Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohio
Listen Nell, it's really simple, you said in your last post, "the men who do the majority of the posting behave like a pack of attack dogs when someone presents a topic with which they disagree." Since I have the most posts here, I posted my disagreement. You called me an "attack dog." Shame on you!
You also made this all about men. If you have a problem with what OBW has written about Johnathan Cahn, then take it up with him. Cordially please.
How would you like it if I grouped "all you crazy women" together? How would you like it if I called "all you crazy women" a flock of vultures?
That's right. You don't like it. So stop doing it yourself.
Peace.
|
Ohio,
I am genuinely sorry if I offended you. It was not my intention to call you an attack dog. I didn't single you out. I wasn't aware that you had the most posts. That was also not my intention. I do apologize for that.
I made the observation about
behavior. I actually said "
behave like a pack..." There is a difference between a person's behavior and the "person." It is
behavior I was calling into question. I do apologize that I wasn't clear.
If I was behaving like a crazy woman, you could say to me "Nell! You're behaving like a crazy woman!" To say "you ARE a crazy woman," that wouldn't be good. I tried to be very careful not to do that.
To answer your specific question, I wouldn't like it if you grouped me in with a bunch of crazy women.
I don't have a problem with what OBW has written about Jonathan Cahn. I do have a problem what I believe to be a discrepancy between what OBW has posted to me in the form of flaming and straw-men arguments at me, then, faulting Cahn for not conforming to "teachings of Christ". Do you have any comments on this?
As for cordially, I believe that all of you gentlemen could communicate to those you disagree with with a little bit more cordially, as could I. Do you agree?
As I have also stated, it's extremely difficult to discuss a book or books with several parties who have in fact, not read the book. What's missing is context. I don't know how I could possibly provide the context someone would need to adequately and accurately understand what I'm trying to convey. Can you put yourself in my position? The objections to Cahn's work has been all over the place, making it even more difficult.
I will also say this, I don't feel obligated to respond to those who communicate with mockery toward me. Awareness has communicated with me with respect and I appreciate that. So I will reply to him. That is my liberty. I obviously don't communicate ONLY with Awareness. I'm communicating with you, aren't I?
Finally, it is the job of the speaker to communicate respect to the audience. Without respect, communication does not take place. I apologize if I conveyed any disrespect to you or others. That was not my intention.
It's worth noting that men and women communicate differently. Maybe all of us could remember that. I'll try if you will. Will that work for you?
Nell