Welcome to the
Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum

This is a community where people come in search of marriage related support, answers, or encouragement. Also, information about the Marriage Builders principles can be found in the books available for sale in the Marriage Builders® Bookstore.
If you would like to join our guidance forum, please read the Announcement Forum for instructions, rules, & guidelines.
The members of this community are peers and not professionals. Professional coaching is available by clicking on the link titled Coaching Center at the top of this page.
We trust that you will find the Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum to be a helpful resource for you. We look forward to your participation.
Once you have reviewed all the FAQ, tech support and announcement information, if you still have problems that are not addressed, please e-mail the administrators at mbrestored@gmail.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 9 10
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
_
_Ace_ Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
_
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
BK questioned why fault needs to be assigned. If I had not realized that it was my fault when I introduced that topic which led to OW bashing and offended at least one FWW, I would not have owned it and fixed what I could after the original offense.

g'nite Mark and all......thanks for the thoughts that will circle in my brain as I, too try to sleep! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Ace

Last edited by Ace_in_bucket; 01/02/08 02:28 AM.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
_
_Ace_ Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
_
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
Quote
Just remember, whenever any of us gets discouraged by the storm, that it won't rain always.

This seems to be a fairly nice discussion (and yes - gasp - even disagreement) going on here.

Great observation, Neak. Hopefully it will continue this way.

Did you just link your story to your sig line? Or was it there all along? If so...that's way cool. If it was there all along...my bad...time for bed for real. (Can't even remember who I posted to about considering linking her story to her sig line, but I vaguely recall it was you and I'm too tired to go back and look.) <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

At any rate, glad it's there.....I hope many others who have not will consider linking theirs, too.

Ace

Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,643
Q
Member
Offline
Member
Q
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,643
Quote
Even when it rains, it won't rain forever...
That can be doubtful during the winter in Seattle. It seems to ALWAYS rain and ALWAYS can seem like forever.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


BS 52, FWH 53, Married 1-1-84
D-day 5-14-07, WH moved in with OW
Plan A 9 months, DARK Plan B 3-17-08 until 3-2-09
WH and OW broke up 1-09
Started over 7-09
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,107
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,107
Hey Acey

Just bear in mind two things :

For evil to thrive requires only that good men do nothing

and

Peace is not merely the absence of active conflict.

Theres a lot of ad-hominem shouting which is a terrible waste of everyone's time, but there's also strongly-presented RIGHTEOUS opinion offered that can cut through fog.

Have a blessed 2008 !


MB Alumni
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 92,985
Likes: 1
Amen, Bob! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena.." Theodore Roosevelt

Exposure 101


Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
Mark, I'll take a stab at answering your "intended to be thought provoking" statements and questions, at least from how I "see" it.


Quote
Do I have any responsibility for the way people react or respond to me.? In other words, do I have a moral or ethical responsibility for the way others perceive me or my actions?


No, you are NOT responsible for other people's perceptions. That is theirs and theirs alone.

YOU (the person posting) have a moral and ethical responsibility, but individual "morals" and "ethics" depend in large part upon each individual's "worldview" and who they think THEY "answer to" for their actions, and what they say or do in response to their "feelings" on any given subject. As has been said many many times on the system:

In the absence of any accepted "absolute authority" that is OUTSIDE of the individual that has the right to determine what "right and wrong" are, then all morals and ethics become "relative" to the individual and NOT applicable to anyone other than the individual theirself.

Attempting to "impose" one's one chosen set of "morals and ethics" upon others who may not share the same set, is dictatorship and/or bullying others and NOT respectful of the "Right" of anyone else to hold their own differing set of "morals and ethics."

In a "community setting," some "authority" to set "rules" is given to the "governing" body and the community decides that "for the common good of all, we will all abide by those rules whether we personally agree or disagree with them."

That's not much different that choosing to believe that Adultery is immoral and and betrayal of a spouse is unethical. The person engaging in Adultery may not "share" that view, or ethics or morals pertaining to "right and wrong" behavior for Married persons.


In the case of this thread, the "authority" has spoken. If others don't like that, they don't have to like it. But the "authority" has the RIGHT to make that determination while the members do not. All members can do is speculate and make judgments based upon OPINION and not fact, since they do NOT have access to "reality" anymore than the "gang" who wanted to paint the "beer can toting" person as a drunk.

Now, the "beer can toting" person only has a responsibility for their actions that "might" harm someone else IF they hold a particular belief, such as a Christian belief to NOT abuse one's liberty in Christ by "flaunting" their beliefs before others who MAY think something is wrong BECAUSE they, too, are a believer in the same authority (i.e. eating meat that had been offered to idols).

This is very much more similar to the "gang" that tossed the adulterous woman in front of Jesus demanding that He "do something" (meaning kill her). The "authority" on sin, morals, and ethics, responded because He KNEW the TRUTH, "let him who is without their own sin cast the first stone."

NO ONE is "perfect," and no one is without the capacity to learn, grow, and even CHANGE. But that usually takes time, patience, endurance, and gently discussing "differences" of opinion that may remain. It's about LEADING rather than FORCING to achieve change.

Now, I can't wait to hear your reasons for posting this here. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />


God bless.

Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,583
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,583
I'm thinking about a WS who perceives Plan B as the BS purposely trying to harm the WS.

Or someone who came from a dysfunctional family who now sets healthy boundaries, sometimes needing to say something to enforce those boundaries, and is perceived by those around as being %@&*$%.

How about the Christian who is with non-believers and needs to stand up for truth, knowing that it will be PERCEIVED as unloving?

How about the friend who loves you so much that they confront you about your affair? You have the "how dare they judge me" attitude.

How about the BS who is paralyzed from shock and cannot get back into reality until a friend (maybe an MB friend) talks directly and sharply to them to get them to focus and take steps that are necessary? The BS feels hurt and attacked.

These people's motives, actions, and words are perceived incorrectly. Does that mean that they should back down and not do what they know is right?

I believe that all they need to focus on is how GOD perceives their actions, words, and motives (obviously I am coming from a Christian worldview). Oftentimes, the right thing to do or say WILL be perceived as offensive.

Did Stephen offend those he spoke to right before being martyred? How many times did Jesus offend the Pharisees? He even turned the tables in the Temple because of His righteous anger. Paul offended so many that he was repeatedly put into jail.

If you don't want Biblical examples, how about the friend who takes his friends' keys because he's too drunk to drive? Or the friend who refuses to gossip? They will certainly be perceived incorrectly.

Or the friend who feels their buddy drinks too much, but doesn't say anything because he knows his buddy will get mad at him?

I can think of example after example of times when we must shed our worry about how we will be PERCEIVED because we love someone enough to tell the truth.


Happily married to HerPapaBear



Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
SMB - I know it's "just my opinion," but I think your post was RIGHT ON!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

At least that's how I perceived it!!!

Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816
2
Member
Offline
Member
2
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 10,816
Quote
Quote
Empathy again.

2long maybe you should consider practicing empathy towards Christians since you think it is fine to say very blasphemous things quite often.

Blasphemy is another one of those things that's clearly in the eye of the beholder. I was a Christian, bk, though I'm not now. And yes, I believe I went through a period of antagonism 2ward my prior belief system, but though you may not believe that, that phase ended more than 20 years ago.

Quote
How about the Christian who is with non-believers and needs to stand up for truth, knowing that it will be PERCEIVED as unloving?

How about the non-believer who is with Christians and needs 2 stand up for truth, knowing that it will be PERCEIVED as unloving? It really does work both ways.

Quote
How about the BS who is paralyzed from shock and cannot get back into reality until a friend (maybe an MB friend) talks directly and sharply to them to get them to focus and take steps that are necessary? The BS feels hurt and attacked.

I remember those times well. I felt that way a lot after d-day and sporadically up 2 about 3 years after. But even back then, I also felt the real support come through with the 2x4s I thought I was getting at the time.

Then there's now. I honestly will say that I wouldn't dream of talking about my marriage here anymore. So, I must go.

Quote
These people's motives, actions, and words are perceived incorrectly. Does that mean that they should back down and not do what they know is right?

Excellent point. I think they shouldn't back down. But they should be careful how they make their point. Not easy, perhaps, but very rewarding if successful.

Quote
I believe that all they need to focus on is how GOD perceives their actions, words, and motives (obviously I am coming from a Christian worldview). Oftentimes, the right thing to do or say WILL be perceived as offensive.

This is perfectly fine, recognizing that there are other worldviews. Those other worldviewers have a similar "calling" 2 be mindful of ideas they don't share as well.

Quote
I can think of example after example of times when we must shed our worry about how we will be PERCEIVED because we love someone enough to tell the truth.

Well stated.

-ol' 2long

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
_
_Ace_ Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
_
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
Hi FH and SMB,

I was replying to BobP and might have lost my post but I will try to paste it here and reply to your thoughts later. Thanks! (and 'whew, it worked!) <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

*******************************************************************************************

Quote
Hey Acey

Just bear in mind two things :

Hi Bob,

So glad you mentioned both (or all 3) concepts:

Quote
For evil to thrive requires only that good men do nothing

If my presuming that you mean that those of us who refrain from posting on conflict threads are doing nothing, is not correct, please enlighten me.

I'll continue as if I'm correct.

It may appear that I am refraining from physical action because I am not actively posting on such threads, but that does not mean I am doing nothing. What you may not be able to see is my reading and searching and praying so I may better understand the issues at hand so that one day I might be able to be a part of the solution.

It's taken me nearly a year and I've learned much. Bob, you weren't around last January when (after only one week) I removed myself from the boards (after saying I needed to do some research on delayed exposure which I had misinterpreted from threads posted by you, WAT and Weaver/Josie). I did not post/lurk for the two weeks that I sought to educate myself. Did I participate in the mud-slinging, name-calling, momma-bashing that went on regarding the topic I was researching? I couldn't, I was in crisis and had the where-withall to remove myself.....and eventually, Dr. Harley and Mrs. Harley answered my questions in person on the radio for free within 2 weeks. I came back determined to learn all that I could so that one day, I might be able to contribute solutions.

Have I done nothing? Many have commented that I've contributed something to these forums, even posters on this thread have complimented me, which I appreciate. It's not the reason for this thread but it does encourage me to continue.

Is there more that I can do? Yup.....so that's why I started this thread, although I wish I had done so last week when I could post during the day. (I am bringing my laptop to work for a project so I might be able to sneak a peak now and then.)

Quote
and

Peace is not merely the absence of active conflict.

I'm all for active conflict against the enemy ~~~> alien inhabitants, consistent trouble-makers, known trolls and agitators who thrive on stirring the pot with no apparent vested interest in helping and no empathy when challenged.

I'm trying to find a solution for what I (and apparently many others) see is eroding the help offered when attacks are made at the person, not the ideas the person is presenting.

I had tried to be a peacemaker early on one of the threads that disappeared. It obviously denigrated swiftly but I didn't see it after that. I can only assume that the dialog was not limited to 'active conflict regarding ideas' but I will never know.

TA and BR had active conflict regarding ideas and concepts that they eventually agreed to disagree upon on the Cheerleaders/Enablers/Controllers thread.

Were they passionate? YES.

Did they vehemently disagree with what the other was saying. YES.

Did they attack each other? NO! But there was much active conflict which did not evolve into active personal attacks as evidenced by the fact that it is still an unlocked (still helpful) thread that SS asked for yesterday. (She may be a newbie, but she has already inspired me to post this thread and continue aspiring to be an MB experienced poster one day....Thanks SS!) <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />


Quote
Theres a lot of ad-hominem shouting which is a terrible waste of everyone's time, but there's also strongly-presented RIGHTEOUS opinion offered that can cut through fog.

I agree wholeheartedly with this as well, especially with the quote I've emphasized. I just disagree that we can cut through 'the fog' by cutting down each other when our fog-cutting methods disagree with anothers.

I realize that opinions will differ and some posters are more passionate than others. Plus, many of us who get unintentionally caught up in the fracus (like me with my delayed exposure issues last Jan.) have no clue what the basic issues are. But if we focus on attacking the source of the conflict and confusion (the enemy) and respect the person who may be in conflict or confusion, I think our strongly presented righteous opinions might help provide a solution rather than exacerbate the problems.

As mentioned earlier, BK and I supported Aph when she was thought to be a troll. I'm sure there was 'active conflict' regarding the time spent to help her, but in the end, she stuck it out and actually changed her POV on many thoughts and concepts. Do I agree with Aph's world view? Not from what I perceived. But I valued her as a person, even sent her a book (when no one else responded to her idea for a book exchange). She just posted an update a few days ago and I replied yesterday.

Since I've mentioned BK, I'll venture onto shakey ground and say that I could have been offended by what I perceived (even before Mark's post) to be an attempt to ridicule this thread title and even my attempt to seek a solution by posting this thread.

Did I react? I tried not to, but I did respond with respect....well I tried to, at least. Do I always agree with what BK posts? No. But nor do I attack him because I don't agree with his ideas or his presentation.

Does that make sense? Sorry that I have to post and run without editing typos, but I will check in tonight.....I hope! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for reading.

Ace

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,083
K
Member
Offline
Member
K
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,083
SMB - you make some good points.

The ability to validate is a relationship skill that can be crafted and practiced on these boards - Ace asks for an end to the war of words - the biting, sarcastic invalidating behavior exhibited on two threads that had to be removed because normally supportive veterans were attacking each other, marginalizing their contributions here by trying to tear down another's validity.

I nearly wrote a thread on the topic of how to develop validation skills. It's a communication art form that is so needed in real life and could go a long way to ending board wars.

Consider this challenge the next time there is a need to set someone straight. You used the example of Christians standing up to non-believers - and since I personally have been marginalized in a war of words over that topic to the point that I have considered minimizing my time here on marriage builders, even though I've been told that I have a lot to offer...

The challenge is to set someone straight without invalidating them as a person or the value of their contribution. The lazy way is to say: "You're WRONG and here's why - point by point". The difficult way is to say: That's an interesting POV. Here's how I would handle that situation." You have to think from a place of love and compassion, and edit yourself many times before clicking the "Ok, submit" button so that you know your intentions are validated by your words and actions here.

We have to put off the natural tendency to "react" instead of think-respond. Stephen Covey teaches about seeking to understand first, then to be understood, in his relationship portion of 7 Habits - where I believe Harley received his inspiration for the Love Bank concepts he developed for Marriage Builders.

I personally love the "ignore" button because it helps me avoid my "react" trigger, and just allow someone to be intentionally marginalizing and invalidating rather than try to "change or educate" them. As I said on one of the threads that got deleted, but bears repeating - trying to educate someone about rude behavior here is like trying to educate a wayward spouse - in both cases, we have an unreasonable expectation that our posts to educate make a difference to those who don't see/want to see their behavior as rude or untruthful.

Perhaps this strikes at the crux of the problem with trolls - perhaps it's time for vets to Plan B the troll and focus on delivering truth to those who seek it - newbies and hurting folks. They are asking to be educated - trolls are not.


Cafe Plan B link http://forum.marriagebuilders.com/ubbt/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2182650&page=1

The ? that made recovery possible: "Which lovebuster do I do the most that hurts the worst"?

The statement that signaled my personal recovery and the turning point in our marriage recovery: "I don't need to be married that badly!"

If you're interested in saving your relationship, you'll work on it when it's convenient. If you're committed, you'll accept no excuses.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
_
_Ace_ Offline OP
Member
OP Offline
Member
_
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 5,312
SMB, I am not referring to how 'tough' Mel was with you and me....I agree with you that she showed she cared for both of us and we needed it and it helped us both. I'll always be grateful to Mel and others who were blunt with me.

I'm talking about the bickering between potential helpers on the hurting person's thread.

One solution would be to honor the hurting person by both parties at odds starting a new thread, which does happen often.

The second solution (IMHO) would be for all those involved to ATTACK the IDEAS and CONCEPTS, NOT the PERSON SHARING THEM...and yes, I am shouting!

Ace


FWH/BW (me)57+ M:36+ yr.
4 D-Days: Jun-Nov 06 E/PA~OW#2 (OW#1 2000)
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,583
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,583
KA & Ace,

I think you misunderstood what I was responding to. I didn't quote it, so I can see how you would. I was responding to Mark's question:

Do I have any responsibility for the way people react or respond to me.? In other words, do I have a moral or ethical responsibility for the way others perceive me or my actions?

I was not responding to the "war of the words" but whether it is our respondiblity (our fault) when we are perceived incorrectly.


Happily married to HerPapaBear



Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,058
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,058
FH,

But you see, you and I are in agreement as to who that absolute authority is. But this is even more basic than either your world view or mine.

Quote
you are NOT responsible for other people's perceptions. That is theirs and theirs alone.
Picture an illusionist performing on stage. His intent is to make onlookers believe that something is happening that is not truly the case. What he does and says on stage is designed to provoke a certain reaction in his audience. He intends to mislead and misdirect in order to gain the admiration of his audience.

But suppose this "magician" began traveling around the country speaking about how black magic and the 'dark arts' are the way to power and authority in one's life. His claims now become that he really has magical powers.

Now assuming that "the Amazing Randy" and his institute is already on the case debunking this guy's magic do I need to point out that his world view is wrong, that he is a dangerous individual and no one should be following him as an example?

To save time here, my answer is that of course I do. My own conscience dictates that anyone who is leading others astray, away from the truth should be pointed out as a liar and a fraud. And BTW, this applies for me within the church and without.

But suppose I not only point out at every opportunity that he is a fraud but I begin traveling around attending his performances and standing up in the midst of his tricks to shout out at him that he is a fraud and disrupting his stage act. Soon, I become the center of attention for the media and those attending his performances and even begin to develop my own following of those who wish to live vicariously through me and tell this guy off in person...sort of.

Before long the police are called to an event and the building is cleared because the opposing sides have polarized totally, shouting is going on all the time and fistfights have broken out in the aisles. Eventually the fake is banned and to my little band I am the hero.

But now I change scenes and I am now driving along a country road and come across a traffic accident. A car load of teenagers has run off the road and has rolled down an embankment. I instinctively stop to help and as I approach the upside down vehicle the first person I see is the magician, who though not trained in medical procedures and who I certainly don't feel has any special powers, is trying to help one of the injured.

If I begin shouting at him and fighting with him and it diverts the help of the EMS and rescue guys that are arriving at the scene and prevents the injuries from being treated. Others have gathered and chosen up sides. Some are followers of the hoax and others are fans of mine. We have a huge shouting and shoving match going on and are inadvertently trampling over the rescue workers and the injured as well. The magician says something I don't like and I push him down the hill. One of the EMS personal says, "Hey. Wait! We have injured people here." and tries to get me to calm down. So I push him down the hill as well because it is my RIGHT to stand up to this guy who is harming others with his phony act.

Others jump to my defense and people are rolling down the hill in droves...

And while this is going on, the teenage driver of the car lies bleeding at the side of the road. and eventually expires.

Now some may see the magician as disruptive to the rescue effort and others might see me as the disruptive influence at the scene, but the net result is that someone died because the help they needed at the time they were in grave danger was diverted from helping them.

When I arrive at the scene I have to make a choice. I can stop to help or move on. But once I stop if my intent is to help the hurting, then that needs to be my focus.

And here is where we quickly get to a real dilemma...Eventually the magician tires of my presence and drives off with his followers, if any. and the kids get the help they need. I too drive away certain that I have helped if for no other reason than that I have run off the fake.

And two mile down the road is another traffic accident (it must be winter in the upper Midwest) and guess who was the first one to stop to help...

Now if I stop to help, my mere presence will create tension, but if I don't stop, someone might die because EMS is still cleaning up down the road. As I approach the car I see that the fake is trying to perform some trickery and claiming it will save the victim...As I stand there contemplating my move the rescue guys from the neighboring town arrive having gotten the call because the locals were busy at the first scene.

What do I do know?

If I walk away, someone might think this guy is for real. If I stay and fight another riot might break out. Some will be certain that he is what is wrong with the picture but some might see me as the problem. And if the victim dies, there will be more than enough blame to pass around.

I have no control over whether or not this guy shows up at every traffic accident in the county, but I do have control over what I do when I see him. And if I stop and try to drive him off, even though others are present who are better equipped than either of us to really help the victims, I will be seen by some as the bad guy. And some will be so offended that they will stop offering help and others will avoid seeking help because they know that one of us will attack the other at the next opportunity. If I stay and fight, do I have any responsibility for driving them away if they leave?

I have to go to work...I'll be back eventually.

This is getting more difficult to remain in the realm of hypothetical...

And FH, I am trying to do this without quoting scriptures because as you point out not all bow to that authority, though I am sure you and I are likely thinking along the same lines, though perhaps not arriving at the same conclusions. To be honest, I began with my conclusion and am attempting to build a case for it as I go.

Mark

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
Quote
Clash of ideas is often needed and healthy for any progress to be made. But not the personal attacks. I was telling K that the Enabling/Controlling thread had numerous clashes of ideas. Yet it was likened to threads of yesteryear by seasoned veterans who posted with respect for both the ideas shared and the person sharing them.


Ace - I think what you may be talking about, or trying to get across, is perhaps easier to think about in terms of the current Political Posturing that is part of the Election Process.

What I am talking about is the "Policy of Personal Destruction." I think most Americans (and probably most people in all countries) are "fed up" with this sort of thing. What is "okay" is contending with differing or opposing IDEAS, but NOT a policy of trying to destroy the PERSON. One need to look no futher than the Clintons to see how a Policy of Personal Destruction is implemented with the goal of protecting the wielder of those actions from "scrutiny of their own actions."

The "arena of ideas" is for discussion of opposing viewpoints, etc., with the POSSIBILITY, not the guarantee, that opinions and beliefs MIGHT change through civil and rational discussion and debate. Like in the political areana, there will NEVER be 100% agreement.

That's also why a "Consensus of Opinion" does NOT make the given opinion automatically "right." "Right" is not determined by how many people might "line up" on one side or the other, but by FACTS, reality, and in the case of theology, faith, morals, and ethics, established by the ONE person who has the SOVEREIGN authority to determine what "right" is, and by opposition to what is thus right, what "wrong" is. That is why SIN is defined as "disobedience to GOD's will," not obedience or disobedience to any one human's will. That is why the act of eating the "apple" (forbidden fruit) was not the sin, it was the CHOICE to be disobedient to the Sovereign's authority to determine what "right and wrong" are, regardless of what might seem good or rational to mere humans. God did not create a race of beings to BE "gods," He created a race of beings to be servants in fellowship with Himself operating in love and self-restraint(choice) TO humbly obey His commands no matter what they might be feeling.

That same lack of "self-restraint," refusal to "explain ourselves," refusal to STAND for what God has commanded, etc. IS what leads to a "win at all costs because that's what I want" attitude, and it is displayed in the posting and in personal attacks bent on destroying the person rather than addressing and discussing IDEAS.

When we ourselves "do wrong," it IS our responsibility to repent, confess, and seek forgiveness, not to stubbornly and "stiff-neckedly" bury our head in the sand and continue on a destructive path.


God bless.

Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,583
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,583
Quote
Quote
How about the Christian who is with non-believers and needs to stand up for truth, knowing that it will be PERCEIVED as unloving?


How about the non-believer who is with Christians and needs 2 stand up for truth, knowing that it will be PERCEIVED as unloving? It really does work both ways.



I don't think I said it didn't work both ways. I, being a Christian, thought of my personal experiences. I would agree with you that it works both ways.




Quote
Quote
How about the BS who is paralyzed from shock and cannot get back into reality until a friend (maybe an MB friend) talks directly and sharply to them to get them to focus and take steps that are necessary? The BS feels hurt and attacked.

I remember those times well. I felt that way a lot after d-day and sporadically up 2 about 3 years after. But even back then, I also felt the real support come through with the 2x4s I thought I was getting at the time.


Do I read you correctly here that you are saying that your real support came through what you, at the time, felt were 2X4s? Just not sure I understood exactly what you meant.

Quote
Quote
These people's motives, actions, and words are perceived incorrectly. Does that mean that they should back down and not do what they know is right?

Excellent point. I think they shouldn't back down. But they should be careful how they make their point. Not easy, perhaps, but very rewarding if successful.

I agree.

Quote
Quote
I believe that all they need to focus on is how GOD perceives their actions, words, and motives (obviously I am coming from a Christian worldview). Oftentimes, the right thing to do or say WILL be perceived as offensive.

This is perfectly fine, recognizing that there are other worldviews. Those other worldviewers have a similar "calling" 2 be mindful of ideas they don't share as well.

I would agree with you here,too, although I didn't intend for my post to be a religious debate. I used religious examples as well as non-religious.

I recognize that I am operating from a Christian world view. When I talk with non-believers, I understand where they are coming from. (I was there a little over a decade ago.) But I don't neglect my own personal world view and belief system. If I did, I would then be overly concerned about how I am perceived by man instead of my living God.


Happily married to HerPapaBear



Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
F
Member
Offline
Member
F
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 9,015
Quote
Even when it rains, it won't rain forever...

Mark


At least not for more than 40 days and 40 nights anyway! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,058
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,058
I'm not going to have much time to devote to this today, so I might be scarce until later...I will read and try to keep up when I can, but won't have much time to post coherent replies so will have to let that wait.

Ace,

Just so you know, I am not ignoring you or your posts and replies. And I am sorry if I have T/J'd your thread. This is something about which I have strong opinions.

Mark

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,093
S
Member
Offline
Member
S
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,093
Mark,

Perceptions are in error every single day. You have responsibilities in some, but not in others. Those in which you have taken some action that results in harm that was a violation of some ethical, legal, or moral behavior, yes, you are responsible - your intent may or may not be relevant. When you are not violating ethical, legal, or moral boundaries, I don't think you bear responsibility for the perceptions of others.

One is regarding perceptions wherein you have absolutely no intention - and no control - over the other person's interpretation of the information. Nor, Do you necessarily even KNOW of their perception. You bear no responsibilty nor necessarily even KNOW of any such interpretation or perception on their part. That would be your alcoholic and worthless drunk example - simply stated, the other folks are just happening to see what they think they see, not what is real. An error on their part, not something the evidence would support if the truth were known.

In another situation, where someone is offended by your actions or words, and you intended none, you MIGHT bear responsibilty:

For example, if you caused a car accident for failure to yield the right of way. You did not INTEND the harm - by your own action, but did so anyway, resulting in the offense. You do bear responsibility, and compensation to the offended party.

Or, you said something to another person intending for that comment to remain private, but it does not. That comment becomes known to a party that is hurt by the comment, unintentionally on your part (this happens all the time). Your intentions were not to hurt another person, although it did happen. You are responsible for an apology and your remarks in the first place.

So, yes and no, intention matters - sometimes. Sometimes we might be responsible for perception, because sometimes perception is reality. Sometimes, perception is NOT reality.

Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 598
H
Member
Offline
Member
H
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 598
FH -

Quote
At least not for more than 40 days and 40 nights anyway!

Several years ago back in Oregon, it rained for 30 some days straight. I'm talking about rain, not the normal 9 months of drizzle in the Pacific NW <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


Formerly known as brokenbird

BH (Me) - 38
WW (Magpie) - 31
Married 2001 (Together 8 years)
DS - 13
DD - 5
EA/PA - 9/05-12/05
D-Day - 11/05

Second separation. Working on me.

If you remain in Me and My words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given to you.
John 15:7 (NIV)
Page 3 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 9 10

Moderated by  Fordude 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Search
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 1,079 guests, and 45 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Mike69, petercgeelan, Zorya, Reyna98, Nofoguy
71,829 Registered Users
Building Marriages That Last A Lifetime
Copyright © 1995-2019, Marriage Builders®. All Rights Reserved.
Site Navigation
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5