Izzy in blue: From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hughes Jonathan Izzy,
I
have not been involved in name calling. Please identify where I
have. Jonathan I am not going to
go back over all the former posts to nit-pick. Perhaps I am confusing you with
Lance. If so I apologize. I have exposed what I see your
attitude as being: holier than thou. Read your own posts again.
They drip with sarcasm and place you in a position above me. I take this as name-calling. You are
assuming the worst of me instead of taking my words as face value. If you knew
my heart you would know that there was not one shred of sarcasm in what I
wrote. But you assume there is. Why is that? I was imploring you to
understand and trying to find common ground for agreement. I have
not asked you to read several books in this thread. I did mention that
several (read hundreds) are available to DaveH. You have often responded by telling people who try to
discuss issues to go read tomes of material. You often assume that because
there are “many books” supporting a viewpoint that this implies
validity to your argument. There are many books about Satanism and the occult.
What does that prove? I have asked you to go to the archive and
read up on how this has already been discussed. Why is this offensive to
you? You have refused to read links provided before. Should I
interpret it as laziness? Why do you want the most for the least? Pardon me for wanting to discuss it with
you rather than review old discussions you have had with others. And when you
provide links to lengthy websites my eyes glaze over. If I asked you to read
tomes of Conservative literature, would you? Again you assume that I am “lazy”
instead of assuming the best of me, or at least giving me the benefit of a
doubt. Your
post below talks about how it is immoral to give false witness. This very
day you circulate an email that is a blatant lie. You are made aware of
this. You say, oh well I was tired. There is no apology to the
group. Please let me spell it
out “I AM VERY SORRY!! I APOLOGIZE VERY SINCERELY.” We
are left with the impression that you could care less if you lie about your
'enemy'. Do you really think 'it is moral to lie'? Do you really think that I intentionally
composed and circulated a lie? A person walking in love would assume
(correctly) that I was foolishly taken in by yet another urban legend, and at
midnight was too sleepy to even think of that possiblility. Your
behaviour shows otherwise. I
agree with the definition of 'moral' that you provided. Thank you for saying so!!!! Thank you, thank you, thank
you! I pointed out that you did not define moralism but rather
just the root. You ignored this. I did not realize that I ignored that; I thought I addressed
it, but you considered it sarcasm and holier than thou. How can you think that
MORALISM is a different word than the practice of doing what is MORAL? ism
I
pointed out that you have added to this definition by placing it in the context
of God. I pointed out that God is missing from the actual
definition. In other words your definition proved what I was saying: God
is absent from morals. There are not two categories of morals,
God-centered and secular-based. They are all secular based. In Nazi
Germany it was moral (i.e. it was not against their conscience and was
considered good behaviour) to exterminate the Jews. Perhaps my last post will help you understand my viewpoint:
that morality is ONLY determined by God’s opinion—not man’s. Take
your definition of moral again (I will include your patronizing comments): They are not patronizing—they are
letting you know that you are assuming I am the ignorant one, when I am only
going by the standard English definition, Jonathan. Perhaps you know better what the word “moral”
means than anyone else who speaks English. Poor ignorant me, I just agree with
the dictionary which states the following: mor·al Of or concerned with the judgment of
the goodness or badness of human action and character: moral scrutiny; a moral quandary. Teaching or exhibiting
goodness or correctness
of character and behavior: a
moral lesson. Now
please show me in this definition where God is. God is completely
absent. Christianity is completely absent. It is a completely secular
definition. Thank you for the invitation. I will be happy to do that.
Take the Dictionary definition above. (highlighted in red for you.) Now,
where do you see God’s absence from what is good, correct in character
and behavior, doing what is right and virtuous, and having a good conscience according to God’s standards? Do you
not see Jesus in that? If not, I am truly perplexed. Please do not discourage me by coming back with insulting
comments or assumptions of evil on my part. Please just address the statements
I made and tell me where you think I am in error. That would be loving me. I am trying to love you by
understanding you. If this is too much trouble for you, just say so, but don’t
just get mad and go away, please. Izzy Jonathan
From:
ShieldsFamily --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan
Hughes This e-mail and any attachments contain confidential and privileged
information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any
dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended
recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. Thank you for your cooperation in
connection with the above. |
Title: RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Jonathan Hughes
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you ShieldsFamily
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Knpraise
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you C. Tim Winkley
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Lance Muir
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you C. Tim Winkley
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Judy Taylor
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you C. Tim Winkley
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Hughes Jonathan
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Lance Muir
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you ShieldsFamily
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Knpraise
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you C. Tim Winkley
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Terry Clifton
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Knpraise
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you C. Tim Winkley
- Re: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you Knpraise
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you C. Tim Winkley
- RE: [TruthTalk] from O'Reilley to you ShieldsFamily