You ask me to do these things behind closed doors where you can gaslight me. And I'm sure I'll have to listen to the pagan run his filthy, low IQ mouth at the same time, with no recourse to it as usual. Gee, thanks but no thanks.
And since you have no time for searching your own heart, I must ask you, in the Name of Jesus Christ, to relinquish the forum, that is in His Name, in which you have violated your own rules, bringing false witness against me.
Ingrid Bergman starred in the film Gaslight, where her character's husband constantly lies to her, blames her with things he secretly set up, and leads her to believe she is imagining changes in the gaslight (which are actually evidence of his deception). So it means lying thoroughly about something that should be verifiable in an attempt to make the other suspect their own reason.
I know you'll have more to say about that from your experience observing abusive people!
Actually, the word for ALL that is 'Crazy-MAKING...' where 1 person, plus (in my case 98++ others) say & do Abusive things, that they Blame on me & demand my "Apology-&-Repentance" for - when I had nothing to do with Any of it. And
making matters worse, because of my Naivete in wanting to live in a perfect world, I then aquiesce... to the wolves, which is just the excuse they're looking for, to keep the whole scheme going for (in my case) 63 years, YIKES!.
so Gaslighting is Illegal acting, that when Reported, other people think you're crazy? - If that's right, doesn't this Strengthen Andy's position in his case? -
You're behind closed doors now, the GAW mods agreed with u/CuomoisaMassMurderer and I, and deleted these two threads as off-topic for this forum. Only people who have the link can see it, such as those who visit your user profile.
I honestly thought you were a strong upholder of Matthew 18:15 ff.: "Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother." Have you obeyed this command, or do you think it doesn't apply?
I will take all the time I have to seek God (including within my heart) for the answers here. I count you as a brother and your use of the Lord's name is painful to me. If he told me that one or both of us should step down, I'd submit.
But if you're going to prosecute charges they need to be cognizable. You used "false witness". In context I found one comment from CIAMM that applies by containing the word "ridiculous". Would you like him to edit that? That could've been done privately as Jesus said rather than starting three attack threads.
This is a lie. I get shouted down over comments that are within all community guidelines, when I try to respond I get deleted. More important than even this, who made this guy the pope and the sole authority in all biblical matters?
So you're saying the statement "Andy misrepresented my statement as though I had stated that Andy is a ridiculous person" is a lie. Andy's deleted post read, "They can call your ideas or thoughts 'ridiculous'." So I'd need to defer to u/CuomoisaMassMurderer on that, because at first glance it looks like he misremembered it or meant something else. But, even if that's the case, at the same time you're charging a lie, which usually means an intentional distortion; so it's a wash yet again.
Assuming your charges are correctly stated, the resolution is to undelete the two comments and to establish protocols for you not getting deleted again in borderline cases. But I've already proposed resolutions and you're having a hard time interacting with that. I've been trying to tell people you used to be easy to get along with; maybe something's changed in your life that you're responding almost exclusively in complaints, without seeking resolution (as Jesus says). God will answer.
It's my understanding that CIAMM finds it very offensive to be called "pope" as a faithful EO member, especially because we've hardly even talked about evidence that we treated Catholicisim with imbalance. You might consider that in future. The admins, on behalf of the LLC, designated the 4 of us as authorities on determining the meaning of our rules and particularly the creeds that we adopted therein. On all other Biblical matters there's technically free rein for everyone. Now can we get past the rhetoric and start following the Scripture that you apparently invoked in the name of Jesus that you worship?
Attack = Telling the truth. When I put up a "public" post, I am opening myself up for comments against my position. I am not afraid of airing this out. Not at all. 24 upvotes, comments that agree with me, comments of people trying to tiptoe all around the subject matter. Perfect thing to discuss among the body of Christ, is it not? The harlot church wants to shut the lights off. Climb any mountain, cross any border to silence dissent, for real.
Andy, most people know the difference between facts backed up by logic and subjective opinion backed up by speculation. Just before you made the post, you called CIAMM "a person who abuses their power against even mild criticism of their own religion". While we both tried to reply, you made your escalatory post. In this comment, the charge of abuse of power was a subjective opinion based on a remembered experience that you did not specify in detail, i.e., without evidence. You then charged him with the "religion" of Catholicism (as I inferred from the past context), yet without specifying that, and in error of course. This is not "telling the truth".
I already answered the charges in your deleted post. Do subjective statements comparing us to Democrats and worse count as "telling the truth"? (In the first months of c/Christianity, you might've gotten deleted for mentioning Democrats; ask u/Perun.) No. But my answering your concern here isn't advancing the debate much better than my answer to your deleted post, despite your insistence upon airing and discussion. Are you asking us to move the venue to the forum you promised not to return to? What good do those 24 anons do you that you keep citing them?
I'm concerned that you may be evidencing the adrenaline theory more than I suspected. You used to work together with us, share the load, agree to disagree on eschatology, dish it out and take it, roll with all comers. Since the fallout, which apparently had something to do with CIAMM's immense appreciation for your first Irenaeus link, I haven't been able to parse the depth behind what you're saying.
In the name of Jesus, I command the spirit of confusion to depart from this conversation and from the presence of the three of us gathered in his name.
You ask me to do these things behind closed doors where you can gaslight me. And I'm sure I'll have to listen to the pagan run his filthy, low IQ mouth at the same time, with no recourse to it as usual. Gee, thanks but no thanks.
And since you have no time for searching your own heart, I must ask you, in the Name of Jesus Christ, to relinquish the forum, that is in His Name, in which you have violated your own rules, bringing false witness against me.
What is "gaslighting" ? Sounds DEADly to me. Sorry that I don't understand Internet language, like everyone else, apparently.
Ingrid Bergman starred in the film Gaslight, where her character's husband constantly lies to her, blames her with things he secretly set up, and leads her to believe she is imagining changes in the gaslight (which are actually evidence of his deception). So it means lying thoroughly about something that should be verifiable in an attempt to make the other suspect their own reason.
I know you'll have more to say about that from your experience observing abusive people!
Actually, the word for ALL that is 'Crazy-MAKING...' where 1 person, plus (in my case 98++ others) say & do Abusive things, that they Blame on me & demand my "Apology-&-Repentance" for - when I had nothing to do with Any of it. And
making matters worse, because of my Naivete in wanting to live in a perfect world, I then aquiesce... to the wolves, which is just the excuse they're looking for, to keep the whole scheme going for (in my case) 63 years, YIKES!.
so Gaslighting is Illegal acting, that when Reported, other people think you're crazy? - If that's right, doesn't this Strengthen Andy's position in his case? -
Nowadays, accusing someone else of gaslighting might itself be gaslighting. The answer is always sunshine, transparency, and justice.
You're behind closed doors now, the GAW mods agreed with u/CuomoisaMassMurderer and I, and deleted these two threads as off-topic for this forum. Only people who have the link can see it, such as those who visit your user profile.
I honestly thought you were a strong upholder of Matthew 18:15 ff.: "Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother." Have you obeyed this command, or do you think it doesn't apply?
I will take all the time I have to seek God (including within my heart) for the answers here. I count you as a brother and your use of the Lord's name is painful to me. If he told me that one or both of us should step down, I'd submit.
But if you're going to prosecute charges they need to be cognizable. You used "false witness". In context I found one comment from CIAMM that applies by containing the word "ridiculous". Would you like him to edit that? That could've been done privately as Jesus said rather than starting three attack threads.
This is a lie. I get shouted down over comments that are within all community guidelines, when I try to respond I get deleted. More important than even this, who made this guy the pope and the sole authority in all biblical matters?
So you're saying the statement "Andy misrepresented my statement as though I had stated that Andy is a ridiculous person" is a lie. Andy's deleted post read, "They can call your ideas or thoughts 'ridiculous'." So I'd need to defer to u/CuomoisaMassMurderer on that, because at first glance it looks like he misremembered it or meant something else. But, even if that's the case, at the same time you're charging a lie, which usually means an intentional distortion; so it's a wash yet again.
Assuming your charges are correctly stated, the resolution is to undelete the two comments and to establish protocols for you not getting deleted again in borderline cases. But I've already proposed resolutions and you're having a hard time interacting with that. I've been trying to tell people you used to be easy to get along with; maybe something's changed in your life that you're responding almost exclusively in complaints, without seeking resolution (as Jesus says). God will answer.
It's my understanding that CIAMM finds it very offensive to be called "pope" as a faithful EO member, especially because we've hardly even talked about evidence that we treated Catholicisim with imbalance. You might consider that in future. The admins, on behalf of the LLC, designated the 4 of us as authorities on determining the meaning of our rules and particularly the creeds that we adopted therein. On all other Biblical matters there's technically free rein for everyone. Now can we get past the rhetoric and start following the Scripture that you apparently invoked in the name of Jesus that you worship?
Wait - re "rather than starting three attack threads" - did Andy really start THREE ?
Yes, one attack thread on our forum (immediately deleted) and then two here.
Why? did you Delete his 1st. thread in "christianity"
Attack = Telling the truth. When I put up a "public" post, I am opening myself up for comments against my position. I am not afraid of airing this out. Not at all. 24 upvotes, comments that agree with me, comments of people trying to tiptoe all around the subject matter. Perfect thing to discuss among the body of Christ, is it not? The harlot church wants to shut the lights off. Climb any mountain, cross any border to silence dissent, for real.
Andy, most people know the difference between facts backed up by logic and subjective opinion backed up by speculation. Just before you made the post, you called CIAMM "a person who abuses their power against even mild criticism of their own religion". While we both tried to reply, you made your escalatory post. In this comment, the charge of abuse of power was a subjective opinion based on a remembered experience that you did not specify in detail, i.e., without evidence. You then charged him with the "religion" of Catholicism (as I inferred from the past context), yet without specifying that, and in error of course. This is not "telling the truth".
I already answered the charges in your deleted post. Do subjective statements comparing us to Democrats and worse count as "telling the truth"? (In the first months of c/Christianity, you might've gotten deleted for mentioning Democrats; ask u/Perun.) No. But my answering your concern here isn't advancing the debate much better than my answer to your deleted post, despite your insistence upon airing and discussion. Are you asking us to move the venue to the forum you promised not to return to? What good do those 24 anons do you that you keep citing them?
I'm concerned that you may be evidencing the adrenaline theory more than I suspected. You used to work together with us, share the load, agree to disagree on eschatology, dish it out and take it, roll with all comers. Since the fallout, which apparently had something to do with CIAMM's immense appreciation for your first Irenaeus link, I haven't been able to parse the depth behind what you're saying.
In the name of Jesus, I command the spirit of confusion to depart from this conversation and from the presence of the three of us gathered in his name.