Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bob Pickle]

Bonnie is complaining over on 3ABNtalk about this thread, and claiming that I am devious and dishonest. What did I do wrong?

• Child of God suggested that I contact 3ABN to ask them about the prices on Danny's books.
  
• I simply responded that the judge had told me that I can't contact employees of 3ABN.
  
• Jack then came unglued, in my opinion, accusing Judge Saylor of issuing that oral order because I had harassed folks, and accusing me of whining, harping, and complaining simply because I responded to Child of God's suggestion.
  
• I then pointed out where Jack got it wrong, and asked him if he was man enough to apologize.
  
• What exactly Jack said next, I don't know, since he edited it after I replied. But I took his reply to be a refusal to apologize for something he had clearly gotten wrong, and something he certainly realizes that he got wrong.
  

Anyone who has trouble complying with the super simple requirement of 1 Jn. 1:9 needs to invite the Lord Jesus in their heart and life. That includes me.

Now if it is wrong to ask someone if they have considered accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, as Bonnie has suggested, then I am sorry for doing so. But somehow I think her criticisms should be leveled at Jack for making false accusations and then refusing to back down or apologize.

[Bob Pickle]

Okay, Okay, I admit it. I've got this hangup about 1 Jn. 1:9. I believe that every born again Christian will comply with that verse.

Am I wrong?

[Snoopy]

Bonnie is complaining?  Really?  Go figure.  Why doesn't that surprise me?  Just because Bonnie is complaining does not necessarily mean you did anything wrong, Bob.

Bonnie is complaining over on 3ABNtalk about this thread, and claiming that I am devious and dishonest. What did I do wrong?

[Gregory]

Now if it is wrong to ask someone if they have considered accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, as Bonnie has suggested, then I am sorry for doing so. But somehow I think her criticisms should be leveled at Jack for making false accusations and then refusing to back down or apologize.

Bob, when you asked Jack if he had considered accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior that question carried the clear implication that he needed to consider acceplting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

In my mind, the majority of spiritually astute people would understand your question as being grounded in your belief that he needed to consider accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior because he had not accepted him as such.  Perhaps some would not see it as such?

Of those who would see it as I have suggested many might ask:  "Who is Bob judge whether or not Jack has accepted Christ as Lord and Savior?"

By the way, I acknowledge that you have said:

Now if it is wrong to ask someone if they have considered accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, as Bonnie has suggested, then I am sorry for doing so.

 
However, that "if" followed by your statement that Bonie's comment should have been directed at Jack and not at you clearly suggests to me that you do not think that you did anything wrong and therefore, I conclude that you do not appear to be sorry for the question that you asked about Jack.

On a second aspect of this:  There is a time to ask an individual if they have accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.  In my experience, that time comes in a private conversation that occurs in a very personal spiritual encounter between two people.  I am not used to that question being asked in a very public manner.  As you asked your question in a very public manner I wonder if you had other objectives in mind, other than the salvation of Jack.

You may very well respond with a question to me as to why I am making these comments to you in a public manner?  Perhaps you will not?  I am publicly responding for a couple of reasons:  1) I have a prior experience of responding to you privately.  That did not go well.  2)  Due to my prior experience with you I am actually requesting the people reading this thread to consider how they relate to people in the area of spiritual concerns.
 

[Gregory]

Bob, you said:

Okay, Okay, I admit it. I've got this hangup about 1 Jn. 1:9. I believe that every born again Christian will comply with that verse.

Am I wrong?

Of course there is a Biblical teaching that people shoud confess their sins.

You come accross to me as placing yourself in the position that: 1) You decide whether or not someone has a sin to confess, and 2) you decide whether or not an individual has made a proper confession.

I will be the first to say that the above is probably not your personal position.  Perhaps I am the only person reading your many comments in this forum who thinks that you present yourself in the above manner.  But, on the possibility that others may see you in that manner, small though that possibility may be, you may want to consider:  1) How you may appear to others, and 2) what you want to do about it?  On the other hand, you may not want to consider such.  I do not know and I do not imply anything.

[Bob Pickle]

Bob, when you asked Jack if he had considered accepting Jesus as Lord and Savior that question carried the clear implication that he needed to consider acceplting Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Well, Gregory, do you think that if someone point blank tells you that they are not going to apologize for something that they clearly got wrong, that they clearly need to consider doing that? I do. Being willing to make amends is evidence that one has experienced the new birth.

By the way, I acknowledge that you have said:

Now if it is wrong to ask someone if they have considered accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior, as Bonnie has suggested, then I am sorry for doing so.

 
However, that "if" followed by your statement that Bonie's comment should have been directed at Jack and not at you clearly suggests to me that you do not think that you did anything wrong and therefore, I conclude that you do not appear to be sorry for the question that you asked about Jack.

To the contrary, I was pointing out what has happened over and over again during this saga. Which was worse? Asking Jack if he had considered accepting Jesus as his Lord and Savior? Or falsely accusing me of whining and harping, with no basis for doing so?

I have a prior experience of responding to you privately.  That did not go well.

When was that?

[Bob Pickle]

You come accross to me as placing yourself in the position that: 1) You decide whether or not someone has a sin to confess, and 2) you decide whether or not an individual has made a proper confession.

If someone thinks that Jack didn't falsely accuse me of whining and harping, I don't mind being corrected. As far as whether he made "a proper confession" or not, he flat out said he wasn't going to apologize.

[Bob Pickle]

Bonnie claims on 3ABNtalk that I put comments out there which lead people to think that something is true when it isn't. I've thought for some time that she has been doing that herself.

Accusing us of being devious and deceptive is a case in point.

[Bob Pickle]

Gregory, Bonnie, and anyone else who has an interest, read what Jack originally said:

What's your problem, Jack? Why did you come unglued like that?

Child of God was addressing me, and I was simply replying to his/her comment. No hint of whining there.

Judge Saylor said nothing about harassment.

Are you man enough to apologize?

Nope, I am not unglued, nor am It man enough to apologize or even see the need to. Are you really suggesting you don't have shills who you can employ to email or contact anyone you want to question???

After doing so all this time, and so many examples of that even on this forum?

Don't make me laugh..

Obviously, Jack realized that that was a stupid thing to say, so he edited it out. But he still said it, and my reply was directed toward his reply as it originally read, since I didn't know he had edited it.

Face the facts: Jack explicitly said that he as not man enough to apologize, and I thanked him for his honesty in that regard. The thought crossed my mind to say that he at least was man enough to admit it.

Now if someone publicly states that they are not man enough to apologize, and someone else reads that and doesn't know that they edited it out, you can see why someone in this world just might pop the question, "Have you considered accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior?"

[Gregory]

Bob, as experienced as you are in "pro se" work, I assume that you will recognize the follwoing:

"Res ipsa loquitar "

Gregory Matthews

[Fran]

Wikipedia says "Res ipsa loquitur is a legal term from the Latin meaning literally, "the thing itself speaks" but is more often translated "the thing speaks for itself."

Bob;

Keep the faith. Keep gathering facts.  I believe God is with you.  I do not believe you are perfect, because we are told "There is none perfect, no, not one."  Neither are the other attacking here.

Bob, thank you for never lying to me, but always being painfully honest.  None should judge the other except as we judge them by their fruits.

*******

Bob is struggling to defend himself.  He see what I cannot see. I will wait to let the evidence speaks for itself.

[Jack Indabocks]

Gregory, Bonnie, and anyone else who has an interest, read what Jack originally said:

What's your problem, Jack? Why did you come unglued like that?

Child of God was addressing me, and I was simply replying to his/her comment. No hint of whining there.

Judge Saylor said nothing about harassment.

Are you man enough to apologize?

Nope, I am not unglued, nor am It man enough to apologize or even see the need to. Are you really suggesting you don't have shills who you can employ to email or contact anyone you want to question???

After doing so all this time, and so many examples of that even on this forum?

Don't make me laugh..

Obviously, Jack realized that that was a stupid thing to say, so he edited it out. But he still said it, and my reply was directed toward his reply as it originally read, since I didn't know he had edited it.

Face the facts: Jack explicitly said that he as not man enough to apologize, and I thanked him for his honesty in that regard. The thought crossed my mind to say that he at least was man enough to admit it.

Now if someone publicly states that they are not man enough to apologize, and someone else reads that and doesn't know that they edited it out, you can see why someone in this world just might pop the question, "Have you considered accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior?"

 I think a very pertinent question here is wherever did you get that post? Is the Webmaster able to access posts while members are writing them?

In any case that doesn't look like what I wrote, nor is it what I recall, and the only editing I did after you replied was to correct typos. I was wrong. I should have just left them so you would have no excuses here. Then again you should actually quote who you are replying to, or talking about.


You can look to 3abnTalk for further replies.

Jax

[Wendall]

Hmmmmm    :wave:Credibility

[Bob Pickle]

I think a very pertinent question here is wherever did you get that post?

From my browser cache.

In any case that doesn't look like what I wrote, nor is it what I recall, and the only editing I did after you replied was to correct typos.

Short memory? Or are you prevaricating?

[Habanero]

Dont worry Bob, in this question and the many others, the principle of Res ipsa loquitur applies and relieves you of further need to explain. The Jack in the Box doesn't know what you know but it will speak for itself, and far more eloquently than you ever could.