AssemblyBoard
April 20, 2024, 05:45:43 am *
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 brian@tucker.name

For a repository of informational articles and current information on The Assembly, see http://www.geftakysassembly.com
 
   Home   Search  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Brandon's Article on GA.COM  (Read 18092 times)
editor
Guest
« Reply #15 on: January 27, 2005, 03:54:00 am »

Let me give a very specific example:
What is the proper response to a person who comes onto a forum like this and tries to make the case that George Geftakys is "The Lord's Servant?"
Are you telling me that someone with such a viewpoint should be engaged in serious discussion?
I think not.
SWTE offerings.
That is just the sort of person I hope comes here.

I would love the opportunity to reason with such a person, and help them with their confusion and deception.  Isn't that pretty much how all this got started in the first place?  (If a person can't be reasoned with, it is another matter.)

As to your charges against the eagles, again, let the reader be the judge.

Brent
Logged
vernecarty
Guest
« Reply #16 on: January 27, 2005, 04:02:55 am »

Let me give a very specific example:
What is the proper response to a person who comes onto a forum like this and tries to make the case that George Geftakys is "The Lord's Servant?"
Are you telling me that someone with such a viewpoint should be engaged in serious discussion?
I think not.
SWTE offerings.
That is just the sort of person I hope comes here.

I would love the opportunity to reason with such a person, and help them with their confusion and deception.  Isn't that pretty much how all this got started in the first place?  (If a person can't be reasoned with, it is another matter.)

As to your charges against the eagles, again, let the reader be the judge.

Brent

I see your point and agree to some extent.
In fact if you go back and look at the early interactions of the posters with these two, while it got lively, it was not initially at all hostile in my view.
It eventually became apparent that there was little interest in "reasoning together" but rather in a malicious campaign to disrupt. At some point one has to make a decision as to where to expend limited resources. It seems to me that we did make an attempt.
Verne
p.s as to the charges, I speak of only what I know.
In fact, when I find a person willing to deliberately lie about a circumstance, (Oh I know they will later plead ignorance), all bets are off...
She actually posted on her sorry site that I was removed from eldership because of false teaching...can you imagine??!! At that point I lost all respect for her...never had too much to start with...
« Last Edit: January 27, 2005, 08:42:17 am by VerneCarty » Logged
vernecarty
Guest
« Reply #17 on: January 27, 2005, 08:38:44 am »

To read or not to read SWTE?
That is the question!

Jane Doe Smiley



When it was first launched I woud occasionally take a peek.
I was astonshed at the outright plagiarism.
Attribution came only after it was pointed out.
Another example of the fundamental dishonesty of the place.
It is amusing to watch one person in particular tossing around the evident thoughts and reflections of others as if they were their own.
Why would anyone want to pollute their spirit?
Whatsoever things are pure...


Quote
P.S.  FYI - there is another article recently posted on GA.com

I really miss Scott's biting sarcasm...the legacy of the children is the clearest evidence of Moloch's wages...
Verne
« Last Edit: January 27, 2005, 09:03:19 am by VerneCarty » Logged
moonflower2
Guest


Email
« Reply #18 on: January 27, 2005, 10:39:28 am »

To read or not to read SWTE?
That is the question!

Jane Doe Smiley

P.S.  FYI - there is another article recently posted on GA.com

I will read, I think, if only to be entertained by the responses of the ones she has name-called.

If I remember correctly, Snoring with Smeagol referred to Verne as a "snake"? He responded by signing his name on each post with a different snake as his "middle name". It was quite funny and still makes me laugh, so carry on with the debates with the sleeping beagles. I could use the laughs.
Logged
al Hartman
Guest


Email
« Reply #19 on: January 27, 2005, 10:49:50 am »


Quote
Dave Sable said:

I know I will probably get slammed on this one, but I have mixed feelings about Brandon's article.


Bob Smith said:

Now that speaks volumes.

Why would someone on the AB fear getting "slammed" by simply having mixed feelings on an article? Dave is a regular contributor to the AB. Why is he afraid?

Dave knows the history of the AB and how people have been and are being treated. There is no such thing as independent thought. Questioning the goings on is prohibited. Challenging the validity of an article by a spoiled kid will get you, well, "slammed."

I have a question for Dave. If you are afraid to speak your mind why are you still contributing to that board? Is it the battered wife syndrome where you keep going back for more? The fear that if you leave it will be worse than if you stayed?

Break free, Dave. You don't need to take the abuse. Seek out a healthy group of believers that imitate the character of Christ. Many of us have. Its wonderful. Don't try to appease the AB leaders by compromising your values.


To those of you still in it, you too can be free. You can stand for righteousness and no longer tolerate the abusive conduct of the AB. The Lord will stand with you.

I will admit to having a sense of fear regarding certain posters on this board.  I think of their methods as bullyish-- not awfully different from the methods used on the SWTE board, which give me the same sense of fear.

I attribute my fearful feelings to my basic cowardliness, and to years of experience of being literally bullied during an emotionally abusive upbringing and during my tenure in an emotionally abusive assembly.

The reason I walked away from reading the SWTE board and have never looked back was not because of bullies or fears, but because I found the postings there to be without redeeming value, unedifying and unprofitable (as well as unprophetable).  Worse still, I found myself drawn toward participation in debates which held no promise of resolution.

The reason I remain active on this board also has nothing to do with my fearfulness or with bullies, but because I have been encouraged here and have been able sometimes to encourage others.  

My fears are not from God, but are a natural issue that I must deal with.  My conception of "bullies" among my brethren is an imagination that has to be cast down and brought into subjection to the obedience of Christ.  This board helps me confront that and many other personal problems.  

I have no hesitation in saying that our Lord has used this board to instruct me.  The criticisms I have received here have had corrective results for me.  As I credit God, not men, for the gains I have made here, I hold no one but myself accountable for my anxieties.

"Bob" may not realize it, but for those who are in Christ, He is always with us, wherever we are...

al


Logged
vernecarty
Guest
« Reply #20 on: January 27, 2005, 11:33:12 pm »


[  I think of their methods as bullyish--
al




My daughter Christina came up with this one.
(We keep asking her if she read it somewhre but she insists that it is original)

Question: What do you call a bad bull?

Answer  : A Bully!  Grin

When God wants to tame the savage beast, he gives restless men little daughters...I thank Him for mine!   Smiley  Smiley  Smiley
Verne
Logged
editor
Guest
« Reply #21 on: January 28, 2005, 02:37:07 am »

http://www.soaringwiththeeagles.com/yabbse/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=145;start=0

Before anyone goes off on this, let's give her a chance to explain it.

I read it as being strikingly akin to Mormon doctrine, both in the terminology and the logic.   Actually, akin isn't really the word...identical is more like it.

Let's see what she has to say in the way of clarification.

Brent
Logged
Joe Sperling
Guest


Email
« Reply #22 on: January 29, 2005, 02:03:24 am »

Oops. I clicked on the hyperlink without reading what it was about. I didn't realize SWTE was still there. I haven't visited there in a long, long time.

How 'bout those Patriots? I bet they take the Eagles by 10 points.

--Joe
Logged
vernecarty
Guest
« Reply #23 on: January 29, 2005, 02:06:19 am »

Oops. I clicked on the hyperlink without reading what it was about. I didn't realize SWTE was still there. I haven't visited there in a long, long time.

How 'bout those Patriots? I bet they take the Eagles by 10 points.

--Joe

Thirteen!  Grin
Verne
Logged
outdeep
Guest


Email
« Reply #24 on: January 29, 2005, 02:21:14 am »

Oops. I clicked on the hyperlink without reading what it was about. I didn't realize SWTE was still there. I haven't visited there in a long, long time.

How 'bout those Patriots? I bet they take the Eagles by 10 points.

--Joe
I may boycott the Superbowl.  The two teams I didn't want are there.  I guess I'll go for the Eagles since I am still sore at the Patriots for beating the Panthers and Kurt Warner's Rams.  I have to admit, that they are consistantly good, but I'm getting a little tired of them.
Logged
al Hartman
Guest


Email
« Reply #25 on: January 29, 2005, 02:28:21 am »




I may boycott the Superbowl.  The two teams I didn't want are there.  I guess I'll go for the Eagles since I am still sore at the Patriots for beating the Panthers and Kurt Warner's Rams.  I have to admit, that they are consistantly good, but I'm getting a little tired of them.

Dave, you can always just watch it to see the clever new commercials, the budget for each of which could feed a third-world country for a week.


Logged
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
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!