Witnessing

[Cal]

Originally posted by Snow@Mar 13 2004, 12:50 PM

Cal,

Peace is right. I'm talking to her. I doubt that you were to offending by the swine reference. You did what I would have done - tried to make him feel guilty so as to gain the upper hand in the debate. I am not complaining about that or about your motives. I just think threatenng the kid with moderator discipline over the pearls and swine comment is unnecessary.

I had nothing to do, directly, with reporting him or threadening him with mod status. And you seem to miss the point. When you tell someone that they are the object of having "pearls cast before swine", who is supposed to be the swine?

There is nothing civil about that reference no matter how you try to sugar coat it. I'm surprised that a person as rational as you try to be would try to gloss that over.

NO, I'm not offended. I don't really get offended by anything in the ordinary emotional sense on this board. I just find it insulting and inappropriate to use that phrase with someone who disagrees with one's religious propositions.The phrase in question implies (if you think clearly about it) that one person's convictions are superior to someone elses. That may be true in one's own subjective mind, but objectively it has no meaning. All that is says is, "Here is a big put down because I can't think of any rational way to defend myself."

[Rodney]

Suggestion to PorterR: Try using "The Bull in the China Closet" metaphor next time. It has already been endorsed by an LDSTalk Forums authority.

[Guest bizabra]

Originally posted by porterrockwell@Mar 11 2004, 02:37 PM

The story is kind of vague in my mind, but there is family in the ward who has a son who has two kids. His first kid while still in the womb had a condition where there was water in her brain or something to that extent. Anyway, the doctors were pretty much sayin that the kid would be braindead or mentally retarded. But instead, the Father gave his wife a blessing and blessed her and the baby and the child was born wihtout any complication. If that aint a witness I don't know what is.

Coulda been as simple as a misdiagnosis. THAT makes a lot more sense to me.

Would it have mattered it the guy had not been a priesthood holder? Would god have "fixed" the baby if he ahd just been any old guy giving his wife a blessing to be healed? Isn't it the FAITH of the blesser and blessee that matters?

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by Rodney@Mar 14 2004, 10:33 AM

Suggestion to PorterR: Try using "The Bull in the China Closet" metaphor next time. It has already been endorsed by an LDSTalk Forums authority.

LOL....again please.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Cal@Mar 14 2004, 09:02 AM

I had nothing to do, directly, with reporting him or threadening him with mod status. There is nothing civil about that reference no matter how you try to sugar coat it.

And I never implied that you did. I was talking to Peace and telling (suggesting) that she ought'nt threaten people thusly as it had the tendency to stiffle discussion.

And you seem to miss the point. When you tell someone that they are the object of having "pearls cast before swine",  who is supposed to be the swine?

I didn't miss the point Cal, I just interpreted the point differently that you. To use your phrase: "I'm surprised that a person as rational as you try to be would try to gloss that over."

Maybe PR really meant that he thought that you were a PIG, read a slob, sub-human, a scumbag. That's one explanation. However, I think a more reasonable explanation is that PR, a not-humble, 20 year old kid using a Bible metaphor to describe that certain spiritual things were not appropriated to discuss with non-believers who he thought would ridicule them. I am not saying that his thinking was correct, but that's that I believe he was thinking, not that you were sub-human scum.

[Cal]

Originally posted by bizabra+Mar 14 2004, 10:56 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bizabra @ Mar 14 2004, 10:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--porterrockwell@Mar 11 2004, 02:37 PM

The story is kind of vague in my mind, but there is family in the ward who has a son who has two kids.  His first kid while still in the womb had a condition where there was water in her brain or something to that extent.  Anyway, the doctors were pretty much sayin that the kid would be braindead or mentally retarded.  But instead, the Father gave his wife a blessing and blessed her and the baby and the child was born wihtout any complication.  If that aint a witness I don't know what is.

Coulda been as simple as a misdiagnosis. THAT makes a lot more sense to me.

Would it have mattered it the guy had not been a priesthood holder? Would god have "fixed" the baby if he ahd just been any old guy giving his wife a blessing to be healed? Isn't it the FAITH of the blesser and blessee that matters?

biz--good thought. I think it is fine that people feel they have a special power, like the priesthood, but, as you say, let's not pretend that a just and loving God favors the prayers and blessings of priesthood holders over otherwise well meaning and faithful people. It just doesn't make any sense.

[Cal]

Originally posted by Snow+Mar 14 2004, 01:44 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Snow @ Mar 14 2004, 01:44 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Cal@Mar 14 2004, 09:02 AM

I had nothing to do, directly, with reporting him or threadening him with mod status. There is nothing civil about that reference no matter how you try to sugar coat it.

And I never implied that you did. I was talking to Peace and telling (suggesting) that she ought'nt threaten people thusly as it had the tendency to stiffle discussion.

And you seem to miss the point. When you tell someone that they are the object of having "pearls cast before swine",  who is supposed to be the swine?

I didn't miss the point Cal, I just interpreted the point differently that you. To use your phrase: "I'm surprised that a person as rational as you try to be would try to gloss that over."

Maybe PR really meant that he thought that you were a PIG, read a slob, sub-human, a scumbag. That's one explanation. However, I think a more reasonable explanation is that PR, a not-humble, 20 year old kid using a Bible metaphor to describe that certain spiritual things were not appropriated to discuss with non-believers who he thought would ridicule them. I am not saying that his thinking was correct, but that's that I believe he was thinking, not that you were sub-human scum.

I can accept that. :)

[porterrockwell]

What I meant by that, is that you and others will take the most spiritual endeavors of faith and priesthood and come up with some coincendental reasoning behind the situation. It was not to imply that you are in someway a PIG, or a swine. It is actual quite metaphorical and NOT intended as an insult.

[Cal]

Originally posted by porterrockwell@Mar 14 2004, 02:55 PM

What I meant by that, is that you and others will take the most spiritual endeavors of faith and priesthood and come up with some coincendental reasoning behind the situation. It was not to imply that you are in someway a PIG, or a swine. It is actual quite metaphorical and NOT intended as an insult.

Metaphorical? Yes, i agree. By the way, how do you know which scripture is metaphorical and what is not?

[Guest bizabra]

Originally posted by Peace+Mar 13 2004, 12:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Peace @ Mar 13 2004, 12:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by -Marsha@Mar 13 2004, 10:12 AM

<!--QuoteBegin--LaurelTree@Mar 12 2004, 11:20 AM

pig is a little out of line..you could say you dont agree.....

and I am on Mod status for LESS. Where is justice anyway?

This is an honest question. Please answer

It was a constant bashing of the moderators Marsha that got you put on Mod status. You didn't do it twice or three times...you did it constantly.

This confersation should be done on PMs...I am only allowing it this once....

OMIGOD! Can't have anyone questioning or criticizing the "authorities" now, can we?