December 03, 2022, 08:27:56 pm *
The board has been closed to new content. It is available as a searchable archive only. This information will remain available indefinitely.

I can be reached at

For a repository of informational articles and current information on The Assembly, see
   Home   Search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
Author Topic: Re: anonymous posters  (Read 35100 times)

« Reply #45 on: September 20, 2005, 08:30:55 pm »

Dave, IMO, you are being subtly controlled by Tom and that makes it "cultish."  He's good at objective reasoning and rationalization.  One can just as easily be deceived and controlled by objectivity as he can through subjectivity if they are objectively outside of the Truth that is in Christ.  Many learned scholars of the Bible have been very wrong/deceived and adamant about their views "crossing land and sea to make others their proselytes." Obviously, they are unaware of the lack of Truth and true spirituality.
It is really difficult to believe that so many learned scholars of the Bible can be so void of Truth (Christ).   

George taught people to fear being deceived, and to trust their intellects which is the breeding ground of deception.  I kept rubbing my eyes and thinking I was dilusional if I thought I could see something that the Bible scholars from seminary weren't seeing.  George criticized seminary education, but he was full of it.


Franko, you seem to be obsessed with "control" issues.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2005, 05:27:07 pm by moonflower » Logged
Joe Sperling

« Reply #46 on: September 20, 2005, 08:43:13 pm »

When I followed the discussion, it started to become clear how the assemblies began.  Tom and DaveS and AlH and, sorry to say this, but Joe's latest post, made it abundantly clear that those who are not open to criticism will end up becoming cult-like in their behaviour.


Nom mya Ho Ringa Kyo,  Nom mya Ho Ringa Kyo, Nom mya Ho Ringa Kyo. Oh, excuse me. I was chanting but thought I should reply to the above statement. I most definitely am not cultic in my behavior. Nom miya Ho Ringa Kyo, Nom mya Ho Ringa Kyo, Nom mya Ho Ringa Kyo. When I got up at 4:30 before chant time and saw Marcia's post I was horrified to think anyone would accuse me of being cultish. Later, when teacher began his discourse I thought I simply I had to respond to this outlandish claim. Even while out collecting donations the post continued to bother me.  So, I just have to say I am as normal as anyone, and feel very hurt that anyone would imply I am cult-like in my behavior. Nom miya Ho Ringa Kyo, Nom miya Ho ringa Kyo, Nom miya Ho, Ringa Kyo.

Thanks for listening.
al Hartman

« Reply #47 on: September 20, 2005, 10:36:05 pm »

          The Lord said He was not Good - that only His Father is Good.

Well, since I haven't yet said I won't converse with "Meeko," here goes:  The above statement is absolutely untrue.

Please tell where this claim of yours originated-- It has to either be found in the Bible (which you allege to be of questionable reliability) or you were present in person to hear the Lord say it (which I believe would be unreliable).


P.S.-- If it is Luke 18:19 to which you allude, you are drastically misunderstanding what Jesus said...
« Reply #48 on: September 21, 2005, 10:18:59 am »

Amazing. In another post a few of us were labeled as "cultic", now were labeled
as "Die-hard supporters of Tom" because of expressing an idea that was "similar"
to his. How has this board drifted to such an elitist attitude? That is far more cultic.

"Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing".

The above post is shameful and I really mean it. To take someone's great accomplishment, even if it is
40 years after the fact, and use it to infer that somehow it has made the person proud, is not only mean,
it is extremely insulting. Inferring Tom has problems "admitting error" or "admitting wrong" is inferring this
poster is "right" and Tom is wrong. What a bunch of hogwash. What does Tom have to apologize for? The person who made this post should apologize. To infer Tom is "weasling in" on the vast kingdom of the BB,
and that Brent did all the work and took all the blame, is an attempt to incite and to insult.

Tom can defend himself, but I want to say that I think that Tom getting a degree in theology when in
his sixties is not only admirable, but also puts great weight behind what he has to say. None of us is
perfect, and Tom has his failings, as we all do, but nothing warrants the mean, attempt at character
assasination offered above. I have seen the wolves at work before(they always like to come in and
pick one sheep to flambe' in front of everyone), and they always have the same M.O.--enter a discussion,
disagree, attack and become attacked as a result, become offended, incite others to side with them, then
demand an apology. Same time, same channel, same behavior.(I can hear the defense already: "I didn't
say "Tom", I said "not in reference to Tom directly", just a person "like" Tom, when clearly, the whole post
has nothing more of a purpose than to put Tom down).


P.S. Wolf is a strong word to use, and by it I am not inferring the person is not saved---just acting in a
wolf-like manner.

Hi Joe,

This is the post I was referring to when I mentioned the c word.  You accused frank(I think) of wolf-like behaviour because s/he had made a comment about Tom.  You defended Tom based on his great accomplishments and credentials, not on his stated opinion.

I agree with you and with brian that agreeing with someone does not necessarily indicate cult-like behaviour.


quote from the original post does not say that that it because you agree with Tom you are cult-like:
those who are not open to criticism will end up becoming cult-like in their behaviour.

« Last Edit: September 21, 2005, 05:16:52 pm by 2ram » Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!