4 Receive HG in Bible Study!

[TroubleMaker]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

REALLY.....I don't think you honestly know what a "personal shot" is. If you thought I took a "personal shot" at you, then, IMO, you are wound WAY too tightly. Why does it have to be about you? Did you not read where I stated that I should have used more smilies? Interpreted, that means, it wasn't a personal shot. Dude, really, take a breath and relax! The world isn't against you and neither am I.

I didn't think you would back off.

The only one making it about me........is you! I'm discussing scriptural truths, yet you have, in a couple of instances, made remarks about me.

Ok, so if "personal shot" is language that is too strong for you, how about, "You made a personal remark"? Better? Accurate? You said, "You like to argue just to be argumentative". You now say, "You are wound WAY too tightly." I, along with anyone that has a registerable IQ, would see those as personal remarks about me, not as scriptural observations. So it appears to me that any statements made about me has been by you, not me. So the party guilty of making it "all about me", isn't me. It's you.

"For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself, for thou that judest doeth the same things." Hmmm.....

Anyway, I won't be surprised if you, again, derail the conversation and make further personal observations about me, but I can hope, right?



So allow me to summarize the events so far.

1) You seemingly discredit my statements by saying that I'm just wanting to argue.

2) I say that you took a personal "shot" at me but that I won't return in kind.

3) You observe that I don't understand what a "shot" is (maybe you could teach me) and then say that I'm wound too tightly and making it all about me.

Would that be an accurate assessment? Interesting strategy, I must confess. You make negative observations about me and when I say that I won't return in kind, you accuse me of making it all about me.

Very nice! You have completely derailed the conversation from what it was originally about! I've nearly forgotten myself!

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by TroubleMaker

I didn't think you would back off.

The only one making it about me........is you! I'm discussing scriptural truths, yet you have, in a couple of instances, made remarks about me.

Ok, so if "personal shot" is language that is too strong for you, how about, "You made a personal remark"? Better? Accurate? You said, "You like to argue just to be argumentative". You now say, "You are wound WAY too tightly." I, along with anyone that has a registerable IQ, would see those as personal remarks about me, not as scriptural observations. So it appears to me that any statements made about me has been by you, not me. So the party guilty of making it "all about me", isn't me. It's you.

"For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself, for thou that judest doeth the same things." Hmmm.....

Anyway, I won't be surprised if you, again, derail the conversation and make further personal observations about me, but I can hope, right?



So allow me to summarize the events so far.

1) You seemingly discredit my statements by saying that I'm just wanting to argue.

2) I say that you took a personal "shot" at me but that I won't return in kind.

3) You observe that I don't understand what a "shot" is (maybe you could teach me) and then say that I'm wound too tightly and making it all about me.

Would that be an accurate assessment? Interesting strategy, I must confess. You make negative observations about me and when I say that I won't return in kind, you accuse me of making it all about me.

Very nice! You have completely derailed the conversation from what it was originally about! I've nearly forgotten myself!

Umm....now I'm confused. You don't know what an olive branch is either. I said at least on one or two occasions that we were probably saying the same thing. I give up!


I'm going to jail where I belong! LOL At least the inmates understand me!

[TroubleMaker]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Umm....now I'm confused. You don't know what an olive branch is either. I said at least on one or two occasions that we were probably saying the same thing. I give up!


I'm going to jail where I belong! LOL At least the inmates understand me!

"You just like to argue", and "You're wound WAY too tightly" is an "Olive Branch"???

You're right, I don't know what it is!

Enjoy prison!! When you're paroled, maybe we can hook up again and talk about the wonders of simple faith in Christ and the infilling of the Holy Spirit when one simply believes!

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by TroubleMaker

"You just like to argue", and "You're wound WAY too tightly" is an "Olive Branch"???

You're right, I don't know what it is!

Enjoy prison!! When you're paroled, maybe we can hook up again and talk about the wonders of simple faith in Christ and the infilling of the Holy Spirit when one simply believes!

Actually, it's not worth it. You take things way too personal no matter how it is stated. I think you are a Troublemaker!

Pastor John's Undeniable Rule of Life #2
We will never outperform our own self-image. We WILL live what we believe we are.

[TroubleMaker]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Actually, it's not worth it. You take things way too personal no matter how it is stated. I think you are a Troublemaker!

Pastor John's Undeniable Rule of Life #2
We will never outperform our own self-image. We WILL live what we believe we are.

Wait, wait, wait, you're using third-person references and quoting yourself and you're saying that I have a problem with making it all about me???

But no smilie faces this time, eh John? (The following is a quote is of Doc Holliday from the movie "Tombstone") "Does this mean you're not my friend? Why Ed, if I thought you weren't my friend, I don't think I could bear it."

But you're still stuck on drawing a conclusion of me based on my screen name. Oh well. Book covers are enough for some folks, I suppose.

Anyway, here again, you are making personal remarks but I will continue to stay above the mud-slinging. Continue on if you like. However, I would wonder if your inability to discuss the issue would be because you think I'm a "Troublemaker" or that you're unable to exegetically substantiate your position. I suspect I know, but, oh well.

[ManOfWord]

Originally Posted by TroubleMaker

Wait, wait, wait, you're using third-person references and quoting yourself and you're saying that I have a problem with making it all about me???

But no smilie faces this time, eh John? (The following is a quote is of Doc Holliday from the movie "Tombstone") "Does this mean you're not my friend? Why Ed, if I thought you weren't my friend, I don't think I could bear it."

But you're still stuck on drawing a conclusion of me based on my screen name. Oh well. Book covers are enough for some folks, I suppose.

Anyway, here again, you are making personal remarks but I will continue to stay above the mud-slinging. Continue on if you like. However, I would wonder if your inability to discuss the issue would be because you think I'm a "Troublemaker" or that you're unable to exegetically substantiate your position. I suspect I know, but, oh well.

Like I said, You take things way too personal no matter how it is stated. It wouldn't matter how many smiley faces I used....you'd still think I was slinging mud.

K, it's just not worth it to me. I have nothing to defend. This thread was started because something good happened and I was sharing it. It still continues to happen and I will continue to share it when it does. You are not required to share in my joy or even agree with its nuances.

I don't even know what position you're expecting me to "exegetically" substantiate. We both agree that the heart is the most important thing.

Few people preach justification by faith as emphatically as I do. I will repeat that what you and I are saying are probably closer together than realized.

Please tell me how many smiley faces I need to use and just exactly what words would be acceptable to you for me to use as well. If you saw the expression on my face, you'd know that most of this was TIC anyway. At this point, I'm not even sure what smiley face to use so that you won't think I was being smart or something.

[TroubleMaker]

Originally Posted by ManOfWord

Like I said, You take things way too personal no matter how it is stated. It wouldn't matter how many smiley faces I used....you'd still think I was slinging mud.

K, it's just not worth it to me. I have nothing to defend. This thread was started because something good happened and I was sharing it. It still continues to happen and I will continue to share it when it does. You are not required to share in my joy or even agree with its nuances.

I don't even know what position you're expecting me to "exegetically" substantiate. We both agree that the heart is the most important thing.

Few people preach justification by faith as emphatically as I do. I will repeat that what you and I are saying are probably closer together than realized.

Please tell me how many smiley faces I need to use and just exactly what words would be acceptable to you for me to use as well. If you saw the expression on my face, you'd know that most of this was TIC anyway. At this point, I'm not even sure what smiley face to use so that you won't think I was being smart or something.

I noticed quotations around "exegetically." Grammatically, in that situation, one would do this, if they're using it correctly, to establish doubt about the status or usage of the word. So I'm wondering, what was the problem with my use of the word? I'm certain you understand what the use of exegesis is.

But regardless...yes, you were simply giving a report here on what happened in a bible study and I'm certain there's no negativity from anyone toward your report. If you'll take a moment and go look, you'll see that I spoke up not in response to anything you said, but to what "pieinthesky" said who appeared to be interested in starting a negative discussion about people speaking in tongues. In posts 14 & 16, you'll see that "pie" seemed to be casting doubt concerning your attenders actually having received the "holy g" (which, in my opinion, is a very disrespectful shortening of the term). So just in case you didn't appear soon, because I know you haven't been around much recently, I thought I'd jump in a defend you and your report.

Further on, however, I thought I'd have a discussion with you, because I believe it to be relevant, about exactly what is "required" to verify that one has received The Holy Spirit.

And yes, I suppose I was a little disappointed that you seemed to appear and oppose me a bit when in reality, I was only attempting, initially anyway, to defend you and what had taken place in your bible study.

I'm always interested in pursuing a discussion about tongues being the "evidence" of the Holy Spirit. I don't believe that it is "THE" evidence and I have doubts that it is an evidence at all as it is used in pentecostal circles. But we can skip it for now until maybe we cross paths down the road somewhere on another thread.

[TroubleMaker]

And may I just add, on another subject but since you brought it up, I believe that "Pastor John's Undeniable Rule of Life #2" is very deniable.

"We will never outperform our own self-image. We WILL live what we believe we are."


I could waste time with examples, but I have achieved a number of things in my life that were well above my self-image and expectations, some serious and some not so serious. For example, I'm a decent golfer, but I don't practice, don't really care, and certainly see myself as unable to achieve anything. But I recently broke par for 18 holes for the 6th time in my life. I can guarantee you that I was shocked all 6 times and didn't, at all, expect it. And if I ever start to expect it, it seems I inevitably shoot 85.

That's just golf, but I can apply that to life in many instances. And the opposite is true. There are other areas where I have failed and performed well below my self-image and ended up not being nearly what I thought I was. Maybe you could put these "laws" in a thread and facilitate discussion of them.

[rgcraig]

Great report, MOW!