Typo- That should have been, "sensibly equivocal" -- Jesus Army Watch Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, [7], 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20/03/10 11:34:24am
Author: Peter Eveleigh
Subject: Typo- That should have been, "sensibly equivocal"
In reply to: Peter Eveleigh 's message, "only young naive zealots come on here; older members are sensible equivocal" on 20/03/10 12:38:09am

- just meant that the long-term members of the JA, and especially those who were around during what they call "the persecution", when John Everett and I were most active (c1980s), know better than to draw fire and attention by having public debates about their church. This is mainly because they reveal much more in their statements than is ever desirable.

Recent contribuions to the JA Blues from Daniel Stonell about ex-members needing to have demons dealt with is an example of just such an indiscretion. This is why John Campbell always urges members not to come on here and other forums.

It is always fringe and young members who cannot be controlled so easily who post, ultimately to the detriment of the fellowship. You could always rely on them to say something (in their enthusiasm to look radical) that would make the fellowship look bad. This is because young, fringe or even borderline members who want to appear to be dedicated express themselves in extreme terms, while more canny members strive to make the JA sound respectable. Young people detest respectability - what's the point in joining a radical group if all the oldies want to paint it as "mainstream". I remember wanting to sound extreme when I was a young member :)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

[ Login ] Create Account Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
> - just meant that the long-term members of the JA, >and especially those who were around during what they >call "the persecution", when John Everett and I were >most active (c1980s), know better than to draw fire >and attention by having public debates about their >church. This is mainly because they reveal much more >in their statements than is ever desirable. > >Recent contribuions to the JA Blues from Daniel >Stonell about ex-members needing to have demons dealt >with is an example of just such an indiscretion. This >is why John Campbell always urges members not to come >on here and other forums. > >It is always fringe and young members who cannot be >controlled so easily who post, ultimately to the >detriment of the fellowship. You could always rely on >them to say something (in their enthusiasm to look >radical) that would make the fellowship look bad. This >is because young, fringe or even borderline members >who want to appear to be dedicated express themselves >in extreme terms, while more canny members strive to >make the JA sound respectable. Young people detest >respectability - what's the point in joining a radical >group if all the oldies want to paint it as >"mainstream". I remember wanting to sound extreme when >I was a young member :)
Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.