So, Mr Allan, can you handle an interfaith dialogue without trying to convert or accuse or change anyone's mind about anything? It is not like anything that twi ever even considered or thought enough about to actually explore the possibilities of the benefit to a person rather then an organization or any kind of selfish motives. You say everyone has a hidden agenda. I don't think so. Some just can't see the agenda for various reasons. There is no purpose to it but to have an interfaith dialogue. What anyone makes of it is their business.
Do you have some curiosity? A little courage? Yes there is fear in people to not say what they believe. No one likes rejection of any kind. Hearts are tender and should be loved always.
Now you can come back with things I've said to throw off the point. But consider them an alarm clock to try to wake you up.
Have you reached your limit on Christ and who he is in you? Not that that will be discussed or not. I like to hear lots of views and beliefs. And I'm not afraid. Are you? Is God limited to what you believe?
I can but DON'T want to 'handle' interfaith dialogue..I've stated my points on 'intermingling faiths' before.
Have I reached my limit in Christ ? Awhile back..so now my only limitation is how much I can preach him...You know, that Jesus dude...the only begotten son of my God and your God...you know, that Jesus dude...King of kings and Lord of lords, you know that Jesus dude who according to Billy Ayles could be coming back sooner than you or I expect !!
You know, that Jesus dude...engaged in 'inter-faith dialogue'...You bet your last dollar he did !!
"I can but DON'T want to 'handle' interfaith dialogue..I've stated my points on 'intermingling faiths' before.
Have I reached my limit in Christ ? Awhile back..so now my only limitation is how much I can preach him..."
Such a shame you already know all lthere is to know about Christ. Myself, I was amazed at how much more I understood about Jesus and what he taught after I learned more about Judaism. But, being that you have no interest in an interfaith dialogue, I'm sure you wouldn't be interested.
And speaking of which- if you aren't intereseted in an interfaith dialogue, why post on a thread about interfaith dialogue at all?
"I can but DON'T want to 'handle' interfaith dialogue..I've stated my points on 'intermingling faiths' before.
Have I reached my limit in Christ ? Awhile back..so now my only limitation is how much I can preach him..."
Such a shame you already know all lthere is to know about Christ. Myself, I was amazed at how much more I understood about Jesus and what he taught after I learned more about Judaism. But, being that you have no interest in an interfaith dialogue, I'm sure you wouldn't be interested.
And speaking of which- if you aren't intereseted in an interfaith dialogue, why post on a thread about interfaith dialogue at all?
Or why even "witness" as Allan has repeatedly said that he does but has not done here.
Nothing but strong arm tactics rather then seeing the whole picture as opposed to actual mutual believing that is expressly displayed in inter faith dialog. But no it's one way for many and a narrow mind that cuts off the great wisdom and understanding that is whithin each and every one of us.
Spoiler cut for those that don't want their brains sullied with non Christian thought:
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
Now this is not a belief I figured out or authored myself--I read about it in books etc and thought about it alot.
One of the concepts I ran into early in exploration of pagan type beliefs is a pretty widely held belief in pagan/Wiccan circles, As Above, So Below --the natural world reflects the spiritual.
In the natural world a thriving meadow would be one with diverse plants, animals, insects, succeeding, reproducing etc. A sick meadow would be one where few things grow, overtaken by spotted knapweed or something. Many pagans, myself included, apply this concept to human spirituality. Human spiritually is healthy when there is a diversity of spiritual /religious thought and choices.
So, interfaith dialogue is always difficult when there are those that believe that only Their Way is acceptable, especially when evil is attributed to other's who have different beliefs.
Coming out of TWI, we are all familiar with this type of belief. One choice and only one choice seems right to one individual, while another person might see that as a belief that leads toward an unhealthy society with less diversity and choices for individuals.
So, interfaith dialogue is always difficult when there are those that believe that only Their Way is acceptable, especially when evil is attributed to other's who have different beliefs.
yeah, Bramble
all it takes is one voice against an open circle of dialogue
to effectively shut down that circle of dialogue
and not from mere disagreement with what is being discussed
(that is a large of part of the joy and benefit of it)
but from a voice that is against the open nature of the discussion itself
and/or personally against those having the discussion
this is when intelligent and loving discourse comes screeching to halt
and those who do want to continue the dialogue, must either leave and try it elsewhere
or somehow find a way to "stop the mouths of the naysayers"
or simply stop having the conversation
it really sucks if those who disrupt the open dialogue
do so because they think they are casting out evil spirits
because they will indeed most likeley shut down the dialogue (and easily)
which will only reinforce their beliefs that they have somehow done a good thing for God
of course, written online message board discourse present a few different elements to the mix,
where things like lingering disinformation and disintegrating social dynamics seem more problematic than the live verbal noise pollution
There will always be those people who HAVE to be right about things. Whether it's ego or whatever motivates them - I see it on the boards here a lot - man, they will take HOURS out of their lives to post extra long posts full of schmutz to make sure YOU know YOU'RE wrong and they're right.
Whoo-hoo.
What do they get out of it, I wonder? I mean really? Personally, I'm sick to death of them. I'm getting to the point where I HATE posting on the About The Way board anymore because of some of them. Almost ditto about the General board. They don't necessairly attack me - but it's just their attitudes. I wish I could dialogue with some of them face-to-face, you know. I'd love lean over to them and say, "Okay. You win. Go find your prize!" It's just sooooo important to them. But I digress...
In my opinion, to have this sort of dialogue you're talking about, you have to have people leave their egos at the door. They have to be people who are willing to say they're sorry quickly, or who show they have some open-mindedness. If they loose their heads quickly, then they'll miss out on what could be gained from looking at other persepctives. Personally, I would embrace such an opportunity, but I'm not your average x-wayfer.
Also, I think it would be helpful to gather some spiritual demographics on people, if you will, just so you know up front what people's main beliefs, etc. may be - like who's Wiccan, Christian, Roman Catholic, etc., and then perhaps if they're liberal, conservative, etc. I think if we knew who was in the forum, and what they brought to the table, it may make interfacing with them easier.
and yeah...i believe and have seen that there is a level of peer-to-peer dialogue that we can experience and exercise
and its not merely new, and its not merely old,
but a timeless wisdom that has showed up from time to time in one form or another in just about every culture in history
a natural, normal human capacity to fellowship on a level that is beyond like-mindedness based on mutual belief-systems,
because it is a like-mindedness that is based on a mutual intention to enlighten each other
and to be enlightened by each other
regardless of the shape of the vessel in which we hold our faith
but the simple fact is, that some people simply cannot and will not do it for a wide variety of reasons,
even to the point of trying to stop such a level dialogue from happening
it may be deemed morally wrong
it may be deemed weak for being so compromising
it may be that folks simply do not know you can do such a thing...or even how to do it
it may even present an actual threat to the powers of the system at large for the new synergy of information that begins to flow freely
but it requires that the participants are capable of making another certain leap of faith beyond the ones they have already made
it is the art (and risk) of a wide open heart and shameless transparency that invites us into an authentic and functioning shared interior space
oh, that more of the world knew how to do this again...
sigh
if anyone is interested
here is one resource-filled website for one of the most amazing movements, which i have been tracking for the past few years now
there are others, but this is one that is very effectively using peer-to-peer dialogue to all over the globe, in politics, religion, business, ecology, cultural issues, education, conflict resolution, etc...
um...I think that's the kind of post Chas was talking about. (and if not) I agree with people being more upfront with who they are and what they post here for.
What 'ticks' me off are those who 'slip in' and start 'beating their chests' when the reality is some of them were NEVER involved in twi.
um...I think that's the kind of post Chas was talking about. (and if not) I agree with people being more upfront with who they are and what they post here for.
What 'ticks' me off are those who 'slip in' and start 'beating their chests' when the reality is some of them were NEVER involved in twi.
And that is the problem here with you Allan. I have been and remain upfront with who I am and why I am here, yet you think different and that I'm either lieing or hideing something.
Mayde you are just blind and stupid, maybe not, I don't care. But I have made my beliefs known far more then you have or have ever seen.
And another thing, those who were not involved in twi are welcome here. Who are you to say that they are not. And you constantly accuse some here of not ever being in twi-whoopee - like ouch man that really hurts..haha. I would love to hear from people who were not involved in twi on a lot of these subjects.
Speaking of subjects, why don't you start one on twi and what they taught you, I am beginning to doubt that you were ever involved directly and probably just got a hold of the books. Or just from readiong threads at this site. Since you constantly accuse many of not ever being in twi, I think three fingers are pointing at you!
um...I think that's the kind of post Chas was talking about. (and if not) I agree with people being more upfront with who they are and what they post here for.
What 'ticks' me off are those who 'slip in' and start 'beating their chests' when the reality is some of them were NEVER involved in twi.
Agreed.
And further more, and this is something I personally experienced on a thread, I hate HATE HATE it when two people disagree and then others have to jump in on the thread, like kids on a playground yelling "FIGHT! FIGHT!" to take "sides" - then post nothing to add to the thread. I had a disagreement with someone, we sparred a little bit verbally, but nothing ugly - no insults or personal attacks - but it seemed like a couple of posters WANTED to see it turn ugly. It was a good thread until the "Jerry Springer Crowd" showed up. That crap really hurts me - it bugs me. There's no need for it!
As far as the demographics go, or the thing about people being more upfront about their agendas, I know that "labels" aren't really well tolerated on the board because of our past - the common thread we all have. We were labeled in the Way and taught to label others. Some of the labels were: Believer, Non-Believer, Way Corps, Corps Alumni, WOW Vet, Cop Out, etc. Personally, labels urk me still. But for an interfaith dialog to work, I think we'd really need to know who we're addressing upfront so that we can communicate on the various levels we'd need to be at to reach people.
For example, say three of the ten posters who agree to such a forum believe in Goddess worship. A thread poster knowing this information could start with referring to a diety as 'He or She' and instantly have the respect of the three who believed in a female God - they would not instantly feel left out. That's just one examply, mind you. You could apply the same thing with those who were trinitarian, or Jewish, or whatever... the list could go on. I think then that posters could be more sensitive and not feel like they were getting set up for a beat down when they posted in disagreement.
Again, just my thoughts. (They aren't as deep as SirGuessALot's, but I claim them, anyways.)
And that is the problem here with you Allan. I have been and remain upfront with who I am and why I am here, yet you think different and that I'm either lieing or hideing something.
Mayde you are just blind and stupid, maybe not, I don't care. But I have made my beliefs known far more then you have or have ever seen.
And another thing, those who were not involved in twi are welcome here. Who are you to say that they are not. And you constantly accuse some here of not ever being in twi-whoopee - like ouch man that really hurts..haha. I would love to hear from people who were not involved in twi on a lot of these subjects.
Speaking of subjects, why don't you start one on twi and what they taught you, I am beginning to doubt that you were ever involved directly and probably just got a hold of the books. Or just from readiong threads at this site. Since you constantly accuse many of not ever being in twi, I think three fingers are pointing at you!
Dancing - I don't wish to get in between you and Allen, as he's certainly responsible for his own words and actions, but I can attest that he was most certainly in TWI and served at a level that I couldn't have done - I mean that in a respectful sense. Yeah, he's a piece of work, but aren't we all? (And I mean that also in a respectful sense.)
Thank you ChasUFarley for confirming that Allan was indeed in twi. It really doesn't matter is the point that I'm trying to make. I count all people the same no matter what they have done in the past if they want to discuss a subject or even look deeper into my life. And I am more then willing to handle anything in a manner of respect from both sides.
To date I have been accused of many things that are simply untrue by Allan who has no knowledge of what he is accusing me of. He has also accused me and my friend and his wife of being in together with a plan to "recruit" followers into whatever he thinks Todd and his wife are doing. He has also accused me of being like Mike-our pfal Mike. And quite frankly that's a compliment compared to what Allan is doing.
And my apologies to Mike for bringing his name into this discussion. Mike has more guts then Allan has because despite all the comments sent his direction he has at least half the time responded in a calm although condescending manner. And has been willing to state what he believes instead of not stating what he believes on the subject and going to a direct attack and lies about the person he is talking to.
Allan has responded in straight out attacks against the character of myself and others who try to discuss and not attack as Allan continues to do, which is a weakness in his character and is hurtful to many who are having a decent conversation. People are discussing topics and he jumps in and accuses the posters of evil and being devilish or having a devil. And not only that Allan follows these posters to most every thread that throwing the subject of the thread in the ditch and changing the subject to personal attacks that have nothing to do with the subject.
And I am all for the threads changing and shifting topics and getting into other subjects on the same thread. That is not what is happening.
And I will tell you right now Allan you are wrong to change the subject of a thread to making it into an attack against anyone who posts when you have no evidence and no knowledge of the person you attack. Why don't you ASK the person if this is what you think or believe.
I have seen only two people who have flat out lied on this forum, And one of them is Allan. And his lies are worse then the other because it a lot more personal and not based on anything but his own hatred instead of facts or even misunderstandings.
Allan does not want to know what I believe and trys his best to stop me from speaking. And I confess that I would do the same IF I knew what I was talking about. And I have done this once and then let it go. I have not followed this poster around and harrassed him. ALLAN HAS AND IS STILL DOING IT. And doesn't even let the conversation go to where it can to get the point and points across and the many GREAT things that can be said by many.
ALLAN can contribute many great things as well if he would really talk instead of attack the GOOD People of this forum-all of them!!!!!!
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
8
12
14
12
Popular Days
May 24
15
May 21
13
May 22
9
May 23
7
Top Posters In This Topic
CM 8 posts
Bramble 12 posts
allan w. 14 posts
dancing 12 posts
Popular Days
May 24 2006
15 posts
May 21 2006
13 posts
May 22 2006
9 posts
May 23 2006
7 posts
allan w.
Your info lists you as pagan/wiccan...I reiterate what I just said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
http://www.awm.org.au/pages/believe.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mstar1
Uh ...wrong ...if you have even the most basic reading skills you'd see over and over that you have people thinking 'annoying'
Hello! Is anyone home?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Inter-faith dialog is not haranguing people of other faiths over their differences with your faith.
Kind of reminds me of Craig's direction to make "witnessing" a "confrontation of the world's error".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
So, Mr Allan, can you handle an interfaith dialogue without trying to convert or accuse or change anyone's mind about anything? It is not like anything that twi ever even considered or thought enough about to actually explore the possibilities of the benefit to a person rather then an organization or any kind of selfish motives. You say everyone has a hidden agenda. I don't think so. Some just can't see the agenda for various reasons. There is no purpose to it but to have an interfaith dialogue. What anyone makes of it is their business.
Do you have some curiosity? A little courage? Yes there is fear in people to not say what they believe. No one likes rejection of any kind. Hearts are tender and should be loved always.
Now you can come back with things I've said to throw off the point. But consider them an alarm clock to try to wake you up.
Have you reached your limit on Christ and who he is in you? Not that that will be discussed or not. I like to hear lots of views and beliefs. And I'm not afraid. Are you? Is God limited to what you believe?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
I can but DON'T want to 'handle' interfaith dialogue..I've stated my points on 'intermingling faiths' before.
Have I reached my limit in Christ ? Awhile back..so now my only limitation is how much I can preach him...You know, that Jesus dude...the only begotten son of my God and your God...you know, that Jesus dude...King of kings and Lord of lords, you know that Jesus dude who according to Billy Ayles could be coming back sooner than you or I expect !!
You know, that Jesus dude...engaged in 'inter-faith dialogue'...You bet your last dollar he did !!
Inter-faith dialogue.......................WWJD
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
What's that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
"I can but DON'T want to 'handle' interfaith dialogue..I've stated my points on 'intermingling faiths' before.
Have I reached my limit in Christ ? Awhile back..so now my only limitation is how much I can preach him..."
Such a shame you already know all lthere is to know about Christ. Myself, I was amazed at how much more I understood about Jesus and what he taught after I learned more about Judaism. But, being that you have no interest in an interfaith dialogue, I'm sure you wouldn't be interested.
And speaking of which- if you aren't intereseted in an interfaith dialogue, why post on a thread about interfaith dialogue at all?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
Or why even "witness" as Allan has repeatedly said that he does but has not done here.
Nothing but strong arm tactics rather then seeing the whole picture as opposed to actual mutual believing that is expressly displayed in inter faith dialog. But no it's one way for many and a narrow mind that cuts off the great wisdom and understanding that is whithin each and every one of us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
I've been thinking about this thread...
Spoiler cut for those that don't want their brains sullied with non Christian thought:
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
Now this is not a belief I figured out or authored myself--I read about it in books etc and thought about it alot.
One of the concepts I ran into early in exploration of pagan type beliefs is a pretty widely held belief in pagan/Wiccan circles, As Above, So Below --the natural world reflects the spiritual.
In the natural world a thriving meadow would be one with diverse plants, animals, insects, succeeding, reproducing etc. A sick meadow would be one where few things grow, overtaken by spotted knapweed or something. Many pagans, myself included, apply this concept to human spirituality. Human spiritually is healthy when there is a diversity of spiritual /religious thought and choices.
So, interfaith dialogue is always difficult when there are those that believe that only Their Way is acceptable, especially when evil is attributed to other's who have different beliefs.
Coming out of TWI, we are all familiar with this type of belief. One choice and only one choice seems right to one individual, while another person might see that as a belief that leads toward an unhealthy society with less diversity and choices for individuals.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
One doesn't have to be twi or ex-twi to worship the creator rather than the creation !!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Well put Bramble!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
yeah, Bramble
all it takes is one voice against an open circle of dialogue
to effectively shut down that circle of dialogue
and not from mere disagreement with what is being discussed
(that is a large of part of the joy and benefit of it)
but from a voice that is against the open nature of the discussion itself
and/or personally against those having the discussion
this is when intelligent and loving discourse comes screeching to halt
and those who do want to continue the dialogue, must either leave and try it elsewhere
or somehow find a way to "stop the mouths of the naysayers"
or simply stop having the conversation
it really sucks if those who disrupt the open dialogue
do so because they think they are casting out evil spirits
because they will indeed most likeley shut down the dialogue (and easily)
which will only reinforce their beliefs that they have somehow done a good thing for God
of course, written online message board discourse present a few different elements to the mix,
where things like lingering disinformation and disintegrating social dynamics seem more problematic than the live verbal noise pollution
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
I think it can still happen. But it would have to be outside of greasespot. Yahoo messenger is awesome.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
well, i still think it can still happen here
and gsc would be the perfect place for it
many people coming out of twi need to consider the topic
in fact, i bet many of them would be refreshed and renewed by reading about it
that is a large part of what this place is about, no?
i mean, what is a "good fight," anyway?
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
I hope you are right Todd, I really do.
I've seen it work well because of the good character of those involved.
Not that I've seen it done much, but I've seen it help all involved regardless of personal beliefs.
And I do think Jesus did this live.
The sermon on the mount for one.
It wasn't just him teaching but he went in with the people.
Setting the stage so to speak with that short little power packed sermon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
There will always be those people who HAVE to be right about things. Whether it's ego or whatever motivates them - I see it on the boards here a lot - man, they will take HOURS out of their lives to post extra long posts full of schmutz to make sure YOU know YOU'RE wrong and they're right.
Whoo-hoo.
What do they get out of it, I wonder? I mean really? Personally, I'm sick to death of them. I'm getting to the point where I HATE posting on the About The Way board anymore because of some of them. Almost ditto about the General board. They don't necessairly attack me - but it's just their attitudes. I wish I could dialogue with some of them face-to-face, you know. I'd love lean over to them and say, "Okay. You win. Go find your prize!" It's just sooooo important to them. But I digress...
In my opinion, to have this sort of dialogue you're talking about, you have to have people leave their egos at the door. They have to be people who are willing to say they're sorry quickly, or who show they have some open-mindedness. If they loose their heads quickly, then they'll miss out on what could be gained from looking at other persepctives. Personally, I would embrace such an opportunity, but I'm not your average x-wayfer.
Also, I think it would be helpful to gather some spiritual demographics on people, if you will, just so you know up front what people's main beliefs, etc. may be - like who's Wiccan, Christian, Roman Catholic, etc., and then perhaps if they're liberal, conservative, etc. I think if we knew who was in the forum, and what they brought to the table, it may make interfacing with them easier.
Just my thoughts.... for what it's worth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
thanks for the thoughtful response, chas
and yeah...i believe and have seen that there is a level of peer-to-peer dialogue that we can experience and exercise
and its not merely new, and its not merely old,
but a timeless wisdom that has showed up from time to time in one form or another in just about every culture in history
a natural, normal human capacity to fellowship on a level that is beyond like-mindedness based on mutual belief-systems,
because it is a like-mindedness that is based on a mutual intention to enlighten each other
and to be enlightened by each other
regardless of the shape of the vessel in which we hold our faith
but the simple fact is, that some people simply cannot and will not do it for a wide variety of reasons,
even to the point of trying to stop such a level dialogue from happening
it may be deemed morally wrong
it may be deemed weak for being so compromising
it may be that folks simply do not know you can do such a thing...or even how to do it
it may even present an actual threat to the powers of the system at large for the new synergy of information that begins to flow freely
but it requires that the participants are capable of making another certain leap of faith beyond the ones they have already made
it is the art (and risk) of a wide open heart and shameless transparency that invites us into an authentic and functioning shared interior space
oh, that more of the world knew how to do this again...
sigh
if anyone is interested
here is one resource-filled website for one of the most amazing movements, which i have been tracking for the past few years now
there are others, but this is one that is very effectively using peer-to-peer dialogue to all over the globe, in politics, religion, business, ecology, cultural issues, education, conflict resolution, etc...
Edited by sirguessalotLink to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
um...I think that's the kind of post Chas was talking about. (and if not) I agree with people being more upfront with who they are and what they post here for.
What 'ticks' me off are those who 'slip in' and start 'beating their chests' when the reality is some of them were NEVER involved in twi.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
And that is the problem here with you Allan. I have been and remain upfront with who I am and why I am here, yet you think different and that I'm either lieing or hideing something.
Mayde you are just blind and stupid, maybe not, I don't care. But I have made my beliefs known far more then you have or have ever seen.
And another thing, those who were not involved in twi are welcome here. Who are you to say that they are not. And you constantly accuse some here of not ever being in twi-whoopee - like ouch man that really hurts..haha. I would love to hear from people who were not involved in twi on a lot of these subjects.
Speaking of subjects, why don't you start one on twi and what they taught you, I am beginning to doubt that you were ever involved directly and probably just got a hold of the books. Or just from readiong threads at this site. Since you constantly accuse many of not ever being in twi, I think three fingers are pointing at you!
Edited by dancingLink to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
Agreed.
And further more, and this is something I personally experienced on a thread, I hate HATE HATE it when two people disagree and then others have to jump in on the thread, like kids on a playground yelling "FIGHT! FIGHT!" to take "sides" - then post nothing to add to the thread. I had a disagreement with someone, we sparred a little bit verbally, but nothing ugly - no insults or personal attacks - but it seemed like a couple of posters WANTED to see it turn ugly. It was a good thread until the "Jerry Springer Crowd" showed up. That crap really hurts me - it bugs me. There's no need for it!
As far as the demographics go, or the thing about people being more upfront about their agendas, I know that "labels" aren't really well tolerated on the board because of our past - the common thread we all have. We were labeled in the Way and taught to label others. Some of the labels were: Believer, Non-Believer, Way Corps, Corps Alumni, WOW Vet, Cop Out, etc. Personally, labels urk me still. But for an interfaith dialog to work, I think we'd really need to know who we're addressing upfront so that we can communicate on the various levels we'd need to be at to reach people.
For example, say three of the ten posters who agree to such a forum believe in Goddess worship. A thread poster knowing this information could start with referring to a diety as 'He or She' and instantly have the respect of the three who believed in a female God - they would not instantly feel left out. That's just one examply, mind you. You could apply the same thing with those who were trinitarian, or Jewish, or whatever... the list could go on. I think then that posters could be more sensitive and not feel like they were getting set up for a beat down when they posted in disagreement.
Again, just my thoughts. (They aren't as deep as SirGuessALot's, but I claim them, anyways.)
Dancing - I don't wish to get in between you and Allen, as he's certainly responsible for his own words and actions, but I can attest that he was most certainly in TWI and served at a level that I couldn't have done - I mean that in a respectful sense. Yeah, he's a piece of work, but aren't we all? (And I mean that also in a respectful sense.)
Peace.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
Thank you ChasUFarley for confirming that Allan was indeed in twi. It really doesn't matter is the point that I'm trying to make. I count all people the same no matter what they have done in the past if they want to discuss a subject or even look deeper into my life. And I am more then willing to handle anything in a manner of respect from both sides.
To date I have been accused of many things that are simply untrue by Allan who has no knowledge of what he is accusing me of. He has also accused me and my friend and his wife of being in together with a plan to "recruit" followers into whatever he thinks Todd and his wife are doing. He has also accused me of being like Mike-our pfal Mike. And quite frankly that's a compliment compared to what Allan is doing.
And my apologies to Mike for bringing his name into this discussion. Mike has more guts then Allan has because despite all the comments sent his direction he has at least half the time responded in a calm although condescending manner. And has been willing to state what he believes instead of not stating what he believes on the subject and going to a direct attack and lies about the person he is talking to.
Allan has responded in straight out attacks against the character of myself and others who try to discuss and not attack as Allan continues to do, which is a weakness in his character and is hurtful to many who are having a decent conversation. People are discussing topics and he jumps in and accuses the posters of evil and being devilish or having a devil. And not only that Allan follows these posters to most every thread that throwing the subject of the thread in the ditch and changing the subject to personal attacks that have nothing to do with the subject.
And I am all for the threads changing and shifting topics and getting into other subjects on the same thread. That is not what is happening.
And I will tell you right now Allan you are wrong to change the subject of a thread to making it into an attack against anyone who posts when you have no evidence and no knowledge of the person you attack. Why don't you ASK the person if this is what you think or believe.
I have seen only two people who have flat out lied on this forum, And one of them is Allan. And his lies are worse then the other because it a lot more personal and not based on anything but his own hatred instead of facts or even misunderstandings.
Allan does not want to know what I believe and trys his best to stop me from speaking. And I confess that I would do the same IF I knew what I was talking about. And I have done this once and then let it go. I have not followed this poster around and harrassed him. ALLAN HAS AND IS STILL DOING IT. And doesn't even let the conversation go to where it can to get the point and points across and the many GREAT things that can be said by many.
ALLAN can contribute many great things as well if he would really talk instead of attack the GOOD People of this forum-all of them!!!!!!
-----------
Clay
Edited by dancingLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bramble
Here's a link to an Interfaith dialogue on the large scale: http://www.cjnews.com/viewarticle.asp?id=9540
I thought it was interesting in light of this thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.