How does one get over the guilt?

It is a fact that throughout the second world war UK was led by a man that was drunk most of the time--this is a fact.

Germany, however, was led by a tee-totaller, and a vegetarian--another fact.

The truth was that the drunk was a more suitable leader!

evanman wrote:

The truth was that the drunk was a more suitable leader!

That wasn't the "truth", that was the outcome.

evanman wrote:

Germany, however, was led by a tee-totaller, and a vegetarian--another fact.

How does "a tee-totaller" (whatever that means) belong in a sentence supposing to be a fact? Hearsay, I say.

evanman wrote:

It is a fact that throughout the second world war UK was led by a man that was drunk most of the time--this is a fact.

No. That is anecdotal evidence or hearsay. Facts are not supposed to contain clauses like, "most of the time". What is your definition of "drunk" here? Churchill was accustomed to drinking more than you; so what?

I agree with the others, I think you are confused what "fact" and "truth" really mean.

Tee-totaller means someone who abstains from alcoholic beverages.

Hitler was a total abstainer.

Churchill was a notorious alcoholic, drinking bottles of cognac. he often turned up in parliament in a drunken state.

These are facts.

Churchill was the better of the two--TRUTH!

evanman wrote:

Churchill was the better of the two--TRUTH!

How so? In his leadership abilities? This is subjective, and not any kind of established "truth".

It is true that someone's ledership abilities are typically degraded while they are drunk. It is not true, however, that this determines their leadership abilities compared to x random person who doesn't drink. It seems you are trying to point out some frequently expected personal or moral superiority based on wether or not someone drinks a lot.

I do understand, however, the distinction you are trying to make (I think). While I disagree that you are using these terms correctly, this logomachy serves little purpose so I'll leave it at that and do not expect to continue in this regard.

That's fine by me---it was getting boring!!

Monger wrote:

It seems you are trying to point out some frequently expected personal or moral superiority based on wether or not someone drinks a lot.

This in my experience is usually a strong indication that the someone has in the past had a problem with alcohol and drinking and has recently overcome this problem. You'll notice this also happens frequently with religion. You might observe that most Christians were "dirty, stinkin' sinners" before they found Jesus (he was trapped in the closet). Christianity then becomes a sort of comfort blanket which, regardless of how horrible they might be to people, Jesus has their asses covered. Had they considered being good people from the beginning, they might have never needed religion.

I know I certainly don't need Jesus to forgive me for any of my sins because I haven't done anything bad enough yet (i.e: joining a cult, abusing children). All my wrong doings and transgressions have been forgiven and cleared by those wronged by me.

Whoa! Now who's being self-righteous??

This individual is not alcoholic--and to say you've never committed heinous sins (ie joining a cult) measns that you consider yourself to be a superior person!

Any how--who gives a toss what I think, or what you think?

Jesus will be our judge!

Monger wrote: "This comes across to me as rather patronizing. I do not perceive my comments in this discussion as having been "personally insulting", "venomous" or "belittling". Disagreement, vehement or otherwise, is not innappropriate on these forums."

Words are powerful tools. "Logomachy", couched in common courtesy, can be stimulating, instructive and enjoyable. Debate usually does pit one view against another, with its overall purpose to provide additional insight, or clarify the topic and offer one a broader spectrum of ideas and possibilities to consider.
My previous remarks were not intended to be an offense; I was respectfully and truthfully stating what some of my experience, and others, had been.

evanman wrote:

This individual is not alcoholic--and to say you've never committed heinous sins (ie joining a cult) measns that you consider yourself to be a superior person!

I'm not saying I never commited a "sin", I'm simply stating my sins are forgiven by those I've wronged so I don't need Jesus to forgive me or wash them clean. I am miles from being a superior person.

You have sinned by not loving the Lord God above all else!

Only Jesus can provide forgiveness for this!

That is ridiculous.

evanman wrote:

You have sinned by not loving the Lord God above all else!

Only Jesus can provide forgiveness for this!

Actually, Lord Krishna is offering to match all competitor prices on forgiveness. In fact, he's throwing in an additional discount by allowing you to love up to 5 things more than him.

And, if you call now, your forgiveness will be 100% guaranteed to last a lifetime.

(This offer is not available in Canada)

Razz

Quote:

1Co 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

Well, then. That's a completely logical explaination.

A good way to tell you've won an arguement is when your opponent has essentually resorted to name-calling. Yes, Evanman. I'm foolish and will unfortunately perish because I don't share your opinion and blindly follow a single book. If those are my options, I'll gladly embrace death's cold grasp. Give me freedom to think on my own, or give me death.

What I wrote was a quote from the Bible--not my opinion.

You haven't won anything, and what's more I am saddened that you so glibly reject the Lord Jesus Christ and His gift of Salvation, which cost Him everything.

You shall have what you want--freedom to think what you like, and death.

In fact We all get to die, so that's little consolation.

I pray that you may find peace with God before you die.

Quote:

(Isaiah 53:6)
We all went wandering like sheep; going every one of us after his desire; and the Lord put on him the punishment of us all.

Evanman,

I would kindly ask you stop any attempts to use this forum to "witness" to the rest of us. We are all very familiar with the Bible and many of us are, quite frankly, tired of hearing about it (especially if it comes across in a self-righteous way, which I am not accusing you of doing). This is not the place to engage in such activities. There are plenty of other forums where you are free to witness to whomever you please.

(Note: I am stating the above as one individual to another, not as a Moderator)

evanman wrote:

What I wrote was a quote from the Bible--not my opinion.

I know!!!! That's what I keep telling you! Get your own god dammed opinion. Put down the stupid book for a bit and consider reality!

Gosh. Nevermind. Believe in Jesus, talking snakes, Luke Skywalker, The Force, werewolves and bigfoot. Maybe Darwin will win this one.

Instruction
Thorwald, I am relatively new on this site and I am somewhat hesitant to post at times. I noticed here that there is a distinction made between what is acceptable communication in different forums. I may be missing something obvious, but could you perhaps give me some indication of what is considered appropriate and where? The forum titles themselves don't always seem to be sufficient evidence of the content and I am sure that has to do with those making the posts. For myself, I really like order and believe in respecting others, regardless of whether or not we agree on everything. I am so thankful for this site and want to give and take whatever would benefit others and myself, but certainly do not want to offend. Thank you.

Rolling Eyes

Guest,

Hello and welcome to our site. You are more than welcomed to post just about whatever you like. The general idea is simply what you stated: respect everyone else. You will generally find that most users do not like to be preached at. There is nothing wrong with discussing religion and your personal opinions. It is when it starts to sound like "preaching" and/or "witnessing" that many of us start to have a problem.

Just in case you do not know, most of our users are former members of The Family International. Many of us are also SGAs (second-generation adults). That means that we not only were born-and-raised in this group, we are also very familiar with all things relating to the Christian belief system and the Bible. We quite literally lived the Bible; we know it inside and out and can quote from memory many passages contained therein. It has been my experience that most of us SGAs know the Bible better than most Christians. Many of us, including myself, are no longer Christian (here a distinction should be made: we never decided to become Christians in the first place; we were forced to become as such from birth). Thus, we generally do not like it when others take it upon themselves to "enlighten" us about God, the Bible, or anything related to the Christian belief system. We know everything about it and have decided it is not for us. All we ask is that others respect our decision.

Again, we welcome all forms of discussion. I think you will find the majority of us are pretty easy going and accepting.

With best wishes,
Thorwald

Quote:

That means that we not only were born-and-raised in this group, we are also very familiar with all things relating to the Christian belief system and the Bible. We quite literally lived the Bible; we know it inside and out and can quote from memory many passages contained therein. It has been my experience that most of us SGAs know the Bible better than most Christians. Many of us, including myself, are no longer Christian (here a distinction should be made: we never decided to become Christians in the first place; we were forced to become as such from birth). Thus, we generally do not like it when others take it upon themselves to "enlighten" us about God, the Bible, or anything related to the Christian belief system. We know everything about it and have decided it is not for us.

This is the bottom line! Firstly the CoG/TF was not "Christian", the life-style- of CoG/TF is NOT "christian" by any stretch of the imagination. In CoG/TF we were never taught Biblical teaching--we were taught a mish-mash of the odd scripture mixed in with Berg's revelations and perversions! If a person has "never decided to become "Christian" in the first place, then it seems that by asserting that they are "no longer christian" there is a contradiction, or a confusion.

One person "preaches" atheism, or hedonism, new ageism, or any other "ism" this is acceptable--however declaring Christ is wrong. It is fine to mock and use foul language at people who assert the bible, yet let a "Bible thumper" have their say--ooo people get all offended!

As for your assertion that "There are plenty of other forums where you are free to witness to whomever you please. ", you'd think. Most, so-called, christian forums don't want the Bible to be declared either as it threatens their cosy little set up!

I respond quite forceably to anyone who mocks, i'm feel sure you will have noticed by now.

xFamily

How does one get over the guilt?

Quick Links

My Account

able2know