|
|
Post by dennislwatson on Dec 19, 2017 8:16:42 GMT -6
Thank you Mark Olson.
A little lesson in Bible Study. Satan comes at Jesus at the Temptation. He quotes ONE VERSE suggesting that if Jesus were to be in danger His angels would protect Him. If that was true perhaps Jesus should test it. But Jesus comes back at Satan with another verse. You don't put God to the test.
This is typical of what Satan will do. He will attach a verse to you and you will think that is truth. You will do no other Bible study. You don't need to. You have one verse and you KNOW it is true. This is called "Satan's Hermenuetic". Satan's hermeneutic says, "No one knows the day or the hour." and people will believe this about the rapture before they even open a Bible. First what Satan does is not look at context to see this is not even an answer to a question about the rapture. Second what Satan does is suggest you do not even need to look at other verses because this one is so clear. However, with respect to issues about the timing of the rapture there are some problems with "Satan's Hermenuetic!" That is other verses that do not support the Satanic conclusion. There is Amos 3:7 which says that God will do nothing but that He shows His prophets first. There is Hebrews 10:25 that suggest we will "SEE" the day approaching. There is Revelation 3:3 which suggests we might have a clue about even the hour.
The method of Bible study that the Bible (God) suggests is precept upon precept, line upon line, a little here, a little there. Thus I find truth in Psalm 99, 100, and 101.
There are those who then will look at those entire Psalm or another portion of it, or look a different way, and find something else and then POINT IT OUT so as to make it seem like the finding of a little here or a little there is WORTHLESS. That would be an example of a "Satanic Hermeneutic"
Read this article by Mark Olson as he explains it further.
Satan. A word which the LXX and translators of the Masoretic Old Testament chose different methods. A translator has two different choices when dealing with a proper name or title. Transliteration or translation ... that is make the word sound the same, or literally translate the meaning of the title. The LXX more often than not used the latter method, thus translating for example Philistine (transliterated) as Allophyle (or “Other”) which is a translation. Similarly with Satan, the term “the slanderer” is used instead of the transliterated Satan. My thesis in the following is that there is a hermeneutic, all to common, which is best described as Satan’s (the slanderer’s) hermenuetic and that this in turn is to be set aside where and when ever one notices its use.
What then might be meant by Satan’s (or the slanderer’s) hermeneutic and what is the point of discussing such a thing? The term hermeneutic normally means how we extract meaning from text, but one might expand it to mean (as I do in this case) to mean how we extract meaning from any of a variety of forms of communication, i.e., including not just text but speech as well. Satan’s hermeneutic is then is when we (all too often) take the words of another, usually because of associations external to the topic at hand, and interpret them in the worst way we can find. We take the narrowest (or widest) or most literal (or most figurative) interpretation possible. Whatever way we can find to interpret their words in the most outrageous or most negative way possible is the meaning to which we attach their words.
This hermeneutic is often seen in discussions between parties arrive in a conversation with an implicit or explicit understanding that they have important or strong disagreements. Whether it is for lack of confidence in one’s one position, a debaters desire to “win points” in an argument and not a seeking just to understand the other’s position, or just a customary discussion style seen in the blogging and debating environments. And I have to say, this is a failing (sin?) of which I participate fully in just as do my interlocutors in discussion threads.
The primary problem, not just that this is a Satanic hermeneutic and should therefore be avoided on principle, is that in my experience it has the opposite effect from the one intended. Time after time in discussions with parties on both sides resorting to this method my observation is that the ultimate effect of this discussion is that one comes away convinced more than before the conversation began of the correctness and mistakes of your and the other points in discussion. The lesson here is obvious, ... don’t do it. Instead of hunting for the most unreasonable interpretation of the others words, seek to find the core of their point and address that.
Blessings Saints. Soon we rise and shine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Dec 19, 2017 8:46:02 GMT -6
The method of Bible study that the Bible (God) suggests is precept upon precept, line upon line, a little here, a little there. Thus I find truth in Psalm 99, 100, and 101. There are those who then will look at those entire Psalm or another portion of it, or look a different way, and find something else and then POINT IT OUT so as to make it seem like the finding of a little here or a little there is WORTHLESS. That would be an example of a "Satanic Hermeneutic"Read this article by Mark Olson as he explains it further. All yardstick wanted to know was what you were seeing in those Psalms because he wasn't seeing the same thing. Could you explain it to us? |
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on Dec 19, 2017 10:57:43 GMT -6
Dennis you said this (in re: to YS not seeing something in your Psalms)
This is borderline violating Rule #3. Have a little better tact here. What you are impling here is that YS is caught up in this form of hermeneutic, when all he was doing was seeking clarification of your Psalm teaching. It doesnt matter what Mark Olsen says, what matters is the conversation between Dennis and Yardstick in regards to the Psalms you brought forth. There is an accusatory tone in this comment of yours.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Dec 19, 2017 11:29:03 GMT -6
Dennis,
I want to ask a question here but first state that I don't want you to think I'm piling on or ganging up. Absolutely not the intent.
As I was reading along earlier and now seeing the posts by Natalie & BSG in relation to YS question I noticed something in your post about Satan's hermanuetic. You said "There is Amos 3:7 which says that God will do nothing but that He shows His prophets first".
My question for you is two fold.
1. I realize you believe Good showed you that 12/31 is our departure date. Do you believe you are a prophet? Or perhaps just given the word 'like' a prophet?
2. If yes to 1 and we are still in our earth suits on 1/1, does that make you a false prophet? Or did you fall for Satan's hermanuetic? Or did you just miss something interpreting?
These are honest questions. I am not looking to set you up, trap you or point a finger, so please understand where my questions come from. I don't think I could find anyone here that would say "I hope Dennis is wrong" but rather the opposite. I've said it a few pages back.
|
|
|
|
Post by dennislwatson on Dec 19, 2017 12:17:10 GMT -6
Dennis,
I want to ask a question here but first state that I don't want you to think I'm piling on or ganging up. Absolutely not the intent.
As I was reading along earlier and now seeing the posts by Natalie & BSG in relation to YS question I noticed something in your post about Satan's hermanuetic. You said "There is Amos 3:7 which says that God will do nothing but that He shows His prophets first".
My question for you is two fold.
1. I realize you believe Good showed you that 12/31 is our departure date. Do you believe you are a prophet? Or perhaps just given the word 'like' a prophet?
2. If yes to 1 and we are still in our earth suits on 1/1, does that make you a false prophet? Or did you fall for Satan's hermanuetic? Or did you just miss something interpreting?
These are honest questions. I am not looking to set you up, trap you or point a finger, so please understand where my questions come from. I don't think I could find anyone here that would say "I hope Dennis is wrong" but rather the opposite. I've said it a few pages back.
------------------------
Repeating again. I am not a prophet Mike. He has showed THE PROPHETS. Have you read my article yet brother? I talk about these prophets and how each has given us clues. I feel like when you come at me with a question like that you have had private conversations with other moderators and now you are all concerned. Am I correct?
I am not a prophet but there are those today that are prophesying truth young men and women God says. When I present my theory, I am talking about the following PROPHETS who have spoken and all of them I can't wait to meet in time: ENOCH, MOSES, ELIJAH, OBADIAH, JONAH, JESUS, PAUL, JOHN, and lately DAVID & KORATH. It is their words I use to come to my conclusion. I don't have to be a prophet to search out what God has told them. There is honor in searching out what God has told them. It is the honor of kings.
As a result I don't need to answer your second question. I am looking forward to the end of the year. Either way, I am out of the prophecy business...well maybe not because there is significant prophecy about what takes place in the millennium and we have not even scratched that yet.
And you know Mike, how I have a difficult relationship with Moderators.
To me a moderator, unless provoked in language unbefitting a Christian website: would not be an attackerator, or a thatsyouropinionator, or a youruntactfulpersonalitysuckserator, or a spreadallkindsofstuffonthewindowtomakeitunclearforeveryoneator"
I assume moderators know their Scripture. ys has been here a while. Look at how many posts. Look at how many threads he has started. I don't know this person. YS has had plenty of time to review my theory. I think he scoffs at it. Then on a peripheral confirmation he wants to show me that verses can be used differently. I am not sure if ys wants me to step in the beam and show him something of God's word, or if he just wants to be sure that when he scoffs, he will get me to nail down a verse that he can give other interpretations for. I am not interested in doing this for ys. He is not a new Christian, he is a big boy. I will do it later when I come to those Psalms in my other thread on the Psalms of Ascent.
I enjoy these Psalms because God is speaking to me in them. I am very cognizant of when studying the Psalms, to learn the lesson of Psalm 1 (which on my study on the other thread I have found to be an important Psalm for the same day as the SECOND GREAT RESURRECTION SIGN OF 9/23/2017). Psalm 1 tells me NOT to sit in the seat of scoffers. I did see what I saw in Psalm 99, 100 and 101. Within 10 minutes I had asked another believer, a new believer, but in the beam, to examine the same Psalms and he came back reporting exactly what I saw. Yet YS, with all his posts and threads...is blind? Something caused me not to want to answer him because I did not see the question as being from a truly interested party.
Blessings Saints. Soon we rise and shine.
By the way, let's find out where we are on 1/1 and then I will be able to answer your question about my being wrong. I really wish you and other moderators would look forward to the day for other reasons than being able finally to put me down. Happy birthday then ys! Hah! Satan's Hermeneutic uses ONE SCRIPTURE to come up with His hermeneutic and then he puts it above all others. I did not do that. I do not use just one Scripture. I use perhaps scores or more. I am now and at rapture will be quite proud of what My God has said in Scripture. He fulfills His word. And I will be ready to state that if I am wrong, I only used Scripture to get there AND that along the way God has continued to speak and encourage me and encourage others, and cause others to rethink how they study the Bible. That does not sound like the Satanic Hermeneutic being applied. At least not to me. It does cause a lot of problems for moderators. That should cause you all to think more about what you are doing.
|
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on Dec 19, 2017 12:44:56 GMT -6
As a reminder to all of forum rules:
Rule #3. Don't invalidate a fellow member's thoughts. It is ok to express a disagreement, but this shouldn't be done along the lines of "you're just wrong" or "if you believed the Bible than you would agree with me", etc.
Dennis, slow down a minute here. You are in the belief that YS is blind. If he is blind, you are not helping him see your point, but instead are now also calling him a scoffer.
As READER BARB, YS was asking for clarity not scoffing.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Dec 19, 2017 12:52:06 GMT -6
Dennis, the answer to your question is NO...I did not discuss the question I posed to you with anyone. It was mine alone. Now at this point calling yardstick a scoffer, as barbiosheepgirl says is a violation of rule 3. I am locking this thread for a few reasons 1. calling a respected member a scoffer - we allow him (YS) to address your accusation. At that time he decide to open the thread back up. 2. the thread is going off course at this point, and either needs to remain locked or get back on track before 1/1 |
|
|
|
Post by Natalie on Dec 19, 2017 16:50:07 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by yardstick on Dec 20, 2017 3:01:35 GMT -6
Dennis,
I want to ask a question here but first state that I don't want you to think I'm piling on or ganging up. Absolutely not the intent.
As I was reading along earlier and now seeing the posts by Natalie & BSG in relation to YS question I noticed something in your post about Satan's hermanuetic. You said "There is Amos 3:7 which says that God will do nothing but that He shows His prophets first".
My question for you is two fold.
1. I realize you believe Good showed you that 12/31 is our departure date. Do you believe you are a prophet? Or perhaps just given the word 'like' a prophet?
2. If yes to 1 and we are still in our earth suits on 1/1, does that make you a false prophet? Or did you fall for Satan's hermanuetic? Or did you just miss something interpreting?
These are honest questions. I am not looking to set you up, trap you or point a finger, so please understand where my questions come from. I don't think I could find anyone here that would say "I hope Dennis is wrong" but rather the opposite. I've said it a few pages back.
------------------------ Repeating again. I am not a prophet Mike. He has showed THE PROPHETS. Have you read my article yet brother? I talk about these prophets and how each has given us clues. I feel like when you come at me with a question like that you have had private conversations with other moderators and now you are all concerned. Am I correct?I am not a prophet but there are those today that are prophesying truth young men and women God says. When I present my theory, I am talking about the following PROPHETS who have spoken and all of them I can't wait to meet in time: ENOCH, MOSES, ELIJAH, OBADIAH, JONAH, JESUS, PAUL, JOHN, and lately DAVID & KORATH. It is their words I use to come to my conclusion. I don't have to be a prophet to search out what God has told them. There is honor in searching out what God has told them. It is the honor of kings.As a result I don't need to answer your second question. I am looking forward to the end of the year. Either way, I am out of the prophecy business...well maybe not because there is significant prophecy about what takes place in the millennium and we have not even scratched that yet.And you know Mike, how I have a difficult relationship with Moderators.To me a moderator, unless provoked in language unbefitting a Christian website: would not be an attackerator, or a thatsyouropinionator, or a youruntactfulpersonalitysuckserator, or a spreadallkindsofstuffonthewindowtomakeitunclearforeveryoneator" I assume moderators know their Scripture. ys has been here a while. Look at how many posts. Look at how many threads he has started. I don't know this person. YS has had plenty of time to review my theory. I think he scoffs at it. Then on a peripheral confirmation he wants to show me that verses can be used differently. I am not sure if ys wants me to step in the beam and show him something of God's word, or if he just wants to be sure that when he scoffs, he will get me to nail down a verse that he can give other interpretations for. I am not interested in doing this for ys. He is not a new Christian, he is a big boy. I will do it later when I come to those Psalms in my other thread on the Psalms of Ascent.I enjoy these Psalms because God is speaking to me in them. I am very cognizant of when studying the Psalms, to learn the lesson of Psalm 1 (which on my study on the other thread I have found to be an important Psalm for the same day as the SECOND GREAT RESURRECTION SIGN OF 9/23/2017). Psalm 1 tells me NOT to sit in the seat of scoffers. I did see what I saw in Psalm 99, 100 and 101. Within 10 minutes I had asked another believer, a new believer, but in the beam, to examine the same Psalms and he came back reporting exactly what I saw. Yet YS, with all his posts and threads...is blind? Something caused me not to want to answer him because I did not see the question as being from a truly interested party.Blessings Saints. Soon we rise and shine.By the way, let's find out where we are on 1/1 and then I will be able to answer your question about my being wrong. I really wish you and other moderators would look forward to the day for other reasons than being able finally to put me down. Happy birthday then ys! Hah! Satan's Hermeneutic uses ONE SCRIPTURE to come up with His hermeneutic and then he puts it above all others. I did not do that. I do not use just one Scripture. I use perhaps scores or more. I am now and at rapture will be quite proud of what My God has said in Scripture. He fulfills His word. And I will be ready to state that if I am wrong, I only used Scripture to get there AND that along the way God has continued to speak and encourage me and encourage others, and cause others to rethink how they study the Bible. That does not sound like the Satanic Hermeneutic being applied. At least not to me. It does cause a lot of problems for moderators. That should cause you all to think more about what you are doing. Have you ever been in math class, working on solving a problem and having trouble doing so? Have you ever turned to the student next to you, looked at what they were doing, noticed that they had solved the problem (or were further along in it than you were), and asked, "How did you do that?"; because you wanted to understand their thought process, and their method? My queries regarding Psalm 99 and 101 were to ask: "How did you do that?" One might read them as "How did you draw that conclusion?"; "What steps did you take in your hermeneutic method to arrive at such a conclusion?"; "Upon what basis is your conclusion derived?" I explained what I saw in the Psalm 99 and 101 passages, and inquired how you drew a different conclusion. I am unsure if your first post after my second question was intended to answer either of my questions. Was it? I am also unsure if your second post after my second question was intended to answer either of my questions. Was it? The third post by you, after my questions, appears to address something I've never heard of before, referred to as a 'Satan's Hermeneutic'. I am assuming at this point, that any statements in that post were not intended to accuse by implication. If I am misunderstanding that post, would you please clarify by distilling down the example to a plain statement? I would respectfully point out the hermeneutic I used; which is well established, and of which I am certain you have heard: The Golden Rule of Biblical InterpretationThe fourth post from you clearly addresses me, and so I have quoted it above, and will address the red italicized portions of it in detail. First, to ensure that everyone starts out with the same thorough understanding, I have provided some definitions: From reading the above definitions, I would offer two possible understandings of what appears to be an accusation towards me (assignment of my motivation) of scorn, with regard to Dennis' theory. Either: 1. the theory is worthless, lacking in significance, frivolous, trivial, useless, of so little consequence as to warrant little or no attention, unworthy, inferior; or 2. it is offensive, unpleasant, disagreeable, in poor taste, inappropriate, unethical To me, these items are mutually exclusive. To address the first: If it were so, I would not bother reading what has been posted, I would not bother inquiring for details, and I would not bother asking for explanation, because it would be a waste of my time to do so. To address the second: If it were so, I would not want to go near it, because it would put me off. I would avoid it at all costs, or I would rabidly attempt to put it down to get rid of it. Neither of these actions has occurred. What has occurred, is that I have asked for clarification, and comparison/contrast to my own findings. I (and I am certain others as well) would appreciate such clarification to be in small doses, in digestible form, and posted in the forum in direct response to a given question. Regarding the specifics of the above definitions: I would ask non-moderators (disinterested parties) to copy/paste a quote from me, directly responding to a post Dennis has made (as part of the relevant thread) that expresses open dislike, disrespect, indignation, the use of ridicule, or lack of reverence with regard to Dennis' theory [on December 31 being the harpazo/rapture date]; and notwithstanding that a submission to this board does not and should not automatically (by virtue of its content or who posted it) be liked, respected, found worthy, revered, or held in high esteem. I would also ask non-moderators to show me [scriptural passages] where I (or any other believer for that matter) am not supposed to compare things in light of what scripture plainly says; not supposed to verify the truth of teachings by comparing to scripture (i.e.: Psa 99, 101 in my question posts); and/or not supposed to use well-established methods of scriptural interpretation (as previously defined above). I would also ask non-moderators to evaluate whether the questions I have posted (i.e. Psa 99, 101) are an attempt to comply with the last statement. Lastly, regarding December 31 as the harpazo/rapture date; I have taken the position that it could be, but the evidence provided (namely scriptures with hermeneutical methods I am still attempting to fathom) is not yet sufficient for me to agree that it is. As such, you'll pardon me, I hope, for requesting a logical explanation that does not rely on a single passage of scripture (Leviticus) as its underlying fundamental baseline for drawing the conclusion about a specific date. I will go so far as to say that the Leviticus passage is likely a type or parallel, but further scriptural confirmation of said specific date is warranted, in my opinion. I am confident that you grasp the psychological effect (on believers who are 'weaker' than you are) of yet another date passing with no harpazo, when such a huge emphasis was placed upon said date, without (imho) sufficient foundation. Thanks for reading. I really do want to know how you came up with your theory, but 74 pages is overwhelming, and not something that can be consumed in the small amount of time you have been here (less than 30 days). BTW... I am also of the opinion that the information you have, which may be valid, is not intended for me, despite my interest, despite my salvation. It may be for someone else. Spoken in a language they understand, but I do not. That goes for a number of other posters on here. -end of Yardstick the poster reply, begin yardstick the moderator reply- Any issues you may have with moderators on this board are less likely to be with the content of your posts, and more likely to be with your presentation style. Content can be debated, questioned, and have hermeneutics applied. Presentation has everything to do with Rule 3. Thanks again for listening. I am unlocking the thread to allow for discussion of my response, for the time being. |
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Dec 20, 2017 8:15:18 GMT -6
Yardstick, your dealings with me have always been fair and reasonable. Likewise your dealings with Dennis are fair and reasonable. Dennis said "I am not sure if ys wants me to step in the beam and show him something of God's word, or if he just wants to be sure that when he scoffs, he will get me to nail down a verse that he can give other interpretations for. I am not interested in doing this for ys." Read more: unsealed.boards.net/post/new/1222#ixzz51oIFkbUzWhere is the humility in that statement? I often go down the back side of the mountain and then reevaluate and correct myself. Dennis, in all fairness should do the same. Yardstick has by right of following Lord Jesus, a question or questions pertaining to your postings. If you Dennis are unable to answer his questions then say that. However, it is not Christlike to make accusations of "scoffing" against him for his fair and reasonable questions. |
|
|
|
Post by dennislwatson on Dec 20, 2017 10:13:36 GMT -6
I am going through the Psalms at my pace. Right now I am in Psalm 88 counting up to 99, 100 and 101. I am preparing a revision in the article dealing with those Psalms. Also I am considering Psalm 123, the fourth Psalm of Ascent from Psalm 120. So, What is the question I am supposed to answer here? A question that I supposedly cannot answer? I see rapture suggestions in Ps 99, 100 and someone else does not? Fine! I suggested ALREADY there is a Mt. Zion in heaven, I think it is the throne, so that solves it for me on 100. We make it to the throne room. Someone says "I cannot see that!" Well...look again! Someone wants to look at 101 differently than me. Fine. I see saints in the tribulation perhaps dealing with evil on a daily basis. Someone else does not. Fine. People do not like my theory. They scoff (why is this word when I apply it to their non-acceptance of a theory of mine all the sudden like the worst swear word designation of all time? It is almost as bad as "DATE SETTER!" Run Saints. Run to the hills! A date setter approacheth!!!). There was scoffing at my theory. I am not saying that it is scoffing at God. and then... it all gets shut down. You guys...
Laughing because as I was studying Psalm 88 this morning, in fact Psalm 88:8 (11 being a number associated with chaos and destruction) I could not help identifying with the Psalmist and this commentator after getting shut down...
"Psalm 88:8
Thou hast put away mine acquaintance far from me; thou hast made me an abomination unto them: I am shut up, and I cannot come forth."
Thou hast put away mine acquaintance far from me - The same ground of complaint, or expression of the depth of affliction, occurs elsewhere, Psalm 31:11; Psalm 38:11; Psalm 69:8. See also Job 19:13-17.
Thou hast made me an abomination unto them - As something which they would avoid, or from which they would revolt and turn away - as we turn away from the body of a dead man, or from an offensive object. The word means properly an object to be detested or abominated, as things unclean, Genesis 43:32; or as idolatry, 1 Kings 14:24; 2 Kings 16:3; 2 Kings 23:13.
I am shut up - As in prison; to wit, by disease, as when one is confined to his house.
And I cannot come forth - I cannot leave my couch, my room, my house. Compare Job 12:14."
Why can't I apply that Psalm for me as encouragement right now? How many people would say "I don't see it!" and then I would have to argue it out. I'm not doing that for you anymore. I just think for now I have posted enough information. If you are interested seek it out. If not, go and enjoy whatever it is that allows you to honor God. Moderators have a difficult job. I know, it is hard. In "nuclear fission speak" a moderator is a substance, as graphite or heavy water, used to slow down high-energy neutrons. Hard work.
Blessings Saints. Soon we rise and shine.
|
|
|
|
Post by mike on Dec 20, 2017 10:54:20 GMT -6
Dennis,
Your use of the word scoff is out of context and Yardstick tried to point that out, in his very methodical way. Understand that we are all very different and all of us try to or need to try to see that none are perfect, none have a handle on everything and all are prone to errors. Audience is hard to 'catch' here in a written forum as when writing one message from a perspective it may seem abundantly clear to the writer, and perhaps several readers, yet others will only see pieces (some more some less) yet some will not see it. Does that make anyone wrong or a scoffer?
He tried to explain himself as he was asking very pointed questions again in his mind it made sense. Knowing YS a little I understand his approach. Not knowing you very well I do not understand your reaction to his questions or approach. Nor do I see how your response can read in any other way than defensive, accusatory and bit juvenile but you can disagree with that.
My intent here is to remind you that we are one body. Agreeing with each is not a prerequisite to being in the body, but having have love and respect is. I do not see that in your responses here.
|
|
|
|
Post by cwood85 on Dec 20, 2017 11:26:41 GMT -6
"To me a moderator, unless provoked in language unbefitting a Christian website: would not be an attackerator, or a thatsyouropinionator, or a youruntactfulpersonalitysuckserator, or a spreadallkindsofstuffonthewindowtomakeitunclearforeveryoneator"
^^^
Dennis I know you have put a lot of time into your research and findings and even more time posting them here, which you made the choice to do. It is hard when someone disagrees or picks apart your hard work. It hurts to. This coming from someone who has done fine art and photography for many years. There have certainly been times when I thought I made something so amazing or beautiful and then come to find out other may not think so. It can be heart wrenching. How we react to these disagreements or critiques is rather important. Being humble enough to look back and review the critiques and disagreements many time reveals things that where missed and rightly need to be corrected and redone. If it just comes down to a disagreement of opinion, than brush it off and keep going forward. This is coming from an inner city girl with a mouth and an attitude that is a mile high.
I get your your sense of humor. You are right up the alley of I like my sarcasm with a lot more sarcasm sprinkled on top. Not everyone gets that though. Everyone has a different personality and that needs to be respected.
Coming from a non moderator and someone who has had a recently developed a growing relationship with the Lord after not touching a bible for years prior. The above type quotes from you would halt any further reading from you on any site, not just unsealed but anywhere. Wanna know why? And I really try to give the benefit of the doubt, to a fault sometimes...
But the very first thing I thought when I started reading those types of post and comments from you was "wow this guy is an a**." <<< sorry I am really being truthful here moderators >>>
You have posted something's that have made me literally LOL and gotten funny looks from those around me. Take a few second breather before responding or just walk away and come back later if you feel yourself getting riled up.
EDIT: I want to clarify that I do not think anyone here is picking apart Dennis post, however I think that is possibly how it is being received.
|
|
|
|
Post by dennislwatson on Dec 20, 2017 11:55:51 GMT -6
Yes I am an ass. And I feel like asking what Baalam's ass asked. I saw something shiny in Scripture.
|
|
|
|
Post by sawdy on Dec 20, 2017 12:48:16 GMT -6
I saw something shiny in Scripture. I haven't had time to go and look at the other Psalms that you saw "something shiny in". I know from doing my study on the Psalms of Ascent, when I stopped to focus and puck them apart, I could really focus on applying the message to my life. It worked great when I was in a room full of fellow sojourners in Mesech but not when I interacted with the people outside of the study. The people outside of the study were sometimes also Christians but they didn't see the same shiny ✨ as me. I am glad you have come back for a take two. 🎬 It can be hard to interact with different personalities via text, I actually prefer to not communicate by text these dats as it is so hard to convey what I am thinking, tone, words so that someone else can understand exactly what I am getting at. Sometimes I write and put a lot of effort into something to receive comments completely unrelated to what I was trying to convey, or sometimes I will get feedback such as "it makes sense" with no more to help me to further my study. I am not resentful of anyone's comments about my posting. We are all just traveling the same journey. We make be taking other roads. Some may be straggling behind but will reach the destination in their own time. Some like the logical way of placing one foot in front of the other. Some prefer to skip on their journey. I am glad to continue our way though 120-134. Probably when I am done with those, I will check out the other Psalms you've been focusing on. In the meantime, I will go and do my Psalms 121 comment. I didn't feel right carrying on the thread without you so I didn't post yesterday. |
|
