is today. This site is a curse and the furthest thing from a blessing I know of.
>>>
Now Brent spews all kinds of emotional sentimental BS about a young chick he knows absolutely nothing about. How do you know she wasn't raised with bitter parents Brent? Suddenly, a young chick (perhaps vain, perhaps untried, perhaps fame-seeking, we really have no clue) wins his approval. Would he praise her if she was on the forum and came against Brent? But since she is somewhere else, he praises her because she had nothing to overcome. Anyway, neither Brent nor I know jack about this girl, and his speculations (and mine) are bullcrap from A to Z.
<<<
It has been a great hindrance and time squanderer in my own life and pursuits that it sometimes seems I'm in to deep and out of time to overcome it and the other potentially bitter things in my life. If it wouldn't be for other things I have great faith in myself about and some of the terrible things I've overcome and the belief I have to face my errors straight on, The Church of Cog in Christ exholdeman Mennonite would be my greatest and bitter down fall. And I still ain't out of the woods with it yet. But I'm here to face this site with things like I've just written, and learn quickly, and then be gone righteously.
>>>
The movie "The New Way" spoke of some people who because of Church abuse, had attempted suicide. From this, we can conclude that the abuse is real and goes deep into the human soul. So Brent brutally derides those who haven't overcome this real emotional/spiritual abuse, and yet self-rightous pompous preachy Brent cannot overcome the forum which couldn't possibly hurt him in any way, and accuses himself with how much time of his it has wasted, and how it could almost be his "greatest and bitterest downfall". I stand astonished, and I stand in amazement, trying to even process the thought that the COG zone could be my downfall, my upfall, or anything in between. And then he concludes that "he leaves rightously"....of all the self-righteous, pompous comments one can make.
And last but not least, the real question is who has too much time on their hands, Brent, or others?
This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 13, 2008 1:19 PM
Well Scott, you took the bait again. I wasn't even specifically thinking of you when I wrote my post. In fact I don't know if you even flashed across my mind. But you just couldn't help yourself, you had to reveal yourself. I knew after your little outburst this morning that wouldn't be the end of you on this thread. So I figured I'd just let you get it out. So I held my tongue, shut the computer off and went to work. I knew there would be more of you when I got home. But after I had you on my hook again, it was clear as a bell why you have to do what you do. Your own errors glare back at you so bad through my writings that you got to publicly slander me and pick another fight with me. You just don't learn, do you? Ha, whatever happened to the exchange of ideas and not making it personal like you've touted to me in the past after you picked another fight with me and I hit you hard for it. Folks, the last time this guy wanted a pact with me to stay off each others writings {I've never asked for one}, he had me on the phone and I wouldn't give him the pact. Then he calls back a little later whining to me again, so I gave him a pact. Then less than two weeks later he broke it because he couldn't stand something I said on this forum, and it created one of the biggest public scandals we've ever had on the forum. It's in the archives, and I haven't forgot it.
Now Scott concerning Amberly Thiessen. You're more justified with what you said to me about that than in the rest of your post. But I was thinking of those things when I was writing my post. I was hoping people would understand what I really had in mind.....that she is how we should look. What I mean is, Amberly probably hasn't overcome much in her life yet, because I don't think we're put in a position to be tried when we haven't claimed much yet. And if we go about our own business in this kind of life, we end up being basically fair and tolerant of all people, including to the people we come from. We don't claim much, don't get tried much, and see the good in all people, and if we have music or art in us, we move along respectfully and honest in it. This is the natural and peaceful way of the world. And I think it is good, though everyone is going to give an account of their life.
But Scott, you don't even believe in overcoming. You was scorning the notion of examining ourselves the other day like it was a ridiculous thing. So why are you all of the sudden complaining about a young girl that hasn't overcome when the young have tremendous grace on their lives yet? Overcoming isn't so much for the young in their unclaimed circumstances, it's for us. We are the one's that are suppose to overcome, we have things accumulated to overcome, you can be sure of that. And besides, she's young and we're older. We're are the ones that are to set the example. We're suppose to look like her and reclaim the grace of the young in our older age, that's what the true purpose of life is. Her diseases and sins will eventually try her. Then we can see if she can overcome. Until then the grace she exhibits should be our goal. That's what I wanted to show with Amberly Thiessen story. But Scott, like everything else I write you can't stand, you pervert it.
Now I want to deal with a severe charge you made against me again. You imply I haven't been abused. You say I brutally deride other's abuse. You try to make it look like my only abuse and hurt has come from Cog. The abuse Cog has given me is a flea compared to most of the rest of my life. At 14 I was thrown into the spiritual world I had no training of or knew anything about. At night I turned to the walls and cried. I knew no one knew anything about what was going on, because no one had ever talked to me about the things I was forced to face. At 39 I lay dying in bed, heart broken, without any material security, sleepless, appetiteless....and that went on for months. I forced myself to eat, and don't remember sleeping at night. Late in the dark night I clung to the headboard while projectiles shot through my head in a soaking wet bed, crying out to God while I was trying to hang on to my spirt that was trying to leave me. After my spirit would settled back down in me, I was petrified with fear. Scott, I talked once of these demons that had left me, and you Scott, scorned me to no end, saying, good, get the others out of you now. And there's been many other harrowing things in my life: I've been spiritually ravaged and raped, run through the wringer, abused, and through it all I've never charged God nor become bitter towards him.
Scott, has your mental abuse caused that much distress in you? If it had, I don't see how you could have handled your own harrowing things the way you have. And you would have understood me, guarding your tongue concerning me.
And now I suppose I will have to face all you people on here that thinks it's my fault because Scott and I are fighting again. But remember, I didn't say boo to him until he shot a dart at me again this morning.
Well brent, if you have suffered in your life, maybe you shouldn't dismiss others (Kevin and Peter) as if we were only "poor little mennonite boys being shunned".
You have no idea of the mountains we may have climbed or the depths to which we have travelled. And maybe we haven't. See you don't know either way because you are too busy pushing your own agenda and don't take the time to comprehend what others may write here.
GM, I really liked your post. I don't understand either what needs to be "overcome" about a public forum. Either you enjoy and read it or you don't visit it. Pretty simple.
Sirius said <<Jesus, as a man , was a liberal, Brent. I’m a liberal too and would have probably gotten along well with him.>>
What a load of excrement. Sirius, Jesus was not a liberal as we know liberals today. He was not supportive of sin, abortion, porn, alternative lifestyles and oppression of the poor! Quite the opposite. And how would you have gotten along well with Him considering that you justify sin and deny Him and his Father?
"You have no idea of the mountains we may have climbed or the depths to which we have travelled. And maybe we haven't. See you don't know either way because you are too busy pushing your own agenda and don't take the time to comprehend what others may write here."
Peter,
You wonder why we don't get along. Aside from Scott, you've brought the most unjust charges against me of any one else on this forum....you've grossly misunderstood me. If your abuse from the Holdemans had been as great as the abuse I describe, you wouldn't talk the way you do. I'm not talking about the abuse that gets us up on our high horse against those that abuse us. That's everyday stuff. We talk bad because the abuse isn't spiritual or harrowing. Some of you talk about the abuse of the Holdemans, I've talked about the abuse of the exholdemans. But it ain't much, none of us have suffered much from those kinds of abuses. If we had, we wouldn't scorn each other. The abuse I'm speaking of, lays you out, it changes the direction of your journey in life, it gives you vision, it ravages you, it humbles you, you feel the suffering of others, when you see they hurt, you hurt. But for the most part the Holdeman abuse of us exholdemans is surface.....not hand shaking and table eating. That's what I meant in my first post, I haven't belittled or derided any real abuse - I tremble at it!!!! There are some exceptions here, the Holdeman aren't saints by any means. But even at that, I wonder some times at the exceptions when I see and read writings that apparently have no spiritual understanding toward those that have abuse them.....they treat it like surface abuse. So I just live and write what I see.
So Peter, you want to convince me of something, talk spiritual to me, don't talk and criticize me with your everyday discontents, okay? And I'll try harder to do the same to you.
In the mean time you might want to live up to your own pacts you've made with me and not get on anymore of my writings.
I didn't ask you for any pact at any time. I was trying to be nice to you so you didn't have to make any more vows to leave the forum. I don't swear oaths or make pacts. I was trying to be a gentleman and ignore your posts, however, you want to reign the airwaves spouting your "spiritual lessons" and go king james on anyone who disagrees with you. Even GM man said by writing something he knew he' probably get in front of your verbal firing squad.
Brent, you bore me but I find you amusing as well so guess what buddy, I'm not ignoring you any more.
And by the way, I don't complain about "everyday" trials. And I don't feel sorry for your trials that left you screaming or whatever. You brought them on yourself. Be a man and deal with it.
Brent, you whine about the abuse of the ex-holdemans. Also, we know that abuse changes peoples lives. So take a moment to describe how this "abuse of the ex-holdemans" is changing or impacting anybodys life.
This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 13, 2008 9:49 PM
Peter, I edited my post after properly reading your post.
Lark, thanks for understanding me. As far as my beliefs and understanding of H life and beliefs, I think I have been clear and consistent. I admit, some days I am upset and let it be known, but when I try to focus on God and His overall plan for His people I have to allow others' mistakes, or else I cut myself off.
Of course, we can and should address truth and life's actions, and critique others; but we cannot raise ourselves above God, and dictate how He works in the diversity of His kingdom/church. And so such as are born into a culture and its peculiarities of beliefs (not by their own choice), who then propagate their belief system and absorb others, I can trust that God will take care of their sin... just like God deals with me and my sin and misunderstandings.
Scott, so if this sounds disgusting to you, so be it. God does not want the demise of any peoples. But, He wants to work with them by His Holy spirit and 50-100 years is a short time for change in society. There have been huge changes at H in my lifetime, and change will continue. Anybody and ALL who knew CGCM before the 1970's know what those changes are and they cannot be disputed. Specifically, the "authoritarian" approach by church leadership is a phenomenon that came to fruition from the impure seeds sown by John Holdeman ( the change cannot be disputed, the impure seeds analogy are my understanding of what the Word of God teaches), and CGCM is reaping some of that harvest.
I believe, (the Lord tarrying) that huge changes are ahead for CGCM; not sure what they will be but you can read what Dr. C. Hiebert wrote. He covered possibilities and scenarios, already in 1968... about 5-6 years before the "purge/crunch" came.
I have my views too, but all that we might see for the future is really immaterial. The important thing in life is what "we do now". God will never abandon believers who turn to Him with an honest heart of faith. And, He will never throw such away, in whatever denomination they find themselves. Faith is faith, and you cannot define it by culture or way of life. Faith is an intangible inner trust in the God of the universe. What we know of Him is in the Holy Scriptures and it is enough for us to become responsible to Him. He will NEVER FAIL on His promises. If He does or would, then Christianity is a farce.
Edited to define "farce".
farce |färs|
noun
a comic dramatic work using buffoonery and horseplay and typically including crude characterization and ludicrously improbable situations.
• the genre of such works.
• an absurd event : the debate turned into a drunken farce.
This message has been edited by Aaronsboy on Jul 14, 2008 4:05 AM
I had a chance to read the post you deleted. You cowardly writing to me and then not having the balls to read the response shows what kind of dishonest player and cheat you are. But in it you vindicated me.
You're just like your friend Doug, can't take the heat.
Brent
This message has been edited by BrentU on Jul 14, 2008 5:19 AM
"Brent, you whine about the abuse of the ex-holdemans. Also, we know that abuse changes peoples lives. So take a moment to describe how this "abuse of the ex-holdemans" is changing or impacting anybodys life."
Scott,
I also noticed this morning you took the challenge out of this post. You need to read a little closer. I done answered your post.
I said the exholdeman abuse was more or less just everyday stuff......common things in the world like most of the Holdeman abuse was.....that this kind of abuse just comes from unrefined people not really knowing what they're doing or saying.
And Scott, I also touched on the more deeper and bad abuse.....that this kind of abuse wasn't really that hurtful when we paid it back revengefully in like abuse, or reacted or wrote against the abuse coming at us childishly and unspiritually. For our high horse, arrogance and pride, balances out the hurt and sweeps the hurt under the table, and God don't hear our cry.
Now Scott, what Peter wrote to me in his yesterday evening's 8:53 PM post, is deadly and spiritual abuse. It was intentional and meant to harm. This is also your kind of abuse.
Sirius said <<Look at Peter, he denied Jesus three times. Didn’t they hang out together?>>
Sirius, Peter repented mightily of his sin. I wouldn't be surprised to hear you make the argument that Jesus and Satan "hung out" in the desert. Then they went mountain climbing, huh? Whaddya say?
Brent, GM mentioned he was afraid to come against you. Here is one could example of why:
<<<
Folks, the last time this guy wanted a pact with me to stay off each others writings {I've never asked for one}, he had me on the phone and I wouldn't give him the pact. Then he calls back a little later whining to me again, so I gave him a pact. Then less than two weeks later he broke it because he couldn't stand something I said on this forum, and it created one of the biggest public scandals we've ever had on the forum.
>>>
You hit below the belt like a terrorist, leveraging the fact that you knew me years ago, to persuade people that you have inside information about me, but this "information" or alleged events, I cannot prove or disprove because I don't remember anything about it. That makes it tough for me, but that is your point.
And know this:
<<< Well Scott, you took the bait again. >>>
<<< But after I had you on my hook again, it was clear as a bell why you have to do what you do. >>>
<<< .... it's my fault because Scott and I are fighting again. >>>
Brent, I think you have some explaining to do. This would be a good time for you to explain to the forum just what love/hate/bitch dynamics you think are going between us in your own mind. What's this about me taking the bait again, being on your hook again, and this asinine term "Scott and I". There is no "Scott and I". That is a figment of your imagination. I very seldom respond to your post, but sometimes your post (in my view) are such a travesty of justice that it gets a rise out of me and I do respond. Stupid me! And are you any different? Do you not respond to what you don't agree with? But here I go trying to reason with you. I know for sure I've been a lot harder on Hank and the holdies then you. So is there a "Hank and I", or an "Xep and I"? If I can't occasionally post a response to some of your BS without you acting like you are my disgruntled disapointed lover, then WTF? Let the public record speak for itself.
>>I wouldn't be surprised to hear you make the argument that Jesus and Satan "hung out" in the desert. Then they went mountain climbing, huh? Whaddya say?<<
RM, You probably wouldn’t hear me make a statement like that. Why? I’ll tell you why. Although I do believe that Jesus was a kind man who had lot’s of good things to say and helped many people, it would be hard for me to say that he and Satan hung out together. See, RM, I don’t believe a Satan existed then nor do I believe he exists today. Same with God.
You go off like a blind man in this post, declaring war without any weapons.
Oh this is getting good! So now by responding to posts, I'm declaring war? Wow, you sure like the pity parties don't ya?
Oh, and I love that comment to Scott about my post being spiritual abuse! Hehehe, I thought you said I don't write anything spiritual just everyday stuff!
Man, you make my day. I really needed a good laugh this morning. Thanks.
>>Sirius said <<Jesus, as a man , was a liberal, Brent. I’m a liberal too and would have probably gotten along well with him.>><<
RM said: >>What a load of excrement. Sirius, Jesus was not a liberal as we know liberals today. He was not supportive of sin, abortion, porn, alternative lifestyles and oppression of the poor! Quite the opposite. And how would you have gotten along well with Him considering that you justify sin and deny Him and his Father?<<
RM, you really need to get out more. By the standards of his day and his culture, Jesus was a raging liberal. Why? Here are a few reasons:
1) He supported the underprivileged and needy people
2) He spoke out strongly against abuse of power
3) He supported the rights of women
4) He did not condemn prostitutes
5) He spoke out against the establishment
If Jesus was present on earth in physical form today, he would be doing things like going for dinner at Sirius's place (i.e. associating with those who don't follow the accepted religious norms of the day), he'd be walking through the slums and homeless shelters, healing the physically, emotionally and mentally ill people. He'd be in hospitals, healing the ill there (NOT setting himself in a big facility drawing in thousands of people - and even more thousands of dollars for his 'free healing'). He'd support equal rights for everyone. He'd be preaching in the streets during the day, condemning the establishment and its abuses, and walking them (the streets) with the prostitutes in the evening. His closest friends would be rough and tumble lower-class working people (like Peter, James and John the fishermen), loan sharks (like the tax collectors Matthew and Zaccheus), etc. In short, if he were to appear among us in physical human form today, we'd probably throw him into the psych ward since we don't physically crucify the undesirables anymore.
1) He supported the underprivileged and needy people
...and liberals oppress the poor via feel good government socialism which only exacerbates the situation.
2) He spoke out strongly against abuse of power
...liberals use the courts to acquire power and then turn around and abuse the citizenry by forcing their "righteousness" on us.
3) He supported the rights of women
...liberals don't own this one. What have liberals done in recent years to liberate women from Sharia law?
4) He did not condemn prostitutes
...he called them to repentance. Quite different from hiring them.
5) He spoke out against the establishment
Lets see....liberalism has been established in our schools, judicial system, government and orthodox churches. I agree he spoke out against the establishment.
Yo, Not sure where you hang out but I can tell you that points 2-5 are the exact opposite of the h standard around here. the pharisee standard would have a better chance in an average H place except to the exceptional folks that have the true love of God and not the true love of the church in their hearts. Just stand around some time and actually listen to the conversations going on around you, espeially when the conversation turns to some one going thru a struggle, an outsider, an EX, or the man down the street and really listen to what is said. It is a real mind opener.
The problem is that most of these folks seriously think that what they are saying is out of true love for the souls of others and that they are doin their best to serve God and I would have to say that they are really for the most part trying. But when you are the guy on the back side of the judgemental system, I can tell you,it does not come across as love. It isn't till you get on the wrong side of the fence that you can see how wrong the whole attitude and thinking pattern is. I can honestly say that I could live the H life style simply from choice and love of those who I have connected with thru the years and my family. But I can never promote the OTVC like they do nor say this is the only way that God accepts for us to live nor can I ever stand to EX someone without totally just cause and if I did, I could never hold avoidance to suit the standard ever again. It is the most hatefilled practice I have ever seen and I made that decision long before I was ever put out.
I wish I could have instilled more love for others into my children and they are very accepting people, but sometimes I see the attitudes come that are so disrespectful to others and in some of them the lack of true christian spirituality and the true desire to serve God instead of live for yourself and stay out from under the radar as much as possible. I saw a group of youth give a program last nite as a report from a mission trip they took and saw the spiritual impressions that they recieved and the changes it wrought in them. if some of the H youth could get a grip on what we saw last eve, it would totally change the church in ways that would be amazing. I remember stories of a revival in KS where there was a large group of converts and the youth were going out to evangalise yrs ago.
I wonder sometimes what it would take for those in charge to realise that if they would actually do like they preach to us EX, IF YOU WOULD JUST GIVE IT TO GOD AND LET HIM TAKE IT, Can you even begin to imagine what God could do if the leadership would give up their control and actually let God have it.
RM, do you know of any other book whereby I could gain better knowledge on the type of person Jesus was? If there is such a book, let me know. I don’t mind learning new things
LL
We do fall terribly short in these areas here as well, Jesus helped the sick, that's why we would get to spend lots of time with him. Hopefully so he could cure us.
>>If Jesus was present on earth in physical form today, he would be doing things like going for dinner at Sirius's place <<
RM, next time Steve comes to visit me you should really think about joining us. We’ll take you out and show you first hand knowledge of the kinds of guys Jesus would enjoy hanging out with.
>>Sirius, why don't you guys come down here and I'll show you some folks Jesus came to save.<<
I don’t know, RM. It seems to me that the farther south and east a person goes the less tolerant folks get. I’m thinking it might be better to stay up this way where people are more accepting. More Jesus like if you know what I mean
>>You libs are the among the most intolerant people to ever crawl the face of the earth!<<
No way, Dude. We’re tolerant. We don’t judge a black and a white if they get married. We don’t judge a man and a man if they get married. We don’t judge people who don’t go to church.
What we DO judge is when some people decide to hurt innocent people. We’re more like Jesus.
Hey, a couple Sundays ago a very close relative of mine married a very black man! No prob! Everythings cool. Gay "marriage" is an oxymoron. They can't no more be married than you and a cow get married in the eyes of God. Marriage is between a man and a woman.
You say <<What we DO judge is when some people decide to hurt innocent people. We’re more like Jesus.>>
I say phooey on you! Your political party refuses to confirm a nominee for the Supreme Court unless they support a woman's right to murder her innocent unborn child in cold blood! That is the litmus test you have come up with to determine whether someone is in their right mind! That reminds me of Lucifer!
>>Hey, a couple Sundays ago a very close relative of mine married a very black man! No prob! Everythings cool.<<
Hey, RM, you’ve got some progressive blood in you after all. I like it.
>>Gay "marriage" is an oxymoron. They can't no more be married than you and a cow get married in the eyes of God. Marriage is between a man and a woman.<<
Animals have never been my thing, either, RM. I’m with you on that one.
RM, the woman’s right issue is a tough one. If you think about it, how much difference is there between using a condom or the pill, and terminating a pregnancy? Either way human life is being denied. It’s really a discussion that can’t be won.
You talk like a child. No, you didn't write anything spiritual. You don't understand anything. What I meant, the situation was spiritual.....that it would be dealt with in the spiritual realm.
>>Hey, a couple Sundays ago a very close relative of mine married a very black man! No prob! Everythings cool.<<
Whoa, RM, buddy, I just thought about this. You’re white? Are you assuming I thought you were white? I don’t believe I’ve ever met you. I don’t remember seeing a photo of your face.
Thanks, RM, for letting me know that you come from white people.
You must not know what you write to me, or must not understand what I see in your post, that's all I can figure out.
Scott, I don't have any inside information on you. If I got some inside information on you, you tell me what it is, because that's all the more I know about it. I may have said something like that {poor choice of words, or probably mad}, but what I meant, I know you like the back of my hand. And from that there's plenty to defend myself against all your unjust accusations, abuse, and your own below the belt post. But I have absolutely nothing on you, have never sought to get anything on you, and want nothing on you, have never devised any plan among friends or anyone else to get anything on you.
Scott, the problem I perceive with you, you want to get by with the type of things you've been writing to me the last couple day, you want me to be an invalid, you want me to be someone that can't defend themselves, you want me to not see your darts, you want me to not be sensitive, so you don't know what to do when I call you to the mat. That's why my responses to you look like below the belt terrorist stuff to you.
Now about the fishing thing. I'm not fishing for you. I don't want you on my hook. You misunderstand me again. If you want to snag your uncouth and unrefined words on my hook, than I'm going to yank the line and hold you accountable. That's what I meant. I'm not intentionally baiting you. I have no agendas. I've seen to many harrowing things to try and get by with things like that. I just keep my line baited is all.
Scott, my desire is quickly leaving me to get on any of your writings anymore, and you'll see I'm not just carelessly saying that. I know what I write and remember what I write. So if you can just suffer my writings here, there won't be any "Scott and I" thing anymore, because the "Scott and I" thing goes both ways. I didn't make it a "Scott and I" thing by myself, and you know it.
I want to leave this site, I really do, it wastes my time, it curses my life, it slips me up. So I'm working real hard to overcome my bad things concerning this site. When I leave, I don't want to write or read here again. Then you guys {right now I'm mainly speaking to you and Peter because I don't know of anyone else that is my enemy right now}, can get a Brent dictionary going with all my saying, mock my words, run the Holdemans into the ground, consume yourselves doing it, and I won't know nothing about it. Does that sound like a deal?
>>Hey, a couple Sundays ago a very close relative of mine married a very black man! No prob! Everythings cool.<<
Was this relative male or female?
>>Gay "marriage" is an oxymoron.<<
Oh, I guess that answers my question.
>>They can't no more be married than you and a cow get married in the eyes of God.<<
I'm sure that's a very, very convincing argument for Sirius, especially given that he self-identifies as an atheist.
>>Your political party refuses to confirm a nominee for the Supreme Court unless they support a woman's right to murder her innocent unborn child in cold blood! That is the litmus test you have come up with to determine whether someone is in their right mind!<<
Is Sirius a Democrat? I don't remember him ever saying which party, if any, he votes for. Also, I have never heard him discussing abortion rights. What makes you think he even had anything to do with setting up those conditions as the litmus test?
>>That reminds me of Lucifer!<<
Again, not the most convincing argument when you're debating with someone who doesn't believe in a spiritual realm in the first place. Just saying.
This message has been edited by StevenThiessen on Jul 14, 2008 8:07 PM
Lark: You're not the only one who thinks Hank gets the raw end of the deal many times. He is a mature person who measures his words carefully. I appreciate him.
Brent: Naw, don't leave unless you must for peace of mind. I appreciate your efforts. I believe you are truly the only one who can shake up the status quo and self-righteousness manifested here. Someday we are going to meet for coffee and we just may talk until the sun goes down!!! I think I had you in my sights about a year ago and I followed you for miles hoping you would slow down or turn in some place. Finally gave up.
I want to leave this site, I really do, it wastes my time, it curses my life, it slips me up. So I'm working real hard to overcome my bad things concerning this site. When I leave, I don't want to write or read here again.
This type of thinking cracks me up. It's a freakin' website people. Either read it or don't. What's there to "overcome"?
Forreal:
Lark: You're not the only one who thinks Hank gets the raw end of the deal many times. He is a mature person who measures his words carefully. I appreciate him.
I quite agree with you.
This message has been edited by twinspapa on Jul 14, 2008 8:50 PM
RM, I read some of your posts and feel a lot of contempt and anger towards Kevin. But then you end with a smiley face, and it is all very confusing.
The overused hypocrisy of the smiley face sometimes irritates me a little. With our background, we are taught to be kind and friendly and not show anger towards others. I think it's fine if we can learn to move beyond that polite hypocrisy, but then sometimes I think the smiley face is sort of an appeasement of guilt.
The smiley face can be useful if we want to communicate to the reader what we would normally do in non-written communication. I can be light-hearted or sarcastic, and make sure the reader understands I am joking. But a smiley face behind words that are intended to belittle someone else’s ideas or lifestyle makes one wonder where the punch line is to the joke.
<<<
Scott, you got 4 paragraphs from Brent, and I only get one sentence. Should I be jealous? rofl.
>>>
Peter, it is only the fantasy of an "ex-lovers" quarrel. If you got one sentence, it is probably more than you deserve. Brent really likes me and so I get special treatment, but no flowers this time(unless their bindweed blossoms), but he gets testy and protective when others (especially those of the big seven) like me too. It's ok Peter. Please accept my condolances. Unrequited love is a terrible thing, and he's deeply wounded.
(sarcasm alert)
I was just a sittin' here a thinkin'(which could be dangerous!), I think Sirius and RM need to call a conference and have Hank sit in as moderator and we could have Jesus there on a conference call(or Godtv?) and give some serious lessons on tolerance and unconditional love between you and for all people. I would be there as a witness and take down the minutes. I would also be there as an authority figure to keep the peace. Then afterward I could read the minutes and hopefully it would read as follows: Resolved, Sirius and RM are united in their decision to walk in brotherly love according to conference rule.(rather Jesus rule)
This message has been edited by GMman1 on Jul 14, 2008 9:43 PM
Man, Oh, Man GM, What are you thinkin? Don't you know that is what got most of us here in the first place, in this strange nether land of unacceptability and judgemented lives that we live?
Thinkin!!!!! you are definitely in serious danger, Stop immediately, go back and sit down and just let it all wash over your brain, and for heaven sakes, quit thinkin.
Gosh Brent, now Foreal thinks you are sane and speaking clearly. May this unexpected commendation dry your tears and fluff your sodden pillow. Oh, check your meds Foreal. I've heard some placebos have been stuffed in the bottle lately.
Anyway, I've got a little time so I will deal with your bullcrap.
<<<That's why my responses to you look like below the belt terrorist stuff to you.>>>
No sweetie, it is because you bring up "ALLEGED" personal stuff paraded like you know something instead of arguing the issue.
<<< I just keep my line baited is all. >>>
Then why do you bitch and moan when you get a seven hundred pound sturgeon on the line, and its stripping the gears our of your Donald Duck Zebco that came pre-strung with kinky twenty pound test in the clam-shell packaging with the Michael Jackson sing-along CD?
<<< Scott, my desire is quickly leaving me to get on any of your writings anymore>>>
May this desire increase, and may your resolve never waver. You know what they say about a double minded man?
<<< I want to leave this site, I really do, it wastes my time, it curses my life, it slips me up.>>>
For the purpose of brevity, see my advice above again!
<<< Does that sound like a deal?>>>
Brent, I won't deal with you. Most everyone on this forum (including me) is afraid to come against you, but I don't like bullies and terrorist, and sometimes I have a morbid curiosity to poke you a little bit with a stick just to see you go ape, it is sort of like pulling of a big scab, and then you are so sorry afterword, but anyway, no deal, if you write something really really stupid (now lets all don't hold our breath), well, it depends, I may, or I may not set you straight. Is that a deal?
This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 14, 2008 9:24 PM This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 14, 2008 9:22 PM This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 14, 2008 9:20 PM
Quote by Stan:
"RM, I read some of your posts and feel a lot of contempt and anger towards Kevin. But then you end with a smiley face, and it is all very confusing."
Stan: I was told not too long ago by a guy that works at Walmart that you could run anybody down as long as you cared to if you ended with "Bless their heart" Isn't the smiley face another way of saying "Bless their heart"? LOL
Scott: Nah, I didn't call Brent sane. I only understand about half of what he writes sometimes, but that's what I love, makes it look like he is WAY above the unsanctified heathen, walking around muttering and gesturing saying incomprehensible words! Bless his heart! I like him! Incidentally I would check my meds if I could find em, Bless my heart!
When it come to situations like you and Peter have just deteriorated into, I watch myself closer yet. So I'm not going to say much to what you've written tonight. They're the writings of a desperate man.
I'm not going to make a fool of myself over your foolish and pathetic post. But for what you wrote, the war goes on!!! And I can wait it out.
Brent
This message has been edited by BrentU on Jul 14, 2008 10:06 PM
Brent, you should stick around. I think most people enjoy your artistic and human/soulish writings. Its just that your "spiritual" stuff is far too obtuse for most.
when you all figure out a good use for those things let me know, must have about 15 tie downs and fabric to make dozens more. I am real creative, but I am drawing a blank right now.
I reread your childish post again this morning, and it's guilty of all the things you've been charging me with. You make it personal, your post goes "ape", the "Scott and I" thing bites you in the ass, your lover won't give you the time of day anymore, and you sh*t on my good desire to stay off your writings. In short, your post is a snot nose writing, and I won't honor it with my good desire or artistic abilities in any way shape or form.
Stan said <<RM, I read some of your posts and feel a lot of contempt and anger towards Kevin. But then you end with a smiley face, and it is all very confusing.>>
Stan, what irked me was Sirius claiming Jesus was a lib. I make no efforts to write in a PC manner and maybe some of my posts came across a little harsh (nothing as harsh as a lot of other posts in this thread), but I digress, so I put a smiley in to temper them a bit. Usually by the time I'm done writing my little bit I really can smile before I hit the send button.
Steve, I thought it a bit weird myself to use God and Satan in an argument with an atheist, but figured I may as well go with it since he was using the Bible to pick and choose which attributes he liked about Jesus. Now seriously, you didn't think Sirius voted conservative did you? Yeah, I was sort of shootin from the hip yesterday...it was one of those days!
>>when you all figure out a good use for those things let me know, must have about 15 tie downs and fabric to make dozens more. I am real creative, but I am drawing a blank right now<<
You could make a 15 patch quilt and use some frilly white ruffle around each square. It might be pretty contemporary looking by the time you're done! If you used it on your bed, you could be "covered" all night.
On second thought, you should probably not use the frilly white and just go with a plain black ribbon around each;after all, we are after the plain,simple look here for the outward...save the frilly stuff to sew on your undies or something..then it will be covered up...
Cupcake, I appreciate you offering us your used tie-downs. Is there a good vintage market for these things, such as pre-war models, pre-panel models, etc.? Now I would love to have a pre-war, or birth-year D-28 Martin guitar, but since I don't have a loose 15k laying around, I would settle for a 1959, or pre-tied-back tie-down if it was in good shape. I don't mind a little mojo, stained, or faded, but it can't be thread-bare.
P.S. I have an idea. Call Estee Lauder and see if she needs help designing a new line of under-wear, and I also think there may be a market in Chicago. I heard that some of those city boys used to walk the streets sucking on passifiers, so why not wearing head-coverings that have been sanctified, consecrated, purified?
This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 15, 2008 8:58 AM
>>when you all figure out a good use for those things let me know, must have about 15 tie downs and fabric to make dozens more.<<
Locklady, you and cupcake could employ your creative impulses and possibly put together a collage of religious Holdeman relics. Maybe some long sleeved, belted, floral print dresses, a few beanies(make’m small), black hose, the rare photo or two and , of course, some duaks. Probably a museum in the distant future will display it and humans living at that time will be able to enjoy and marvel at the childlike thinking of such a peculiar people.
What ever you do, Locklady, keep at least one duak in reserve for cupcake. I have a feeling that in her will, she’ll likely request to be buried with one.
>>I have a feeling that in her will, she’ll likely request to be buried with one.<<
That might not be such a bad idea! Considering how they seem to never decay,it would probably keep me warm longer than your Corona bottle you're taking along in your coffin..
...never decay....hmm....how about a market for eternal burial shrouds? They do seem to be highly resistant to radiation of all kinds, including new covenant radiation.
>>it would probably keep me warm longer than your Corona bottle you're taking along in your coffin..<<
Hey, if you end up, after the grave, where the Holdemans have taught you that you’ll end up if you don’t wear the duak, you’ll be envious of my ice cold 12 pack of Corona, baby. Even if there is a Satan, he’ll kick me out after I offer to share one with you. I would share with you, too.
Scott,your ideas, if put in use, may be the most effective way to change covering wearing yet! You know when something becomes highly esteemed among men then we are supposed to stay away from it. I say go for it!
You’ve got that right, cupcake! Hey, maybe Satan will give us a position working in the air conditioned front office. We’ll just say, “Satan, we really tried to make sense of it all while living but were unable to draw any solid conclusions."
He’ll say, “Yeah, God is such a prick. He made everything and said it was very good and look what happened to me. Welcome aboard." "And, Btw, enjoy the mini-bar.”
This message has been edited by Sirius65 on Jul 15, 2008 9:33 AM This message has been edited by Sirius65 on Jul 15, 2008 9:31 AM
>Locklady, you and cupcake could employ your creative impulses and possibly put together a collage of religious Holdeman relics. Maybe some long sleeved, belted, floral print dresses, a few beanies(make’m small), black hose, the rare photo or two and , of course, some duaks.<
....and a whole new industry is born. Oh, the awesomeness and greatness of the free enterprise system!
We made it!!!! 100 posts on... I don't get it...
This message has been edited by GMman1 on Jul 15, 2008 9:40 AM
"Brent, you have lost me. When you lost your ability to make me feel emotion, you really lost me. My receptors don't even pick up your signals anymore."
Get it straight Scott, I wasn't trying to make you feel emotional.
Every time you write to me, you trap yourself. The last couple days and then again this morning, you're picking me up from somewhere.
Your relationship to me has distinct overtones of the effeminate. In other words, you relate to me, not as a man, but in the way of a contentious menstruating jealous bitch with a love/hate attachment disorder. Do you want to take this further?
This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 15, 2008 12:45 PM This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 15, 2008 12:42 PM This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 15, 2008 12:37 PM
>>what irked me was Sirius claiming Jesus was a lib. I make no efforts to write in a PC manner<<
Come on, RM. I irked you? I was just trying to find nice things to say about Jesus.
I’m usually not a politically correct writer here either, but finding the good in Jesus seemed like the right thing to do.
Since, according to the Holdemans, you, cupcake(if she stays on the path that she's currently traveling) and I are all three going to end up in the same place anyway, if you’d like, I can request that you, also, be placed in the air conditioned front office.
Your relationship to me has distinct overtones of the effeminate. In other words, you relate to me, not as a man, but in the way of a contentious menstruating jealous bitch with a love/hate attachment disorder. Do you want to take this further?
Lol big time Scott!
H.mmmm. One of these days I will understand the relationship Brent holds on you!
Nope! Tain't worth the effort on this old brain! Carry-on i\even if I don't get it!
This message has been edited by bawar on Jul 15, 2008 4:33 PM
"Your relationship to me has distinct overtones of the effeminate. In other words, you relate to me, not as a man, but in the way of a contentious menstruating jealous bitch with a love/hate attachment disorder. Do you want to take this further?"
Scott,
I was gone last night, but I was amused with I read your last signal. Everything you write against me is your traps, your problems, your errors, your contention, and no less with the quote above. You keep bringing this up in your post lately, so it's your jealous you're fighting with. You seen it, it harasses you, and without even thinking it could be your thing, you push it off on me. So I guess I'm the one you have that problem with. It's your "Scott and I" deal, again, not mine, another thing you made a public deal of here.
Scott, this kind of thing you're a master at. For years you've tried to make your errors appear as mine, and you're just about clever enough to do. What I mean, it would fly with people if I wasn't able to defend myself against your hateful jealousy. All I'm doing out here is minding my own business, working hard everyday, not having any agendas that give me the run around and I have to go put fires out on, and holding my ground when I have to. That's what my days are about.
And Scott if you want to take it further.....if that wasn't just a bluffing challenge, I've got more to say, believe me. So when things turn bad, and there's your "stupid me" posts again, just remember I've only left my own things and come to the battle field from a day where I was working hard and just minding my own business.
Paris, I think what Scott is trying to do is end this insane madness but Brent can't let go. Scott has tried to separate himself from this by being extremely clear (and graphic). He has also complimented B on his artistic writings and encouraged to keep those up, and slow down on the machine gun approach to finding "error" in everybody and everything. However, Brent has to keep it going and going and will not let up. He has been known to do the same to me and others. (only his writings are spiritual etc)
(now of course I'll be shotgunned for saying anything)
"Paris, I think what Scott is trying to do is end this insane madness but Brent can't let go. Scott has tried to separate himself from this by being extremely clear (and graphic). He has also complimented B on his artistic writings and encouraged to keep those up, and slow down on the machine gun approach to finding "error" in everybody and everything. However, Brent has to keep it going and going and will not let up. He has been known to do the same to me and others. (only his writings are spiritual etc)
(now of course I'll be shotgunned for saying anything)"
Peter,
The error was never defined by me - the road is open and filled with liberty. The error you see is your own by your own reaction to my defending against false and lying accusation and gross misunderstandings. I don't go looking for trouble and starting wars, I don't have time for it. You guys can't believe you could be wrong and that it could be revealed in a way your not used to.
You guys are used to running over people, and when someone stands planted in the road, you freak out and can't believe the stotgun could be pointed at you.
One of my biggest problem here is I don't have the exholdeman spirit. If I had that spirit I could do and say and be whatever I wanted to {the proof is in the membership here}, and I'd be cool and received here.
You say, "I don't go looking for trouble and starting wars", and you also say "All I'm doing out here is minding my own business", and yet you have often said, that you are on this site for the purpose of exposing and manifesting religious hypocracy. So is this really "minding your own business"?
This message has been edited by oldmanrip on Jul 16, 2008 8:45 PM
"You say, "I don't go looking for trouble and starting wars", and you also say "All I'm doing out here is minding my own business", and yet you have often said, that you are on this site for the purpose of exposing and manifesting religious hypocrisy. So is this really "minding your own business"?"
Scott, you need to turn my signal off.
If you're "manifesting religious hypocrisy" in the Holdemans, why can't I manifest it in the exholdemans?
Besides I've never stated my purpose as the way you accuse me, it's not my ministry.
The error was never defined by me - the road is open and filled with liberty. The error you see is your own by your own reaction to my defending against false and lying accusation and gross misunderstandings. I don't go looking for trouble and starting wars, I don't have time for it. You guys can't believe you could be wrong and that it could be revealed in a way your not used to.
You guys are used to running over people, and when someone stands planted in the road, you freak out and can't believe the stotgun could be pointed at you.
One of my biggest problem here is I don't have the exholdeman spirit. If I had that spirit I could do and say and be whatever I wanted to {the proof is in the membership here}, and I'd be cool and received here.
You know, they say when you point a finger at someone there are three more pointing back at you.
And by the way, what is this about membership here? I didn't know this was an organization that had a membership roll. I always thought it was a public forum.
Now, seeing that you believe there is requirements for membership here, I guess you could also say that the forum is government over you. Well, that explains your need to "overcome" it. I find it more honest to be my own man and just participate freely in a public forum. But, I guess to each their own.
....and he swaggers over to the fence and leans his arms over the top rail and mutters to himsef, Geez, I always wanted to see a gun fight at the OK Corral....dem fellers are shot up bad, one feller got his preachin' finger shot off, and de udder guy has got his forum hat buzzed off..... well, I vunder who is going to be overcome first?? Hey ya'all, you need some hep?? No, the guy says, stay out of it! oh well....I is jus' tryin' to git in on the entertainment..
Well now, dat is one game I ain't so good at.. I don't know when to hold'em or when to fold'em, and I has got to have the chair with my back to the wall...jus like Jesse James did.
Yeah, dat never made no sense, killin' over a woman.
Tell ya what der fella, I is gonna hit the hay and keep mysef outta trouble fer tonight. Happy trails..
Yeah, same here, ol buddy. Sometimes when night gits long in the tooth I git a hankerin’ to take the conversation down the wrong trail. Hasta la vista.
Caution: This forum may contain statements and comments that are offensive. If you are easily offended, please exit this forum now.
By using this forum you agree to be accountable and liable for your post's. All postings are the responsibility of the posting participant. The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the management.
)thought I did until I started to reason scripture with the Mennonite Brethren. Friendships dissolved overnight. I now understand how it is possible to have so many reasons to not be part of them that it seems like you never give the same reason twice. I have found that it is in every church and every reason that I left the MB I have seen in our current church save one, yet. But he himself is pushing the book that tells the people to not be satisfied until he is gone! But you are looking in the wrong place for understanding. Look for peoples hurt. God's people indeed do perish for the lack of knowledge. Churches have much to say, but precious little of what they say is in the Word. 
