Sensitivity in the chatroom

[Percepi]

Leaving the room is always a good option, as it's not healthy to let things have a very negative emotional impact. You have to take the general flow of discourse for what it is in anonymous web forums, and, if it's not a personal attack, it's probably healthier to not participate in things generally, a mistake to be hanging in that venue, when simply the conversation is going to cause emotional upheaval. You have to anticipate all, in a more Wild West environment. Find another forum, or move on to doing something else, that restores you to a healthy centeredness.

It really depends on the individual and what their goals are. If you're comfortable where you are, or if you're not in the mood to deal with a certain situation, leaving is probably the most optimal option. The downside is that you may miss out on other conversations that are taking place in the room.

But there are reasons why one might want to stay in the room. Maybe they don't want to miss out on other conversations that are being had. Or maybe they want to use that room to discuss something else that's semi-related, in which case they can try to move the conversation along. Or maybe they just want to learn how to handle the stress, so they sit there quietly and focus on improving their resistance.

There are just so many variables and I think it's important to measure all the possibilities, their pros, and their cons.

 

[JFSurvivor]

Talking about sensitivity of other cc users: please don't say 'omg,' even if you mean 'oh my gosh.' Thank you.

I meant oh my gosh. I ALWAYS mean oh my gosh.

 

[Nautilus]

You can always just switch rooms if the topic isn't to your liking.

 

[JesusIsAll]

It really depends on the individual and what their goals are. If you're comfortable where you are, or if you're not in the mood to deal with a certain situation, leaving is probably the most optimal option. The downside is that you may miss out on other conversations that are taking place in the room.

But there are reasons why one might want to stay in the room. Maybe they don't want to miss out on other conversations that are being had. Or maybe they want to use that room to discuss something else that's semi-related, in which case they can try to move the conversation along. Or maybe they just want to learn how to handle the stress, so they sit there quietly and focus on improving their resistance.

There are just so many variables and I think it's important to measure all the possibilities, their pros, and their cons.

That's so. Most things have a greater context, and how can you know what it is in the other person's shoes? Myself, I'd not find any redeeming merit in the environment, worthwhile of the unhealthy, strong emotional effect it was having, but can't speak for anybody else. You know, I wouldn't agree with but a fraction of what you've expressed of your belief system(s), but I've always liked you, really think you're a gentleman in your ways.

 

[elf3]

yeah lets reprimand someone here for saying OMG. That makes perfect sense to me as we will argue constantly over works vs faith yet ignore the Person and Works of Christ and completely ignore what the Gospel of Christ is. "Oh I am so perfect that I dont even think OMG". What is going on in your head right now as you read this? I bet you are having perfect loving thoughts about me as you read this. No I am not perfect and if you think you are then I have some very bad news for you. OMC (Oh my cookies) are we so lost we need to prove to others our "holiness".

 

[dcontroversal]

Yes, Jesus was full of all three, always toward men.... It is not the lack of love respect or humility, in these cases, it was in the needed message at the time. Love never left anyone of those messages, otherwise the power of the message would not have born fruit. When you say at the end "Sometimes love respect and humility demand the truth being spoken, I read that as you have said it to mean...The love itself, in its nature of itself, the respect regardless of the meaning of the word itself, and humility, the very root meaning of that word are allowed to be opposed of its value for a moment while claiming to use it for a greater good. This is inconsistent theology. I do not agree.

God never let's you go to that end to conclude one truth of His over another one. Scripture speaks of this too. So, what I would describe as what you were highlighting would be "tough love", and yes, Gods timing has need for this approach with some people at certain times. As was demonstrated in the temple... But never to lose our foundation of Love to enter into it.

We see this many times with Jesus in the bible over the Hypocrites, He is God remember, and has a right to judge; He not us. But in His judgement He did not hate men but sins work in people that mocked the beauty of Gods grace found in the real victory of grace in men. This was a anger not of men, but of sin and Satan's ploys. We are to hate evil but never the men of which hold that evil even for a time until repentance. This is the Word of Gods calling.

Love and truth go hand in hand.....the motivating force behind ALL that we do should be LOVE as Paul preaches in the Corinthian letters.......Does God so LOVE the WORLD? Yes....Does God tell us the truth rgardless of how it falls? Yes.....Love demands the truth so...sorry if you disagree.....Like Mr. Brown sang that is (your) perogative...I added the (your)....!

 

[sltaylor]

The other day i was in the Bible Study chatroom and the topic was about athiests. My mother is one, and my father is agnostic. This being said, which i made clear in the room and how hard it is for me. But this made NO difference to the guy spouting about the doom athiests in general will have to face. I am well aware of this, as are most of us, even non-believers have heard of this, but it made no difference to this man. He kept having to make it clear how they are going to hell, etc. So, this issue is very painful for me since my entire family including distant relatives are all non-believers as far as i know. Even my immediate family (husband and daughter) are not saved as far I can tell.

All I am asking for is a little sensitivity especially on the issue of non-believers. Some people have family members who are and it is very painful see them on the wide road of destruction. My prayers seem futile sometimes...i've been praying for my parents since 1989 and they are farther off than ever. Also, the other subject which really gets to me and makes me want to cry in frustration is the "don't be yoked with an unbeliever" verse some feel the need to beat people over the head with. I get it. You need to warn the unmarried, but please don't pour on the guilt to people who are ALREADY in this marriage situation. It's really cruel and unfair to punish them this way.

Please try to be more sensitive to people with unbelieving spouses or family members! Please. You have NO idea how painful it is unless you have been there. It's all fine and dandy for you guys who have tons of family and friends who all love Jesus. That's wonderful for you all. Be thankful. But not everyone is blessed enough to be in this type of situation. Just have a little compassion, is all i ask. But since many don't, I usually just leave the room when this happens and hope the topic changes soon.

that's all! thanks.

Yes it is a sensitive issue, and only you know the pain. I'm sure everyone on here has family members in the same plight and the aching of your heart is surely felt.

Sometimes we just have to let God do what he does, and that's call us all out of the darkness, at the time he feels best.

This is a CC chatroom, everyone on here is here because I'm sure they feel passionate about what they believe and are just wanting to share what they know as the truth. When people are passionate, there in lies some of the problem on here. People feel so deeply about what they believe, and are so passionate about it, differences of interpretation are bound to arrise, and emotions will be deep with that.

My heart goes out to you. You just keep planting seeds, and let God make them grow. We were all blind at one time, just trust God will open their eyes, as he opened yours and all of ours...

 

[Percepi]

That's so. Most things have a greater context, and how can you know what it is in the other person's shoes? Myself, I'd not find any redeeming merit in the environment, worthwhile of the unhealthy, strong emotional effect it was having, but can't speak for anybody else. You know, I wouldn't agree with but a fraction of what you've expressed of your belief system(s), but I've always liked you, really think you're a gentleman in your ways.

Thank you!

 

[didymos]

I meant oh my gosh. I ALWAYS mean oh my gosh.

Cool, better type it in full next time though, we don't want people to think you type something else.

 

[JesusIsAll]

Thank you!

You're very welcome. Of course, I most fear for your soul, but an irony that's striking of you is that you would make such a good Christian apologist, steady and reasoned. A long time ago, I believe I said a couple things like "that's ridiculous," sincerely meaning this, I seem to remember involving intelligent design, and, though there was no intent to rattle, sometimes I have a bluntness unbecoming, hit the post button, think a little more, and, "Maybe I should have said that better." Expecting something angry as a result, it was almost unnatural how you avoided answering, with such human grace. (Matters like never explaining the heart and blood thing.) Would that all us Christians had that quality. Now there's irony, is it not?

 

[Percepi]

You're very welcome. Of course, I most fear for your soul, but an irony that's striking of you is that you would make such a good Christian apologist, steady and reasoned. A long time ago, I believe I said a couple things like "that's ridiculous," sincerely meaning this, I seem to remember involving intelligent design, and, though there was no intent to rattle, sometimes I have a bluntness unbecoming, hit the post button, think a little more, and, "Maybe I should have said that better." Expecting something angry as a result, it was almost unnatural how you avoided answering, with such human grace. (Matters like never explaining the heart and blood thing.) Would that all us Christians had that quality. Now there's irony, is it not?

It's easy to lose one's composure during a debate. Believe it or not, I fumble from time to time as well. It just takes practice, self-reflection, and a willingness to change. Even if I can't convince others of my views in the midst of debate, I can at least obtain a better understanding of my opponent's position. Not only can I learn what their views are, but why they may hold those views (in the least presumptuous manner as possible).

I'm not sure what you were referencing when you said "heard and blood thing".

 

[JesusIsAll]

It's easy to lose one's composure during a debate. Believe it or not, I fumble from time to time as well. It just takes practice, self-reflection, and a willingness to change. Even if I can't convince others of my views in the midst of debate, I can at least obtain a better understanding of my opponent's position. Not only can I learn what their views are, but why they may hold those views (in the least presumptuous manner as possible).

I'm not sure what you were referencing when you said "heard and blood thing".

That reference was a little off the cuff, going to how I probably said something like, "'Splain this, then, Einstein!", that sort of thing, just can't help facets of a diseased mind that yield rancor and being called a moron. (And I resemble that remark... it's really a matter of a device that yields literary precision, for people who can connect the dots...) I don't remember if the comment was made to you, directly, but you were there, my response thinking of a post of yours, I asked you guys to explain this,

Which evolved first, the heart or the blood? If the heart did, and there was no blood, why was a heart necessary? If the blood did, where would it go and what would it do?

Nobody came back with anything, but for this one person who made some lala land statement of little iron cells in the primordial slime or something. It was just a smokescreen, one of those junk science fantasties you can't dignify as theory, which he thought that, if he made it sound real technical, it would play in Peoria. I recall wishing you'd answer, but dropped it, content my primitive notions of an intelligent Creator far from ruffled. It was probably for the better, as it could have gotten more vicious, like the thousands of systems' aspects required, simultaneously, for the most primitive organism to live, much less reproduce, how something appeared from nothing and exploded, for no reason, an explosion that resulted in order, all this reverse entropy, whut?! I was loaded for bear, and it seemed like fun, at the time, being the God's advocate.

 

[Percepi]

That reference was a little off the cuff, going to how I probably said something like, "'Splain this, then, Einstein!", that sort of thing, just can't help facets of a diseased mind that yield rancor and being called a moron. (And I resemble that remark... it's really a matter of a device that yields literary precision, for people who can connect the dots...) I don't remember if the comment was made to you, directly, but you were there, my response thinking of a post of yours, I asked you guys to explain this,

Which evolved first, the heart or the blood? If the heart did, and there was no blood, why was a heart necessary? If the blood did, where would it go and what would it do?

Nobody came back with anything, but for this one person who made some lala land statement of little iron cells in the primordial slime or something. It was just a smokescreen, one of those junk science fantasties you can't dignify as theory, which he thought that, if he made it sound real technical, it would play in Peoria. I recall wishing you'd answer, but dropped it, content my primitive notions of an intelligent Creator far from ruffled. It was probably for the better, as it could have gotten more vicious, like the thousands of systems' aspects required, simultaneously, for the most primitive organism to live, much less reproduce, how something appeared from nothing and exploded, for no reason, an explosion that resulted in order, all this reverse entropy, whut?! I was loaded for bear, and it seemed like fun, at the time, being the God's advocate.

Oh, I see. I don't recall this comment so it's likely I simply didn't see it or I was more focused on other arguments at the time.

Regardless, I feel this has been quite a productive conversation.

 

[Marian29]

I apologize for the super-complainy rant, but the rules say I can't erase after 5 min. So there it is forever on CC for all to view. Hopefully this post will get kicked to the wayside. I know better than to let feelings get the best of me...

I was just in a particularly extra-senstive mood.

Don't feel guilty. There are other Threads in Bible Discussion forum, that are much less relevant than the theme about respect you're highlighting.
It is really important to respect each others, even when someone is drastically against our beliefs. It really can be very hurtful to see very close relatives to us, blind about the spiritual world. I do have some too, and I keep praying about them, even if their changing will be in the last minute before the coming of Christ. God is eternal, is always good to remember His way to count time is different of ours. Praise the Lord.

David learned to live in the time of the Most High.

"For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.
For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
Now the just shall live by faith: but if {any man} draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.
But we are not of them who draw back unto perdition; but of them that believe to the saving of the soul."


Hebrews 10:36-39