Kudos, Shades!

[_wenglund]

Wade, I have to disagree, you are still hurting about being banned from FAIR and much of your anger toward that banning has been aimed at GIMR who you are angry toward as the cause of your banishment. Her 'Kudos to Shades' simply released the pressure valve. Look, here is the skinny: I care about you and I understand your desire to defend the Church, but is it not best to do so with a cool head and with no need to react so strongly off of each thing that is said? I mean, when we get down to the underlying reality of all our interactions, we are all the shining Children of God seeking our return to His presence. It is not our ultimate task to counter everything that is said and done. I would suggest that ultimately we are to love God and each other and leave well enough alone.

In life, we all have our individual experiences. They make us unique. They make us who we are. If you set out to invalidate someones experiences, by telling them they are not true and they never happened, then you are taking away a part of that person. I know you related the story of the schizophrenic person who yelled at you, but we are not talking about that when we speak about GIMR's experiences. Why argue with what she has been through? Must the Church be justified through denying her pain and invalidating her existence? I would suggest that the Church can survive on its own and perhaps thrive even more by accepting all that we have been through, both as individuals and collectively. Sweeping problems under rugs and them sending out PR minded individuals to insist that raised area under the carpet does not exist, is not the best way to go. There is nothing forcing you to be that type of individual. If you really want to help people, it is best to accept them as they are.

Wade once again, I want you to know that I like you and I am supportive of you.

I could understand your presuming, against my ULTIMATE AUTHORITATIVE declaration to the contrary, that I was hurting from my banning at FAIR were I to have, to your knowledge, ever over the past year or so since I was banned, said anything about being hurt (or something to that effect) by the banned, or gone to other boards to complain and whine like so many here and at MT have. But, I haven't. In fact, I have said just the opposite on numerous occasions.

But, don't let those important facts get in the way of your false presupposition. I understand that you, in your own likeable way, need to view it that way. And, I am fine with that--particularly since you want to like me and be supportive of me. Who wouldn't want that?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade, of course you are the ultimate authority in yourself. It just seemed like you were stuffing your anger and then denying its existence. I thought it would be worthwhile to examine that "false presupposition" of anger, as well as reexamine the need to defend the Church in such a way as to engender ill feelings in others. No harm done if you think otherwise.

I am glad we were able to examine, and hopefully put to rest, your false presupposition about me beng angry. I wasn't in the least.

And, as for my defense of the Church (i.e. correcting cognitive distortions), I consider it like the cleansing power of iodine and hydorgen peroxide in a wound. It may cause hurt or ill feelings, but it is intended to heal and to stop or prevent the cycle of hurt, pain, and loss for all parties concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Who Knows]

And, as for my defense of the Church (i.e. correcting cognitive distortions), I consider it like the cleansing power of iodine and hydorgen peroxide in a wound. It may cause hurt or ill feelings, but it is intended to heal and to stop or prevent the cycle of hurt, pain, and loss for all parties concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I'm still waiting to find out what these supposed 'cognitive distortions' are that you think you are correcting. Are you referring to yourself here?

[_wenglund]

Wade,

In what is perhaps one of the most ironic events out of too many to count in interactions with you, you display an inability to comprehend the difference between events that occur to an individual, and their emotions regarding those events.

I can see why you might think that given your inability to comprehend the intimate interplay between events that occur to an individual and their emotions regarding those events, not to mention the cognitive lense through which those events are perceived, conceptualized, synthesized and so forth, and the reciprocity between the cognitive lense and emotions related to to the events being passed through the cognitive lense.

One elderly woman may "experience" the event of a boy scout helping her across the street as one of highly violative and potentially harmful threat to her safety, and be racked with fear and dispare at the perceived victimization. Whereas another elderly woman may "experience" the same event as a wonderfully helpful and protective act of kindness, and joy in safety and charitable love extended towards her. Can a person from afar rightly assess the falseness of these two "experiences"? Of course.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_beastie]

I am glad we were able to examine, and hopefully put to rest, your false presupposition about me beng angry. I wasn't in the least.

And, as for my defense of the Church (i.e. correcting cognitive distortions), I consider it like the cleansing power of iodine and hydorgen peroxide in a wound. It may cause hurt or ill feelings, but it is intended to heal and to stop or prevent the cycle of hurt, pain, and loss for all parties concerned.

Why is it that you insist on others recognizing you are the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY on your own feelings, and yet deny that right to others?

by the way, there are many "anti-mormons" who would say:

And, as for my attack of the Church (ie, correcting cognitive distortions), I consider it like the cleansing power of iodone and hydrogen peroxide in a wound. It may cause hurt or ill feelings, but it is intended to heal and to stop or prevent the cycle of hurt, pain, and loss for all parties concerned.

[_wenglund]

And, as for my defense of the Church (i.e. correcting cognitive distortions), I consider it like the cleansing power of iodine and hydorgen peroxide in a wound. It may cause hurt or ill feelings, but it is intended to heal and to stop or prevent the cycle of hurt, pain, and loss for all parties concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I'm still waiting to find out what these supposed 'cognitive distortions' are that you think you are correcting. Are you referring to yourself here?

See the "Venting" thread for my repeated correction to your false assumption about what cognitive distortions I have been referring to.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_beastie]

I can see why you might think that given your inability to comprehend the intimate interplay between events that occur to an individual and their emotions regarding those events, not to mention the cognitive lense through which those events are perceived, conceptualized, synthesized and so forth, and the reciprocity between the cognitive lense and emotions related to to the events being passed through the cognitive lense.

One elderly woman may "experience" the event of a boy scout helping her across the street as one of highly violative and potentially harmful threat to her safety, and be racked with fear and dispare at the perceived victimization. Whereas another elderly woman may "experience" the same event as a wonderfully helpful and protective act of kindness, and joy in safety and charitable love extended towards her. Can a person from afar rightly assess the falseness of these two "experiences"? Of course.

Given the fact that I posted at length about the effect of emotions on our perceptions on another thread with you, your first paragraph only demonstrates either you don't really read my posts, or you read them without comprehension.

But, aside from the interplay of emotions on our perceptions, first you need to recognize the difference between an individual relating events that occurred in his/her life, and his/her interpretation of those events in terms of the motivations and intents of others. Do you recognize the difference? This difference must be established.

Second, define what you mean by "afar". And how does the person from "afar" rightly assess the falseness of these two experiences? By what process?

[_Who Knows]

And, as for my defense of the Church (i.e. correcting cognitive distortions), I consider it like the cleansing power of iodine and hydorgen peroxide in a wound. It may cause hurt or ill feelings, but it is intended to heal and to stop or prevent the cycle of hurt, pain, and loss for all parties concerned.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I'm still waiting to find out what these supposed 'cognitive distortions' are that you think you are correcting. Are you referring to yourself here?

See the "Venting" thread for my repeated correction to your false assumption about what cognitive distortions I have been referring to.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Ha. Hardly. You never even responded to my last post there. I'm particularly interested in your response to my last paragraph.

[_Bryan Inks]

I'm only about halfway through reading this thread and noticed that no one had commented on something that I find to be rather interesting.

And, it wasn't just the Apostle of Color thread, it was threads that preceeded it and several after it, including a thread where I was attempting to intervene of GIMR's behalf and to help her stop seeing racists behind every bush and racism in perfectly beneign actions. I was attempting to do the same with you in your race baiting thread on Apostle's of Color.

The irony of this comment is absolutely tasty.

Anyone seeing it?

...

...


I'll give you you a hint. replace one theme in the above comment with one that starts with a "b" and rhymes with "bigot".

...

Get it yet?

Wade, of all the people on the internet, you seem most adept at finding problems in other's actions that so closely mirror your own.

In the quote above, you are "trying to help" someone who didn't ask for your help. You are trying to "stop them from seeing racism in every beneign action". Possibly admirable. . . were that the case. Even if it is operating under wrong assumptions, I commend your willingness to help.

However, Jesus himself once said. . . "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (Matthew 7:3)"

You find your bigotry in every comment. You see bigots in everyone. . . why not fix your problems before trying to fix someone else?

[_keene]

I'm only about halfway through reading this thread and noticed that no one had commented on something that I find to be rather interesting.

And, it wasn't just the Apostle of Color thread, it was threads that preceeded it and several after it, including a thread where I was attempting to intervene of GIMR's behalf and to help her stop seeing racists behind every bush and racism in perfectly beneign actions. I was attempting to do the same with you in your race baiting thread on Apostle's of Color.

The irony of this comment is absolutely tasty.

Anyone seeing it?

...

...


I'll give you you a hint. replace one theme in the above comment with one that starts with a "b" and rhymes with "bigot".

...

Get it yet?

Wade, of all the people on the internet, you seem most adept at finding problems in other's actions that so closely mirror your own.

In the quote above, you are "trying to help" someone who didn't ask for your help. You are trying to "stop them from seeing racism in every beneign action". Possibly admirable. . . were that the case. Even if it is operating under wrong assumptions, I commend your willingness to help.

However, Jesus himself once said. . . "And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? (Matthew 7:3)"

You find your bigotry in every comment. You see bigots in everyone. . . why not fix your problems before trying to fix someone else?

It's like looking through a chain-link fence from really close up. You don't see the fence, you see what's on the other side, with little bits of the fence in the way. But everyone on the other side can see what's holding you back. The trick in christianity, and in all life, is to either step back and look at the fence, or trust others who tell you that the fence is there. That means letting go of a certain ammount of pride. Very difficult to do for most anyone, christian, Mormon, or other.

Easiest way to see what holds you back in life, is to find out what you think is holding back others. Humans have a need to identify with their surroundings.