Friday, December 16, 2005

Chapter 7f - Miroslav Walks

** Read Chapter 7a, Chapter 7b, Chapter 7c, Chapter 7d, and Chapter 7e first!**

As all of this church drama unfolded, my wife and I were co-leading a nearly two year long marriage class with another married couple, Jim and Jane. We had really developed a deep love for them and each of the other couples involved, and so we decided that we wouldn't leave NH until we were done. (You can read a little bit about the marriage class in one of my earlier posts.)

So how did it go when we left? Read more!It was sometime in September that my dad "confessed" in front of the congregation and was removed from his position in the church. As I shared in my last entry, I was very confused as to what was going on at that time and began investigating. But at the same time, we had this weekly marriage class going on at our house that we continued to be an intrigal part of. Though we were supposed to be leading the class with Jim and Jane, it had effectively turned in to us leading the class with the help of Jim. This was because Jane, his wife, had become pregnant and her body was not handling the pregnancy well. It was very tough for her and there were many times she could not leave the house for days on end. Jim did his best to be involved in the class, but Jane was just physically unable to join us 90% of the time.
So each night, Jim would come over to the house and pray with my wife and I for about fifteen to thirty minutes before the class started. It was during this time that we'd compare notes and develop our "plan of attack" for the night. I remember that just before the first meeting after my dad's "confession," Jim asked me where I stood with what had happened. He had seen my public frustration in earlier leader's meetings. I told him that things were complicated... but that my dad had admitted to a serious sin and that therefore the church was acting biblically in their public rebuke of him and in choosing to remove him. Jim challenged me to deny my my father and to pursue Truth. He related to me that he too had to deny much of his heritage in pursuing Christ... and though it was difficult, we are commanded to have no allegiance other than to Christ. We prayed, and talked about how we would field any questions from the students on the subject. I told him I'd support the leadership despite my misgivings about the situation. That night, the other couples asked me what I thought of everything. They were very much in shell shock (as we ALL were) at what had transpired. I assured them that the Bible commands for public rebuke when a leader falls in to sin and that my father was no exception. And that was that.
I don't remember the topic ever coming up again until my father left. At that point, Jim asked me what my plans were and I told him that we were planning on staying at the church at least through the marriage class, and after that... I wasn't sure. And that was the truth, because I STILL wasn't sure what the heck was going on. This was during the time that I was losing a lot of sleep wondering if my father was truly the man he had been painted to be. I wasn't sure of much... but I did know that I was commited to completing the marriage class.
At a certain point (it must have been soon after the last leader's meeting that I talked about in Chapter 7e), I realized that my wife and I were going to leave the church immediately after the completion of the marriage class. I remember telling Jim about our decision. We were on the way out to a men's event out at this way-out-of-the-way house that had a private man made lake and a cool little out building for parties & meetings. Jim and I were riding together to this thing and were talking about lots of stuff. He asked me if I had told anybody in our class about our plans to leave, and I told him,"No." I told him that it was our plan to finish out the marriage class, meet with the pastor, and then head out at which point they would figure things out. Jim told me that I should tell the other men in the class what my plans were so that they wouldn't be surprised by it all. I told him that I had refrained from talking about it because I didn't want to complicate things. He suggested I inform them I was leaving but to leave it fairly vague... not to get in to all the reasons. Fair enough, I figured. So, that night I told three of the guys what my plans were. They all said that they figured that was the case... and that was pretty much it. I actually remember the exact moment I told two of 'em. They were in tuning their guitars getting ready for worship. They just kind of nodded in understanding, said they understood, and went on back to singing worship songs. It was so not a big deal to anybody.

A short while later, my wife and I had an opportunity to meet with the head pastor. We had decided that since Jim knew, and now our students in the marriage class knew, we ought to have the conversation with the senior pastor. When we decided to set up a meeting, we had to wait a little while because he was away at a pastor's retreat/seminar at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church in SoCal. In anticipation of our meeting, I typed a two page letter outlining the problems that we saw with the church. My wife and I scheduled a meeting with our long time pastor and his wife and got together with them just after they returned from their trip.
I remember being very nervous going in to the meeting. This was a scary thing that was happening. I was seeing things in the leadership that troubled me deeply but leaving the church of my youth... that was HUGE. I was sure of my decision... but, at the same time, I wasn't. There was something that was still very troubling about it all. Even though I had publically accused them of being a "weak leadership" and had begun to see more clearly the twisted thinking that was in my long time church, there was still a part of me that was, um... scared and unsure of myself. A part of me was second-guessing my decision. But all that was about to change.
As soon as we sat down to talk, the pastor had a big smile on his face. He seemed genuinely happy and peaceful. I remember that I was pretty surprised. Surely he was just as burdoned as the rest of us were during those months... and he must have known that the meeting we called was to announce that we were leaving, but he seemed to be strangely removed. I assumed it was because he had just returned from a little quasi-vacation.
He and his wife prayed to get the meeting started. To be honest, I don't remember saying much in our time together. They kind of led the thing. I never even had an opportunity to read my letter or address any of the items on it. Instead, the pastor started out by asking us if we were leaving the church. We said yes and that I had several reasons why, many of them that had nothing at all to do with my father's situation. He didn't ask what the reasons were. Instead, he shared that he had just returned from this pastor's seminar at Saddleback and had a revalation of sorts. He wasn't claiming to have had some sort of supernatural miracle or that God talked to him in a dream or anything. He was just saying that he had come to a realization of some mistakes that had been made. He had talked things through with some other pastors there, shared the most recent events with them, and received counsel. And now he knew what the problem was.
Remember how I said that going in to the meeting I was 99% sure of myself... but that there was a part of me that second-guessed the decision? Well, that 1% went away as my pastor for 24 years told me that he was convinced the reason for all that had happened with my father and all the inner turmoil in leadership was because he had failed to "put his foot down earlier." The pastor said he needed more authority and less discussion. He said that he was sure he had made "too many concessions in an effort to have a colegial eldership." My wife and I were shocked! I remember holding hands with her through the meeting. I felt her grip tighten as the pastor outlined this new revoltion revalation. He went on to say that he had come to realize that as the senior pastor, he needed to take charge, lead the way, and and that he had failed to do so. He said that he needed men around him that supported his decisions, not fought with them. "If you aren't with me, then... there are plenty of other churches in town with empty pews."
The meeting continued and didn't get any prettier. Nobody raised their voices or anything like that; it was just an ugly meeting on so many levels. My wife and I were told that we were shrinking away from a test from God; the church drama was a spritual stepping stone that had been placed in front of us. If we backed away from this test (by leaving the church), we were told that we would never experience any meaningful spiritual growth. We wouldn't experience true friendship. We would wander the desert like Israel did after not going to battle when God called them. True fellowship would illude us. The discussion turned to other churches and we were told specifically that "its a desert out there... it really is."
And then, the curse that crossed the line.
We were told DIRECTLY, twice, that if we left, the pastor was very very concerned that we would end up like my wife's parents, who had just filed divorce papers the day before after a very painful marriage of over twenty years. I interrupted the pastor as he was about to reitterate his "fears" for the third time.
"Stop!" I said. "I'm telling you right now that if you say that again, we will get up and leave. Do not say that again. Do you understand?"
He was surprised at my assertiveness and said he didn't know what I was referring to. I reminded him that he was about to, for the third time, suggest that my wife and I were destined to the same difficult life and painful divorce as her parents were going through that very week. He said he hadn't said such a thing. His wife reminded him that he had and told him that he needed to back off.
Even now as I write this it gets my blood boiling. Here is a man who has known me and my wife our entire lives. He knew the painful details of my in-law's divorce. He knew my wife and I and our fears. I too come from a divorced family and he knew that. And here he was pulling what appeared to be some sort of power play / manipulation trick. It wasn't going to work with me and I wouldn't let him mess with my wife. But it pissed me off, thats for sure.
Thankfully, it also made it easy, and obvious, that it was time for us to go.
I don't remember what else was said in the meeting. I think I kind of put a damper on things but calling out the pastor for what he had said.
Looking back, I can't imagine that the pastor was purposefully being manipulative or hurtful. I just can't imagine that. I prefer to think that he was just doing his best to love us, maybe the only way he knows how. I believe he thinks he was doing the right thing in trying to "warn" us. Makes me sad to think of how screwed up it is to hear stuff like that coming from a senior pastor.

We didn't have a marriage class meeting the week after we met with the pastor. We had taken it off because there was only one more class left, the final evaluations. Plus, there was an all-church retreat that the students were encouraged to go to that weekend.
The following Tuesday at about 5:30pm, I got a call from one of the students trying to confirm the time and place of our meeting.
"Same time, same place," I told him. (Our house, 7:00pm)
"hmm... there is some conflicting information going around then. I was told by Jim it was at his house," said the student.
"Oh... well, you know, maybe Jim got confused or something. I'll give him a ring. Its at our house as usual..."
I didn't think much of it. Sometimes miscommunication happens, ya know? I hung up and dialed Jim who informed me that no, the meeting was at HIS house tonight and I was not invited.
"HUH?! What are you talking about man?"... I asked.
Jim told me that over the weekend at the all-church retreat the senior pastor had informed him that I was no longer to be allowed to teach the class because I was leaving the church.
I was shocked. "Are you serious?" I asked Jim.
"Yes," he said. "But can you bring over the gifts for the students so we can give them out tonight?"
I was just kind of numb. I told my wife what was going on and she was livid. I did my best to calm her down and told her that this was exactly the type of thing we needed (in addition to the crazy meeting with the pastor and his wife) to help make our decision to leave one that we never second guess. I grabbed the students' gifts and headed over to Jim's house to just be done with it. He came outside and thanked me. I asked Jim what he said when the pastor told him that I shouldn't be at the class anymore. Jim said that it was hard to say it, but that he agreed with the pastor.
"WHAT?! Are you serious? Why?!" I asked.
He went on to say that there were several things about me that really bothered him about the last several months: 1) I had changed my style of leadership, 2) I had told the students that I was leaving the church, and 3) I had been meeting with one of the students in a prayer group.
"???!?!?!??!?!! ... Um, what are you talking about? Why is this the first I've heard of any leadership style issues I have? And don't you remember that you are the one that recommended I tell the students that I was leaving?! Why is having a prayer group with a student in the class a bad thing? And if it was not appropriate for some reason why didn't you say something six months ago when I told you?! ... and why didn't you or the pastor call me to discuss this decision?"
All I got in response from Jim was "blah blah blah." No examples. Just vague accusations of being "different" lately. Jim confessed that the pastor had told him that it was inappropriate for me to tell the students I was leaving. I asked Jim if he told the pastor it was HIS idea. Jim said it wasn't important. Jim told me that the pastor also thought it was inappropriate that I had been praying with one of the members of our group. I asked Jim if he told the pastor that he had been fully aware of our prayer meeting and encouraged it. He said that wasn't important either.

I hopped in the car and headed home. I couldn't believe it. Jim had seen my wife and I pour everything we had, our entire hearts and souls, in to this marriage group. I had towed the line and picked up the slack when he couldn't carry his part of the load because of his ailing wife. And I had been suportive of the leadership at all of our meetings. And now this. Just absolute garbage. Thankfully, he and I were not particularly good friends or the pain would have been worse. We had seen battle together, and in that regard had been brought close but it wasn't like my best friend turned on me. Still, it was a taste of betrayal. And I didn't like it.

I returned home and told my wife everything. I decided to call the senior pastor who I discovered was irate with me and was not willing discuss ANYTHING with me. "I've made up my mind and the decision is final. We have nothing left to discuss. Goodbye." He said as he hung up on me.
SHOCK. Seriously. SHOCK. My wife, oh she was not happy at all.

Soon our phones began to ring. The students were calling us and they were very very upset at the news. They wanted to stage a protest. They told me they had all decided to boycott the meeting and come to my house instead. I told them not to. "Just go to the meeting and get it over with. Its the last class, ya know? We love you guys lots..."
After the meeting things did not improve. Six of the eight students (the other two had to get back to babysitters) came to our house in turmoil. They were crying and angry and curious about what the heck was going on. They informed us that the pastor had sent his son and daughter-in-law to "fill in" for us. They hadn't had any dealings with our class whatsoever. They hadn't seen us lead it. They didn't know anything about any of the marriages. They hadn't walked through all the issues... and yet they were brought in to help conduct the final evaluations meeting and to explain why my wife and I were not allowed to lead (they basically were the senior pastor's messengers). The students were shocked to hear the son and daughter-in-law of the pastor detail all the reasons that we were unfit to be leaders anymore. One of the students called it a "two hour long Miroslav and wife bashing session." Rumors and accusations against us were flying. One of the students asked if it was true that I "cursed out the pastor." ... ??? ... uh, no.
The evaluations hadn't been completed that night at the marriage class meeting, they spent the whole time trying to convince the bewildered class that removing us from the class was the right thing to do. My wife and I comforted the students, told them that we agreed it was completely wacky, but that we thought they should just go to class the next week to finish things up and be done with it all. They did.

Over the next several weeks, I had a couple of phone conversations with the pastor's son, who had been a long time friend. I told him that he had blindly followed "marching orders" from his father, the pastor. I told him he had no business getting involved in that situation. And if he felt like he did have a role to play, he should have called me ahead of time to make sure he was getting the straight scoop. Couldn't the meeting been put off a bit to make sure things were being handled properly? I told him it almost seemed like he had been used as a pawn in his father's fight against my dad. I didn't know that to be true for sure but it sure felt like that was what was going on. My dad has an argument with the senior pastor and leaves the church... then I announce I'm going to be leaving... and the pastor sends his son to usher me out. Just kind of weird, ya know? Why not be a man about it and go clean up your own mess rather than send your son to do it? Bah. Finally, I told the pastor's son that I lost my respect for him. He was sorry to hear that. Yeah, well... what can I say.
My wife also had a conversation with the daughter-in-law not too long after we left. My wife is so awesome. She took the Truth to this girl and rocked her world. She had no answer for any of the challenges my wife brought and instead deferred to the "I was following my husband" excuse. PUKE. Some of the questions my wife brought demanded an answer and that excuse didn't cut the mustard. The daughter-in-law said she'd look in to it and get back to my wife. She never did.

And thats the one-post version of how things went down as my wife and I left the church that was NewHope. Glad to be out of that mess, thats for dang sure!

52 Comments:

Blogger David Porta said...

Miroslav said...
>The pastor said he needed more authority and less discussion. He went on to say that he had come to realize that as the senior pastor, he needed to take charge, lead the way, and and that he had failed to do so.<

Scary stuff, indeed.

A pastor is a shepherd. It has the same root as "food."

"Feed my sheep."

I once complained to a pastor that the church should have communion more frequently, given Lutheran understanding of that sacrament.

Pastor said...
>I could tell them I was increasing the frequency, and they would support me in that; but it needs to come from them. It isn't my job to tell the church what to do. It's my job to be their pastor.<

That knocked me for a loop. While he agreed with me about the eucharist, he didn't think that imposing his will was what the congregation needed. He exhibited the heart of a servant. I learned something that day, simply by his example. Now, *that's* a pastor!

Friday, December 16, 2005 5:20:00 AM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Yeah, we were pretty surprised too. Looking back, I always knew that things were this way... but I accepted it for some reason. I bought in to it as "godly authority." After we left and experienced other churches in the city, we became more and more aware of how weird things were at NH. We too found several pastors who exhibited the type of heart your pastor did.
More on that in the next chapter.

Friday, December 16, 2005 12:02:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good times!

I just met this week with one of the NH elders and his wife with a small group of folks that meet to pray and plan a Young Life High School in Oak Park. (If the other elders knew they were praying at my house they would be in really big trouble!)

I asked them to stay after the meeting and we made a quick visit to the events of the past 3 1/2 years. After talking (sort of) for about 10 minutes they told me that God had not done any of the things He wanted to do in my heart during this time of trial.

They have both become just like the senior "pastor."
Sees all, knows all.

After reading this blog, I am reminded about how much my wife and I were becoming the same.

Merciful God.

I felt sick for two days after.

Friday, December 16, 2005 3:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dude, are you sure your not taking any liberties with that story? I don't remember it happening exactly like that in relation to the students....but this all comes from a guy who just learned the months of the year. Remember also that this story should be read through the lens of pissed off emotion.....and that there are two sides to every story. I only know your story. The whole thing creates all of these conflicted emotions within me and when you describe some of those people like you did I only become more confused.
The pastor was right about one thing, Is your walk with the Lord stronger today than it was when this whole mess started? I don't know if that means anything or not but I have been challenged several times, and failed several times just by being a bystander to this fiasco.
But I thank God that my love for him has grown because I could have very easily been a victim of this.

Friday, December 16, 2005 4:12:00 PM  
Blogger Deborah said...

Well, you were certainly right about similarity of stories, eh? Same song, 30th verse or so. Really, in my opinion, this goes waaaayy back.
The thing to be grateful for is that when things got ugly, it did make things very clear for you.
I thank God SO MUCH that things got funky with us, or my hubby probably would not have left. And, as much as people at at the time wanted to say it was all my doing, I REALLY was doing that whole "defer to the husband thing" you mentioned. I planned with ALL MY HEART to follow my husband on staying and trying to reform the church, or leaving and finding a new church home (I knew I could live ANYWHERE, even Iraq or China, if it was what God wanted, and I trusted God to lead my hubby). Hubby was very, very unclear on the best thing to do -- until the poop hit the fan. And things became blessedly clear.
Tough. Hard. Crazy. Strange. Weird. But clear as a country sky. And that was a blessing.
I am truly sorry that you and your wife had to experience such pain. And I know it must have hurt you worse than our little deal. We had both been involved in other churches over our childhoods and were not ever as deeply committed or in love with the church as you and your wife were.
I know also that the Lord walked with me through the year or so after that in such powerful ways that I could actually feel Him, sense Him, hear Him.
I pray that in all your doubts and struggles, from the church stuff to the questions about the Lord and His way of working things, that His very Presence would invade your house and heart, press you from all sides, and keep heating things up :)

Friday, December 16, 2005 4:12:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

DM,
sorry that you continue to be such a target. That sucks.

Anonymous 2,
No... I'm not taking any liberties, but I'm certainly open to correction if I am remember something incorrectly. Was there something specific that was off?
"this story should be read through the lens of pissed off emotion" - Not sure why you'd try to discount what I'm saying because of the fact that it pissed off (which I freely admit in my story).
"there are two sides to every story" - True that. Please feel free to share your version if you've got a different view.
"The pastor was right about one thing" - hmm... very surprised you'd say that. The pastor was not saying that my spiritual walk would suffer as a result of the church's collapse and the resulting fallout, he was saying that we would suffer because we were not being "good soldiers" (my words) and we were not staying at NH, where God wanted us. Are you saying that my spiritual condition is evidence that he was right?

Friday, December 16, 2005 4:20:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Mama to 3 Soaring Arrows,
Yup... very similar. Spooky. I also felt, as you did after your experience, that God was leading us out of that place and that He strengthened us during the years after we left. That faith made it all a lot easier!
Thanks for the words of encouragement!

Friday, December 16, 2005 4:23:00 PM  
Blogger Deborah said...

I just read Anonymous 2's comments, and though he/she is obviously a friend of yours, I was reminded that folks from all sides of this story will be reading these posts/comments!
For the record, I'd like to state my position that although I DO think there are some very wrong ways of thinking that have been a part of the church for many, many years, I do NOT think the whole church is damned. In fact, my biggest concern is whether those wrong ways of thinking are still in effect not only with some of those still there, but with many of those that have left. And I still can't figure out exactly what all those wrong ways of thinking are -- it is hard to put a finger on them, precisely.
And when I mention "the church," I am thinking of a church that really doesn't exist anymore. As Miroslav stated in one post a long while back, it is hard to know what is going on there right now. And, actually, I know of many VERY GOOD things that are going on there RIGHT NOW.
That is thing about God. This was hard for me to "get" when we first left and I was hurt, and I saw God reaching the lost or healing hurts through people that I saw as "defective." Well, welcome to reality. We are all a bunch of defects. Looking at church history can reveal this. Yet, throughout all of time, the good/holier times and the screwed up times, God is still God, and His work is still done.

IS Anonymous 2 questioning whether your spiritual condition reveals whether or not you were in the right? I hope not, cuz this is one thing I felt the church had as a "wrong way of thinking" when we left. I asked God to please not let any tradegdy strike us for the year or so after we left because I feared the old churchgoers would say, "See! God's blessing not on them. Them wrong." When frankly, I don't think God is that easy to figure out.
Personally, I do think you have come to this Faith Crisis partly because of this church stuff. But I think you are in a "better" place (I am not saying good place, ok?) than before. If nothing "went down," you would probably still be really involved in church, surrounded by good friends, obeying the law of the pack -- and possibly feeling the joy in all those things so strongly that you didn't notice what was really going on between you and the Lord.
With the other stuff out of the way -- be some of it admittedly really, really good stuff -- you are left with nothing but you and God.
Now we just pray for God to getcha.
One way or another...gonna getcha, getcha, getcha :)

Friday, December 16, 2005 4:35:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Mama to 3 (for now),
Good post.
Man, tell me about it with that scared-to-run-in-to-bad-season-of-life-thing. My family has TOTALLY gone through that. As amatter of fact, my dad got sick not too long after leaving and that was something that I wrestled with big time. At a certain point (as evidenced by this blog), you kind of realize... um, thats retarded. Number one, the God of the Bible is not a formulaic diety whereby sin = bad stuff and righteous living = good stuff. Secondly, why do I care about what people think who I KNOW have a twisted way of seeing things?

"Run, run, as fast as you can
You can't catch me, I'm the gingerbread man!" :D

Friday, December 16, 2005 4:45:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Anonymous 2,
Hey bro, you definately did come across as second-guessing the accuracy of my depiction of the story. Please clarify so that readers of my blog will not think I'm making this stuff up. If you don't remember what happened, please don't assume (and question me publicly accusing me that) I'm "taking liberties." Either pony up what ReallyHappened or clarify that you may not remember, k? Or ask your wife (or the other students)... I'm sure they'd remember.

Friday, December 16, 2005 5:15:00 PM  
Blogger David Porta said...

Miroslav said...
>my dad got sick not too long after leaving and<

I have heard that emotional crisis does correlate with disease. You're having a rough time, emotional stress, then you get sick, the flu, cancer, whatever.

Dunno if it's scientifically substantiated.

Isn't plague one of the four horsemen?

I looked, and there before me was a pale horse! Its rider was named Death, and Hades was following close behind him. They were given power over a fourth of the earth to kill by sword, famine and plague, and by the wild beasts of the earth.

The birds are coming!

Friday, December 16, 2005 6:25:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2 -
I was very shocked when I first read your comment. However, after considering it for a bit, I remembered the place you were at in life and then it makes a little more sense. As I recall, you and your wife seemed to be the least concerned about what was happening to us. This was probably because your marriage was still on shaky ground and that was your main focus. Regardless of your perception, these events DID occur. I remember even the elder's daughter that was in the class was outraged and was threatening to leave the church if it didn't get fixed. (Of course, after speaking with her dad she was convinced that she would stay). You are right that there are two sides to every story and I would really LOVE to hear what their side is and how they would ever be able to justify it. I assume that they cannot since when I spoke to the pastor's daughter-in-law the last time and asked her to get back to me with reasons, she never did.
Just in case you were wondering what I thought...

Saturday, December 17, 2005 7:56:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok,let me clarify what my heart on the matter was.
1]The whole thing with the pastor and his advice to Miroslav is that there is the possibility that there would be some truth in some of the words that were spoken so long ago, and we should consider that.
2]You guys were on my mind during that time very much even though that was such an uncertin time in my life. I may not show it like others but lets not assume that I wrote you 2 off.
3]I don't agree with NH in alot of things, lets be carefull how we talk about others.
4]Thanx for the strong response

Saturday, December 17, 2005 9:34:00 AM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Anonymous2,
First and foremost, please do not use real names of those involved. I've had to delete and repost both of your previous comments to maintain anonymity of those involved. Thanks!
In response to your four points:
1) Not true. What makes manipulations so powerful is that it has a partial truth in it. Thats its biggest hook. I have absolutely no problem in saying that the pastor's doom and gloom prediction was nothing more than an old school guilt enducing effort on his part to get us to stay at his church. And thats not to say he was some sort of complete and absolute bully that was out to get us... as stated in other posts, I believe he was trying to act in love the best he knew how. He just had a very twisted view of things.
2) I know that neither Janice nor myself were written off by you. Neither of us felt that way then, nor do we now. That wasn't her point at all. The point in her comment was that our ugly situation near the end was simply not the biggest blip on your radar at the time. (and that's absolutely a good thing!) You just have to understand that given those circumstances, for you to come in here and suggest I took liberties with my retelling of the story without giving any corrections or some sort of alternative viewpoint is quite offensive. You are challenging my integrity with that type of question and thats garbage if you aren't willing to back it up. So, as I mentioned earlier, you should really either retract the question and admit that you are not fully aware of what went on (or don't remember b/c you had bigger fish to fry at the time), or pony up more info.
3) Good point, agreed.
4) Gut check #2? ;D

Saturday, December 17, 2005 9:49:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi Miroslav,

I am awake and have been catching up on my favorite blog. I came across MT3SA's:

"In fact, my biggest concern is whether those wrong ways of thinking are still in effect not only with some of those still there, but with many of those that have left. And I still can't figure out exactly what all those wrong ways of thinking are -- it is hard to put a finger on them, precisely."

There are many wrong ways of thinking that I took part in and, I believe, been a victim of. One FAT wrong way of thinking is "playing the odds". I did this way back on Tribute when about 40-50 people left (I can't quite remember how many, but it was sizable). I thought: "What are the odds that our leadership is off on this one?" Mind you, I didn't, nor do I today, know what the issues even were that prompted the exodus. But, that didn't matter. I was playing the odds. Fast forward to August of 2002. What were the odds that Miroslav's father was right? The odds were definitely not in his favor. Impossible in my mind. On the flipside, what were the odds that the rest of the eldership was wrong? Also, not very good. Again, impossible.

Some of us tried to "reason" with Miroslav's dad. I happened to be one of them. I SINCERELY thought that I was in the right. I even told him so. Boy, was I wrong.

But many people did not ever speak with him. Nor have they still. Or, if they do finally decide to talk (which is indeed rare), they go in with blinders so huge and lenses so unrelentingly clouded, that nothing is gained by it. This is simply because they straight-up believed what they have been told. END OF STORY. They believe it because they trust the leadership. And oh, the tragedy begins...This is why even my going to Miroslav's father NEVER helped the situation. You see, we were all programmed to "defend the leadership". After all, this is the Biblical thing to do, right? "And if you don't stand and defend your leadership, then you are sinning against God." The problem is, this rule becomes so powerful and in-grained that you will defend anything and everything, including sin. Or you will at least "dumb it (the sin) down" to a level that seems more...palatable. Defending sin is defending the indefensible. In fact, it's sinful.

Those that never investigate the matter continue to play the odds. All they know is that Miroslav's father left them. And to the average NH-er, this is a betrayal. The deception of it all is, is that they never asked HIM what his side of the story is or why he left. To them (and to me at the time) he had no excuse, because again...what are the odds that he actually has a good one? And so sadly, they stay in the dark. If they only knew how right he was for leaving...and about everything else. He was right. Way back when, he was right. And the fog was powerful enough that he somehow was almost fooled into thinking that HE was the problem. This fog is Scriptural. After all, how can John the Baptist, who had a FANTASTIC head-start on the rest of us sinners:

Luke 1:15
...for he will be great in the sight of the Lord. He is never to take wine or other fermented drink, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth.

and

28I tell you, among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet the one who is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he."

...who knew things...REALLY knew things:

Luke 3
16John answered them all, "I baptize you with[c] water. But one more powerful than I will come, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

...and saw things...REALLY saw things:

John 1
32Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. 33I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, 'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.' 34I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God."

Jesus' First Disciples
35The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. 36When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, "Look, the Lamb of God!"

...have doubts like this:

??!!!

Jesus and John the Baptist
18John's disciples told him about all these things. Calling two of them, 19he sent them to the Lord to ask, "Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?"
20When the men came to Jesus, they said, "John the Baptist sent us to you to ask, 'Are you the one who was to come, or should we expect someone else?' "

Mind you, John was in prison at the time he had these doubts. I think this was his fog-moment. Actually, Miroslav, as I've been writing this, I am thinking that you are in VERY GOOD company when it comes to losing faith!!

Getting back to playing the odds. Everybody that only listened to the elders' version of events and went with that, is, once again, playing the odds. I love this verse in Job where he states something very powerful and Godly (try not to jump through to the end...really read this through and meditate on what the Lord is showing us):

Job 29 (NASB)
Job's Past Was Glorious
1And Job again took up his (A)discourse and said,
2"Oh that I were as in months gone by,
As in the days when God (B)watched over me;
3When (C)His lamp shone over my head,
And (D)by His light I walked through darkness;
4As I was in [a]the prime of my days,
When the (E)friendship of God was over my tent;
5When the Almighty was yet with me,
And my children were around me;
6When my steps were bathed in (F)butter,
And the (G)rock poured out for me streams of oil!
7"When I went out to (H)the gate of the city,
When I took my seat in the square,
8The young men saw me and hid themselves,
And the old men arose and stood.
9"The princes (I)stopped talking
And (J)put their hands on their mouths;
10The voice of the nobles was (K)hushed,
And their (L)tongue stuck to their palate.
11"For when (M)the ear heard, it called me blessed,
And when the eye saw, it gave witness of me,
12Because I delivered (N)the poor who cried for help,
And the (O)orphan who had no helper.
13"The blessing of the one (P)ready to perish came upon me,
And I made the (Q)widow's heart sing for joy.
14"I (R)put on righteousness, and it clothed me;
My justice was like a robe and a turban.
15"I was (S)eyes to the blind
And feet to the lame.
16"I was a father to (T)the needy,
And I investigated the case which I did not know.

There it is: "And I investigated the case which I did not know"

and (NKJV): 'And I searched out the case that I did not know.'
and (NIV): 'I took up the case of the stranger.'
and (KJV): '...and the cause which I knew not I searched out.'
and (NLT): 'and made sure that even strangers received a fair trial.'

Playing the odds is wrong-thinking in EVERY way. As one of my 'anchors' (whom I love dearly) has said before: "If anybody needs a Scriptural example of this, "I submit to you the Book of Job." Or the spies:

Numbers 13
Report on the Exploration
26 They came back to Moses and Aaron and the whole Israelite community at Kadesh in the Desert of Paran. There they reported to them and to the whole assembly and showed them the fruit of the land. 27 They gave Moses this account: "We went into the land to which you sent us, and it does flow with milk and honey! Here is its fruit. 28 But the people who live there are powerful, and the cities are fortified and very large. We even saw descendants of Anak there. 29 The Amalekites live in the Negev; the Hittites, Jebusites and Amorites live in the hill country; and the Canaanites live near the sea and along the Jordan."

30 Then Caleb silenced the people before Moses and said, "We should go up and take possession of the land, for we can certainly do it."

31 But the men who had gone up with him said, "We can't attack those people; they are stronger than we are." 32 And they spread among the Israelites a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, "The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there are of great size. 33 We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."

Good ol' Caleb.

Lastly, MT3SA's concern about "whether those wrong ways of thinking are still in effect...with many of those that have left."

The "fog" is powerful indeed. I am a witness to its power and it's pull. I have my own story which would probably blow your mind. Luckily, I went through my 'battle' with warriors who anchored me...who helped me to stand. I don't know where I'd be without them. I can't tell you how many times we spoke on the phone late some night and would launch into prayer: "And Lord, please God, show us if it is us who is just not seeing these things correctly. Lord, we BEG you to show us if we are suffering from wrong-thinking." I believe we used those very words. I want you to know that God is faithful and that he is doing things to His Glory:

John 5
17Jesus said to them, "My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I, too, am working."

He's just not working fast enough.

(Hah!)

Psalm 18:30
The ways of God are without fault.

Amen.

People that have left have done and still do some serious soul-searching: "How can we have been so duped (by the enemy)?"

God honors this soul-searching:

James 4
6But he gives us more grace. That is why Scripture says:
"God opposes the proud
but gives grace to the humble."

God GENTLY humbled me. We were arrogant. I was arrogant. And I hate myself for it. God loves me though and has blessed me utterly. I am so happy for leaving NH. I don't say that lightly. Before we finally did leave, I was scared that one day I might regret it. But never, and I mean NEVER-EVER, have I doubted since we finally made the decision to go. If somebody from NH does read this, please, oh please Mr. or Mrs. NH-er, ask yourself why would I truly, TRULY and WITHOUT deception, truly be so happy to have left? Why would I (and I guess a hundred or so others) be so happy to have left...my home? OUR home? The only home I ever really knew? Why would I sacrifice all of that? Don't misunderstand me: I am not saying that everybody else had better leave as well. What I am saying, or asking, is to please, I beg you...think through why we HAD to leave.

One more thing that I read in a good book about character and why it matters: "A departure from the truth is a departure from God." Period.

Anonymous

Saturday, December 17, 2005 2:23:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bring it.
Same strange thanks from my house.

I was just lying in bed, waking from a nap and thanking God for His wonderous way of turning all things to good, for those who are called. May He have great mercy on us all in 2006 and the days to come.

Saturday, December 17, 2005 4:53:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Anonymous,
Holy smokes... good comment man!

Playing the odds is a good thing in Poker, but not when it comes to church discipline. :)

I agree with your arguments supporting the importance of researching a matter that has caused so much pain as this issue has. However, I'm not sure that Momma to 3 Soaring Arrows point was the same as the one you are discussing. I wonder if she was thinking something more along the lines of an earlier blog entry of mine: A letter arrived... Speak Momma Speak!

Sunday, December 18, 2005 4:51:00 PM  
Blogger Deborah said...

Actually I quite agreed with Anonymous' comments.
They seemed to be right on the money.
I really don't know if I personally can know what all the "issues" are.
That "letter arrived" post references one of the issues, I guess I would call that one "treating other Christians badly in the name of the Lord." Another one is surely "misuse of authority." Yet another issue would be the average sheep exercising blind trust in the words of those they look up to. Yet another would be looking to people, peers or leaders, for answers over and above looking to the Lord God and His Holy Word. And I was reminded by this post of another issue I see -- thinking that God blesses those who are doing right and curses those who are doing wrong -- in a black and white sort of way that is quite obvious to "everyone."
Really, there are probably so many issues. And not just issues with this church. Our experience with these issues happened largely with folks who have LEFT this church, so I have to worry if these issues have yet been stripped from their mainframes.
But there are so many issues all around us, with the world, with the American Church...and I guess the biggest issue is ME. I have to agree with, who was it -- Chesterson?, who said THE PROBLEM IN THE WORLD IS ME. I have issues too :)
Thank the Good Lord that He not only gave me heart to hear Him and a brain to reason, but a handbook of absolute truth to learn to live from.
Oh how I long for the grace to run further up and further in!
- MT3SA

Sunday, December 18, 2005 7:05:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

oh. cool then. ;D

Sunday, December 18, 2005 7:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, what I said is are you sure your not taking any liberties with your story, I didnt accuse you of taking liberties with your story. Think of what I said as a speed bump in your blogging hummer of happiness.
There was no discount taken at this register at the time I wrote you, and besides I have paid full price for that blessed entry.
Besides if I remember correctly Paul used names of people he disagreed with, for the purpose of being "in the light" no doubt.

Sunday, December 18, 2005 11:37:00 PM  
Blogger David Porta said...

>Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.<

Miroslav and his dad were teachers at NH?

>holding on to faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and so have shipwrecked their faith. Among them are *Hymenaeus* and *Alexander*, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme.<

What's going on here?

Sunday, December 18, 2005 11:45:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Anonymous 2&3,
Ok. Well, you say potato, I say potaatoe. I take it as an accusation. But... we can just let that be I suppose.

David Porta,
Please expand on your thoughts. I don't want to make any assumptions as to what your point is. Them be some heavy verses.

Monday, December 19, 2005 11:05:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll only accuse you of being a sexy blogger

Monday, December 19, 2005 12:28:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

in that case, guilty as charged.

Monday, December 19, 2005 12:42:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oy! The "rest of the story" makes me sick today. I didn't know you and Jannie had to go through that. I got a taste of the craziness in one meeting with the two old-time elders and their wives some months later when some of us tried to do something constructive and redemptive for repairing the mighty breach. I was stunned at the responses we were nailed with.

It was so wonderful for me when we knew we were done with what we had to offer the church.

Didn't know abt the root of "shepherd" being that of "food." Thanks to the "dentist" for the meat.

Monday, December 19, 2005 4:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Between Miroslav and A2 & A3, I have to side with Miroslav. This is why:

A2 says:

"Dude, are you sure your not taking any liberties with that story? I don't remember it happening exactly like that in relation to the students....but..."

You accuse him of taking liberties. No matter how you slice it, taking liberties is dishonest. Dishonesty is lying. God hates lying. You are simply saying that these events did not go down the way Miroslav states that they did (albeit 'exactly' you say). But you offer no other version.

Then you say:

"The pastor was right about one thing, Is your walk with the Lord stronger today than it was when this whole mess started? I don't know if that means anything or not BUT...blah blah blah blah blah"

That's just being mean in a sneaky way.

Then when challenged, you reply as A3:

"Hey, what I said is are you sure your not taking any liberties with your story, I didnt accuse you of taking liberties with your story. Think of what I said as a speed bump in your blogging hummer of happiness."

Your words remind me of this:

Proverbs
18 Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death, 19 Is the man who deceives his neighbor, And says, “I was only joking!”

You really should say something like: "Okay, Miroslav, I know that I wrote such-and-such, but I shouldn't have accused you like that.". You also kicked him while he was down by saying (and I repeat):

"The pastor was right about one thing, Is your walk with the Lord stronger today than it was when this whole mess started?"

That's jacked up.

If you're REALLY his friend, you REALLY should apologize right here and now.

Anonymous

Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:18:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Anonymous,
Holy can of whoop a** man! Well said. :)
(though I want to clarify that I don't disqualify A2,3 as a friend for his statements here)

Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:47:00 PM  
Blogger Deborah said...

This Last Anonymous post has got Hubby and I feeling very sad.

It’s not that we desire to defend Anonymous 2/3 as we really don’t know the situation any better than most readers. We haven’t spoken with Anon 2/3 and don’t know where he is coming from besides what we read here.

However, reading through these comments reminds us – in a clear and painful way -- of another “issue” that we see with the old “wrong ways of thinking.” Maybe we would refer to this “issue” as “hanging someone on a technicality instead of trying to see someone’s heart”.

One of the mistakes we made when we left NH was being too free with our words and too trusting of our “friends.” We thought that if we just talked freely from the thoughts emitting from our hearts and heads, that our friends would seek to hear the message of our hearts. Instead, they (a small group of people) latched on to a few words here and there and made our life a living hell by turning those words back on us.

Should we have been wiser, not to speak as freely as we did? Most certainly. Should we have not been so naive and trusting? Oh, you betcha. Should we have prayed more, trusted God more, and explained ourselves a lot less? Heck yes.

We have to wonder if Anon 2/3 has a similar problem – speaking too freely and being too trusting of having his friends seek to understand him.

A few points of consideration:

The Last Anonymous said:
“You accuse him of taking liberties.”

Um, Anonymous 2/3 did NOT accuse Miroslav of taking liberties.

As far as we can read, and we quote:

"Dude, are you sure you’re not taking any liberties with that story?”

“Are you sure you’re not” sounds to us like a question of clarification. And the “I don’t remember it that way” sounds like his recollection is a bit different that Miroslav’s. If that’s a crime, we have problems with our Holy Bible as the gospels vary a bit from point of view to point of view, and I certainly wouldn’t “accuse” Luke of making accusations against Matthew.
Our opinion is that Anonymous 2/3 SHOULD have stated what point of view he had instead of leaving it open-ended, but this still does not make him guilty of ACCUSING MIROSLAV OF LYING. And because Miroslav is a good friend of Anon 2/3, he will seek to see this truth in his friend’s heart, before getting his panties all in a ruffle.

The other Anonymous -- the long, great commentator, Anon the Great? -- made a point of saying that one of the “wrong ways of thinking” at NH was the sheep not looking deep into both sides of the story. Should Miroslav not welcome someone who wants to look into both sides of the story? Someone who isn’t “playing the odds” of blind trust? What a wonderful trait! This looking into both sides of the story may be seen as an unexpected surprise for a sheep fresh out of NH. Praise the Lord, ya know? Let’s investigate. Let’s figure it out. Let’s leave room for others to do this. In the end, Truth will prevail.

Last Anonymous said
“No matter how you slice it, taking liberties is dishonest. Dishonesty is lying. God hates lying.”

And next

“Proverbs 18 Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death, 19 Is the man who deceives his neighbor, And says, ‘I was only joking!’”

Last Anonymous has provided us with a classic example of setting up a Straw Man Argument and knocking it down. ACCUSING Anonymous 2/3 of something he DID NOT DO and then showing scripture proofs for how bad that thing is that he didn’t do, and then demanding that if he is a real friend he apologize for the thing he didn’t do. Talk about deceiving your neighbor!

Referring to Anon 2/3’s comments, "The pastor was right about one thing, Is your walk with the Lord stronger today than it was when this whole mess started? I don't know if that means anything or not BUT...blah blah blah blah blah"

Last Anonymous replied,
”That's just being mean in a sneaky way.”

LA, how do you know it is being mean in a sneaky way? Maybe you know Anon 2/3 very well and are speaking with authority on this. To us, from reading this blog, it appears that Anon 2/3 was a former student of Miroslav’s, someone who used to look up to MIroslav’s walk with the Lord, and is now seeing his older brother in a major crisis of faith. Anyone with any bit of the “me/good = God’s blessings” wrong way of thinking has got to weigh this out in their mind, ESPECIALLY after reading that Miroslav’s former pastor predicted doom and gloom. (For MT3SA’s feelings on this way of thinking, see earlier comments – short version: I think its nonsense). Can we give this guy a break and walk with him through this journey?

We challenge you, Last Anonymous, if you are REALLY interested in the truth, to not wrap Anon 2/3’s words in a stranglehold around his neck without first seeking to understand his point of view.

With the reaction you gave, If we were Anon 2/3, we would want to run away not only from NH but also from this blog.

Tuesday, December 20, 2005 10:42:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

WoOt! The fur is flyin' now! :)

MT3SA,
First what I agree with:
1) Straw Men are lame.
2) Your statement regarding “me/good = God’s blessings”. I agree it is a silly way to approach the God of the Bible. I give A2/3 the room to be a bit, um, confused on this issue and I don't take it to heart too much in light of his overall love for me. It did piss me off though.
However, I also contend that when man witnesses his friend getting "beat-up" due to another's immaturity (referring to LA reading A2/3's suggestion to me that the pastor was "right"), it would be that man's duty to stand up for his friend. And so, I don't knock LA's charge towards A2/3. I did soften his rebuke with a statement regarding my continued friendship with A2/3... but I would not go so far as to try to stop it all together. As a matter of fact, I appreciate the stepping up in my defense. Again, I defend the rights of all of us to draw our own battlelines of conscience.

And on to my disagreements:
"We have to wonder if Anon 2/3 has a similar problem – speaking too freely and being too trusting of having his friends seek to understand him." - No no. Thats not it at all. Maybe in YOUR situation that was the case. But not here at all.

First the technical stuff:
Re-read the original statement. It WAS an accusation, intended or not. Asking a question that starts with an "Are you sure" and also has a negative verb produces a clear insinuation. "Are you sure you aren't reading more into LA's post than what is written?" ... for instance, is more an accusation than a true question of "clarification", as you put it. But can you judge intent based on one possibly miscommunicated question? No. So...
Read further and A2 shifts his statement to the reader stating: "Remember also that this story should be read through the lens of pissed off emotion.....and that there are two sides to every story." - This statement clearly takes another step towards discounting my story.
So obviously, wether intentionally or not, his comment can easily be read as a challenge to the validity of what I had to say.

Now the "heart issue" stuff:
Anonymous 2/3's writings wreak of accusation and ignorance. You suggested that if I, Miroslav, truly wanted to seek truth that I would seek out his heart on the subject. I have. We have talked. He doesn't really care about discovering the truth of what happened. He is content to say he doesn't know. He has not, nor does he intend to seek out the various stories to try to come to some sort of opinion on the matter. He prefers to stay fully neutral regarding all of my leaving story, and the stories that I've discussed surrounding NH. (This is where he stood last week, the last time we talked.) I personally don't blame him for that. If that is where he had left things, at a decision to be ignorant, no problem by me mon.
The problem I take with A2/3, which I've told him directly and we will likely discuss further with him over lunch next week, is that he is content with his ignorance but decided to "throw arrows" of accusation and doubt as I share my struggle publicly. After his initial post, I gave him plenty of room to clarify, tell his version of the story, or to back off from his accusations. He did not retract them, but rather stated fairly dryly that he "did not accuse me..." in his earlier post. And all of a sudden the circle starts over again. Once again, he is a poor communicator... or is he? Is he trying to clear things up by stating that he has no intent to accuse me? Or is it a subtle way of dodging the fire by pointing to a technicality in that he did not OUTRIGHT accuse me? ... again, go further in the comment and you will find ANOTHER accusation. This time in a backhanded way... an accusation of me not wanting to be "in the light" as Paul was in his writings.

Let me just say clearly that I don't believe that we have the luxury of preserving our ignorance on a matter while knocking those who choose to pursue truth. That is whacked... or jacked... or just plain mean, however you want to say it. Its particularly hurtful when its done in the sort of glib way that A2/3 chose to write his comments.


You also suggest in your comment that A2/3 is more similar to the discrepencies between the gospels than the Proverb LA referred to. I think you are wwwwayyy off.
First... look at the obvious similarities with the Proverb situation. Hurling of an accusation (via a loaded question and a vague statement of disagreement)... followed by "but this all comes from a guy who just learned the months of the year" & "think of it as a speedbump in your hummer..." Don't you see how that falls in line with the "I was just kidding!" part of the proverb?(rhetorical) That Proverbs verse seems appropriate to the discussion to me.
Secondly, the Gospels never challenge one another by questioning if the other writers are "taking liberties" with their rendition of the story. If this was found in Mark, for instance: "And you must look at that fellow Matthew... are we sure he is not taking liberties with his story?"... every student of language would call that an accusation. It would undermine Matthew's writings. Thats a fact.

Early on you wrote: "However, reading through these comments reminds us–in a clear and painful way" ... and then felt compelled to write a very firm rebuking comment to LA. Why does LA not have the same right? I believe that he has gained similar clarity and pain after reading A2/3's posts. Don't you see how backwards your argument is? You are challenging LA for the fact that he was challenging A2/3! Craziness.

This, I suppose, goes back to the blog you referred to "A letter arrived..." .... and the issue of battlelines of conscience.

You see, I have no problem being challenged. But stay. Put up a fight. Say something. Stick to the battlelines of conscience if you are going to beat on the drums of war. Don't hurl a rock and take off running. Thats weak sauce. And thats what A2/3 has done.

You accuse A3 of not seeking out the heart of the matter, rather holding to technicalities... and yet I see hints of the same accused errors (which I do NOT believe to be errors, btw). There is no more than one genuine question in your comment to A3. You cannot possibly probe somebody's heart on a matter (A3 in this case) if all you do is make statements? It would seem that you have fallen in to the same alleged trap that A3 has.

Because of that, I find your challenge to LA to be quite ... um... hypocritical. (Not that I love you any the less for it.) Its hypocritical in the same way that the letter I got from Anon the Great was hypocritical.

I vote that so long as we are willing to defend our positions, let us all find the freedom to establish our battlelines of conscience and duke it out. A2/3 has not done that.




On a lighter note,
Don't you dare suggest that ANYBODY EVER LEAVE MY BLOG or you will be forbidden from posting ever again. ;) hehe...

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 12:35:00 AM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

oops, believe it or not, I left something out of that last comment. I agree with MT3SA that leaving out his version of the story is not what turns A2/3's comments in to an accusation.

Also, there was a third component as to why the first comment was obviously an accusation and that is the part that says: "I don't remember it happening exactly like that..."

Ok. That will do for now. Carry on.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 12:44:00 AM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

crap, just re-read my megacomment and realized that in the last paragraph I went on and on about A3... I meant LA. Oh well. Thats what the get for using the stinkin' anonymous option. ;p

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 1:07:00 AM  
Blogger Deborah said...

So, you said not to check the comments late at night, but our middle son woke up with foot pain and I couldn’t resist flipping on the computer.

I’m not going to argue all the technicalities as it would be just taking up space here and saying similar things to what’s already been said (hubby’s asleep so he can add in the a.m. if he feels like it). We pretty much already know we disagree on this type of thing. I see the points you are making and I know you see ours, and yet we don’t see eye-to-eye, and discussion probably won’t change this much.

(For the record, I think that word ACCUSATION is over-used with NH folks. It bothers me. It takes something that can be a small thing between friends and elevates it to a whole new level, in my mind. Makes me think of putting someone up on trial. I’m not arguing this point, just saying that the word gives me the eebie-jeebies and grates against my ears, especially when I hear it said over things that I don’t feel are life-and-death deals. I’m not just thinking of this here section of comments, but years of use.)

And, yeah, I hear you on the hypocrisy end of things – especially in regard to our writing A3/LA..

We thought about that as we were writing it. But we truly do feel that LA or A3 or whoever-he-or-she-is was WAY MORE CLEAR in his position than Anon 2/3. Our MAIN BEEF is that Anon 2/3 was RAILED AGAINST WITHOUT FIRST MAKING A CLEAR STATEMENT (and again, Anon 2/3 should have been more clear, but we feel from the statements made was not clear enough to warrant a rebuke like that. I know you think Anon 2/3 was clear enough, perhaps this is because you actually know him and talked to him about it?).

Perhaps we should have tried to find out for sure where A3 was coming from – but he seemed to be QUITE talented at making his position known. We feel that his point comes through loud and clear, and this is the point we took issue with.

For example, don’t these statements sound pretty clear to you?
“If you're REALLY his friend, you REALLY should apologize right here and now.”
“That's jacked up.”
“You also kicked him while he was down…”
“You really should say…Miroslav…I shouldn't have accused you like that”
“Your words remind me of this: Proverbs 18 Like a madman who throws firebrands, arrows, and death, 19 Is the man who deceives his neighbor, And says, “I was only joking!”
“That's just being mean in a sneaky way.”
“You are simply saying that these events did not go down the way Miroslav states that they did (albeit 'exactly' you say). But you offer no other version.”
“You accuse him of taking liberties. No matter how you slice it, taking liberties is dishonest. Dishonesty is lying. God hates lying.”

Call me crazy, but A3’s position seems pretty clear and like there is not much room to ask for clarification. I think we got the point.

Miroslav, I guess it is good that you approve of someone standing up for you in the way LA/A3 did. I know that it makes you feel loved. It just smells too much like old times for my taste.

And about that you may be right – perhaps the old smell of rotten stuff that is flooding the memories is getting in the way of seeing what is going on here. Perhaps our old experiences cloud our judgment of A3 and we see his words as more harsh than they were meant to be.

It’s not too much fun resurrecting memories that have been dead and buried for awhile, in fact it sucks. So thanks for bringing it all up :)

Oh, one more thing in re-reading your post (I'm really tired now). We weren't trying to say "this verse applies better than that verse." We were just trying to say that people see things differently. Just like you guys mentioned about this Anon 2/3 guy having his eyes on his marriage at the time of your departure -- his point of view will be drastically different. There will be things he didn't pay attention to, things he saw that you didn't, etc. etc. That is the similarity we meant in the gospels. Luke remembered things important to him, Matthew remembered things important to him.
As far as the Proverbs verse, again, it is probably those "good old times" clouding my judgment again. It really is lame to have people use scripture against you in a strong and harsh way that doesn't seem theologically correct. This verse just seems way too harsh for THIS situation. Is Anon 2/3 a madman? A madman shooting ARROWS, FIREBRANDS, AND DEATH? I see the “only joking part” fits. And I see the idea A3 was getting at – but I think it is much too harsh. That's the root of what we were getting at with this verse -- not meaning to compare it with the gospels. Hope this makes some sense. Otherwise I’ll have to clarify tomorrow, darn it, and I have Christmas to get ready for.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 1:42:00 AM  
Blogger Deborah said...

Also, this anonymous stuff is frustrating. It is lame God-only-knows what opinions your readers are forming against us when we have no clue who they are! We have no one to get upset at :) and the flip-side, it is harder to understand where someone is coming from and empathize with them when that person is reduced to words on a page and is not a "real" person.
I say you figure out how to have your commentators leave their opinions over the microphone. That would be, uh, fun.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 1:50:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Disclaimer: I am about to post this reply to MT3SA's, but it took me so long, that now I see that EVERYBODY in the world has written back. I read a few lines, but without reading anymore, I will post this anyway. I hope this doesn't confuse everybody too much.

MT3SA's,

Good challenge. I have lots to say on this issue, but I must first ask you:

Why didn't you challenge Miroslav's responses?

His:

"You just have to understand that given those circumstances, for you to come in here and suggest I took liberties with my retelling of the story without giving any corrections or some sort of alternative viewpoint is quite offensive. You are challenging my integrity with that type of question and thats garbage if you aren't willing to back it up. So, as I mentioned earlier, you should really either retract the question and admit that you are not fully aware of what went on (or don't remember b/c you had bigger fish to fry at the time), or pony up more info."

--and--

“Anonymous 2,
Hey bro, you definately did come across as second-guessing the accuracy of my depiction of the story. Please clarify so that readers of my blog will not think I'm making this stuff up. If you don't remember what happened, please don't assume (and question me publicly accusing me that) I'm "taking liberties." Either pony up what ReallyHappened or clarify that you may not remember, k?”

--and finally--

“Anonymous 2&3,
Ok. Well, you say potato, I say potaatoe. I take it as an accusation.”

Read once again what A2/3 wrote:

A2 says:

"Dude, are you sure your not taking any liberties with that story? I don't remember it happening exactly like that in relation to the students....but..."

Would you agree that taking liberties is lying? If not, then I don't know what to tell you. If you do, then here it is:

A2 says:

"Dude, are you sure your not LYING with that story? I don't remember it happening exactly like that in relation to the students....but..."

MT3SA’s says:

“Last Anonymous has provided us with a classic example of setting up a Straw Man Argument and knocking it down. ACCUSING Anonymous 2/3 of something he DID NOT DO and then showing scripture proofs for how bad that thing is that he didn’t do, and then demanding that if he is a real friend he apologize for the thing he didn’t do. Talk about deceiving your neighbor!”

Ouch! That hurts!

Let me ask you: Are you accusing me of lying? Of course you are! It’s right there at the end!

Sweetheart! I am going to be spending eternity in Heaven with you, ya know?

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

Hmmm…“something he DID NOT DO”, you say.

Miroslav ENDS it with:

“…. I take it as an accusation.”

I say:

“You accuse him of taking liberties.”

Dearest Mama,

We are saying the SAME thing.

I honestly read an accusation through and through. It's veiled (or suggested) but it is what it is.

Even Miraslov said:

"You are challenging my integrity with that type of question and thats garbage if you aren't willing to back it up."

And

“…for you to come in here and suggest I took liberties with my retelling of the story…”

Let me be the first to agree with you when you say:

“However, reading through these comments reminds us – in a clear and painful way -- of another “issue” that we see with the old “wrong ways of thinking.” Maybe we would refer to this “issue” as “hanging someone on a technicality instead of trying to see someone’s heart”.

YES!! One cannot ascribe motives, so…with that:

Dearest Mama, A2/3 may not MEAN what he says. And that’s fine. But he IS saying it. I can only go by WHAT HE SAYS. (If I could underline, I would—sometimes I make it bold for emphasis only—I’m not screaming it at you)

To put it another way (and this has NOTHING to do with A2/3—I’m just trying to make a point):

If you gossip about me and slander me and lie about me, I can deduce BIBLICALLY that you hate me and are my enemy.

How can I do that? I mean, isn't that jumping to conclusions?

No. Is isn’t:

Proverbs 26:28
A lying tongue hates those it hurts...

God is the one who gets to hand out titles. You would be my enemy if you were to do such things. Even if you FELT like you were my friend or said you were my friend, you are not my friend. You simply are my enemy.

You see, you HAVE to be willing to let the words speak for themselves. Words mean something.

Proverbs 12:18
Reckless words pierce like a sword...

Dearest Mama,

This is my best to you right now. I will pray some more tonight and seek the Lord’s will for this conversation.

p.s. Try not to put A2/3 in your shoes (so to speak) in an IRONclad way. His situation here may be the same as your situation you speak of. Or not. What I am saying is, you may find yourself defending him because in doing that, you are really defending yourself on some level. And you don’t gotta do that.

p.s.s. I hope I made sense on that last ‘p.s.’…I will clarify it if it doesn’t read well. I gotta go to bed.

p.s.s.s. To you, I may have come across as a meanie (I’m not—ask Miroslav) but I was defending my friend. If you go back and look at every comment, other than ‘Janice’, I don’t think anybody defended Miroslav. He was on his own (and that’s not to say that it’s possible that people just didn’t read A2/3’s comments). Although Miroslav can handle himself (heck, I’m kinda scared of him!)…I just didn’t want him to get silence from the rest of us.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 2:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous will now be forever known as "Extra Strength Excedrin". Just kidding. From now on, call me "Dashboard". I gotta say that I am lost a little on the whole A2/3 thing. I see that some of you refer to me (Anonymous) as LA and A3. I was ONLY Anonymous.

A2 was also A3. See the comments he made.

MT3SA's,

When I quote that Proverb about the madman, I know that it sounds harsh. I'm really not even calling A2/3 a madman. The Bible is a book of principles, right? We've all said retarded things only to wish we could re-cant, right? Thus, I would not say this about ALL OF US IN THE WHOLE WORLD:

Proverbs 29:20
Do you see a man who speaks in haste? There is more hope for a fool than for him.

This is a man who, well...This is just what he DOES. This Prov 29 man does this CONTINUOUSLY.

Likewise, the man who "jacks up his neighbor" ALL THE TIME is spoken of as a madman. None of us wants Jesus to entitle us 'madmen', so we knowingly move our heart attitude away from having thoughts of "jacking up our neighbor".

Again, I cannot (nor do I) hand out the title "madman" to A2/3. Only God can do that.

It's just that that particular proverb speaks to basically: saying or doing something mean to your neighbor, and when called on the carpet, the neighbor recants with a "I was only joking" which is what I see here. I am SO tired right now.....zzzzzzzz

Gotta go!

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 3:30:00 AM  
Blogger David Porta said...

Them be some heavy verses, indeed.

"We who teach will be judged more strictly."

I was wondering, could your crisis of faith be something God has given you, connected to your having been a teacher? A judgement for you to bear, your cross? Something to ponder, or dismiss.

I figure you repented being party to NH's flaws, and you went through the wringer exiting NH, which was bad enough. So, was that God's chastening? And, if so, wasn't it plenty?

Anyway, one wonders how this verse ever actually applies. Taking up the mantle of teaching, in the church, be heavy-duty in and of itself, dude.

Then, when a seriously flawed church is where one was teaching... I dunno. It can be difficult to know when a Bible verse applies to a given case, or not; and, if so, how, precisely.

Am I being like one of Job's "friends," here? Could be. Could be. Finger-pointing makes for moneymaking songs if yer Bob Dylan, but I ain't him.

Also: my first comment's focus was on church leaders. So, I'm keeping with that theme. Am I?

"holding on to faith and a good conscience. Some have rejected these and so have shipwrecked their faith."

Since you describe your absence of belief as like conversion in reverse -- inexplicable, but there it is -- one might argue that it doesn't constitute your having "rejected" faith. Still, sorta sounds like a shipwreck, to me.

"Among them are *Hymenaeus* and *Alexander*, whom I have handed over to Satan to be taught not to blaspheme."

Oy gevalt!

Hey, the fear o' God never hurt anybody. ;)

Not that anyone has blasphemed. Not that anyone hasn't. What is blasphemy, anyway?

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 4:15:00 AM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

MT3SA,
First of all, don't lie. I know you hid a tack in your son's bed to get him to wake up screaming at night to give you an excuse to come back to my crack lined blog. :D

I agree LA/A3's comments were clear. But let me say that A2/A3 is being "railed" for the lack of clarity in his comments and for what is the only reasonable conclusion to what he has written. We can only know what he means by what he says as Dashboard has pointed out. He is being called on the carpet for two reasons: 1) his vagueness, 2) the reasonable point to his statements.

You think that the Proverbs verse is "much too harsh." You are looking at the proverb too literally. Proverbs are famously figuratively literal (or vice-versa). They try to give a clear impression by using imagery. But... even with that clarification, you'd still probably think its too harsh. Just felt like arguing with you some more here. :)

Oh, two other things. One, I'm not a NHer anymore so I get to use the word 'accuse' without any of the baggage that comes with them, k? Two, I actually LIKE the anonymity of everything because I think it allows for more clear communication without reading too much in to other people. Though you are correct that knowledge about who you are speaking with can lead to empathy, it can just as easily lead to more piss and vinegar, ya know? Anonymity allows those with good communication skills to dialogue about things in a rational, intellectual manner without bringing other issues in to the mix. Obviously, there are pro's and con's to each.

Major WoOt! to the blogger formerly known as LA/A3 now know as Dashboard. Another rockin' comment there man. I wish I knew who you were... ... I'll figure it out some day. You'll slip up. ;)

You wrote,
"Sweetheart! I am going to be spending eternity in Heaven with you, ya know?" - Ha... yeah, but you will be FIXED and all this kinks worked out by then, you jerk . hehe...

I gotta give major props to your first PS to MT3SA. I sensed something like that too, but you wrote it much gooder then me.

David Porta, DDS,
Glad to see you are ok my friend. No posts in a 72 hr period made me nervous. ;D
Ok, so I understood you correctly in my initial interpretation of your original comment. Rather than go balistic on you here, lets table this particular discussion (re: God's justice, my shipwrecked faith) until my next Chapter where I plan on writing about my efforts to reconcile all that has happened.

Much luv all. Big Props to big-dawg-Dashboard. Shout-outs to M23&Hubbster. :D
Great discussion raging on here. I love the intensity of it all... with an underlying love and respect. Good stuff.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 9:51:00 AM  
Blogger Deborah said...

Hi Guys! I really want to be finished talking about this, but I suppose I gotta finish what I start.

I at least need to address a few of the questions cast my way…

But first of all I NEED to ask, Where the heck is Anon 2/3? I really want to be careful not to fight his battles -- this is not my intention, please help me not head down this rabbit trail. I haven’t a clue how to fight for some Anonymous Character, he can fight for himself. I just don’t want to see him unnecessarily struck down, either.

Dashboard asked, Why didn’t you challenge Miroslav’s responses?

Because of the simple fact that he left room for Anon 2/3 to respond. At first he was very gentle, and then he got a little stronger, but he seemed to be looking for a response and seemed to accept Anon 2/3’s “I didn’t mean that,” at face-value even if it didn’t make sense to him. It felt like more of a conversation between friends than a rebuke.
Why the heck did Anon 2/3 not respond better?? Maybe his computer is broken or his grandma just died or he’s a dork – I don’t know why not! Frankly, it was rather irritating that he didn’t explain himself better than a cursory, “Oh, didn’t mean it that way.” But I still don’t think this behavior – on its own -- warrants such a strong rebuke.

Dashboard asked, Are you accusing me of lying?

I would like to clarify to Dashboard that I did not intend to accuse him of lying (not in the slightest), but DID intend to accuse him of being too harsh. And yes, we will spend eternity together, thank God in better states of mind, at least on my end of the crazy spectrum. Please remember that you will spend eternity with Anon 2/3 also. If you are upset with us for making a harsh accusation against another brother (you), perhaps you should also be upset with yourself for accusing another brother (Anon 2/3) of some pretty strong stuff. We may not know who he is, anymore than I know who you are, but I’ve read enough of both of you to guess that you are both saved, sealed and delivered. We are ALL going to spend eternity together.
Maybe I am misunderstanding this and you weren’t saying you were upset with us accusing you of something even though we will spend eternity with you. Maybe you were simply stating how excited you were to spend eternity with me -- a sweetheart.
In that case, thanks :)

On that same question, I think it is deceiving – misleading or unrepresentative may be better words, we used “deceiving your neighbor” on purpose to tie in the same terminology Dashboard used, not as a synonym for lying – for you to set it up as clear as day that Anon 2/3 was “accusing Miroslav of lying” and then tell him how bad THAT is to do. THAT is bad to do, but did Anon 2/3 do THAT? I think his comments are significantly unclear as to WHAT he meant. We on this end cannot defend Anon 2/3 as an angel of good cheer, and you cannot call him a meanie. We just don’t know.
It sounds like it was not your intention to mislead, and thus in NO WAY are you guilty of lying, but the words you used DO IN FACT mislead (i.e. misinform, give the wrong impression) others into thinking something is CERTAIN – when that something looks VERY uncertain to me.

OUR intention was to point out the harshness of a response to an original reply that didn’t seem to warrant such strength. Now, if Anon 2/3 had written on here, “Miroslav’s a jerk and a liar and everything he said on this blog reeks of untruth. Things happened in NO WAY similar to the way he told, I know a whole different story and I won’t tell you,” then your rebuke would have fit better.
I DO UNDERSTAND that Dashboard and Miroslav think Anon 2/3’s replies WERE this clear. I submit to you that other people will not read Anon 2/3 comments as this clear – case in point, US! You read Anon 2/3’s replies much differently than we did over here. We can’t argue over his motives or thoughts as neither one of us knows (unless you do know more than I do, but in that case you have to see that I am missing information – as Miroslav already filled in a few of the missing pieces or dispelled the myth of the personality type).
I do think that HOWEVER Anon 2/3 clarifies his positions (if he ever does, where the heck is this guy??), we should accept him as telling the truth – unless you have some AMAZING reason not to. I’m fine with some of the “but you said here…” but for the purpose of really feeling out what the heck this guy meant, but not for the purpose of proving we are right, ya know?

And I am in agreement with Miroslav saying we are doing to you what you did to Anon 2/3, i.e. assuming that the way we read your words are the way you intended them. It is nice to hear from Miroslav that you are a nice guy who is not super harsh. It appears to me from your latest responses that your intention was not to be as harsh as we felt you came across. Thank you so much for saying you did not mean to be as harsh as we read. I believe you when you say that it wasn’t your intention to call Anon 2/3 a madman. Can you see how using that verse and saying it “reminds” you of this situation could sound harsh to some of the readers? Sure Proverbs isn’t a literal book, as Miro said, but when you lay out an “accusation” and follow it up with a very strong verse, what are people to think? I am happy that your intention was not to be harsh to Anon 2/3 but to show Miroslav you care. I know that Miroslav didn’t see you as being harsh as we did – he saw you as standing up for him in a loving way. We did not see it that way; we saw a strong knee-jerk reaction. That said, I am able to separate what seems “logical” to my brain, knowing that I have my own leanings and biases and pre-existing conditions, and lay that aside to trust your word on your intentions.
THIS is what I felt did not happen to me when we left NH, and this is what I worry may still exist in the hearts of some of those at NH and some of those that have left. I am tempted to tell a story here, but perhaps I should refrain.
It appears I may be projecting my issue onto an innocent-bystander, and I am sorry if I misjudged you and you are not the type who would “hang someone on his words” but instead would really seek to see someone’s heart and believe them when they explain themselves to you. I feel that Anon 2/3 has not explained enough of his thoughts to warrant the response you gave, and that even his "I didn't mean it that way" should be enough for you to believe where he is coming from -- whether it makes sense to you or not. I don't know if you struggle with this or not.
It is hard for me to write to an audience that I don’t know. The old adage “when in Rome, do as the Romans” doesn’t cut it when you have no idea who the Romans are. And when you know the Romans AND the Greeks are reading this, and you have a love for both of them, it is hard to choose words that will reach both (and maybe that’s the point – it’s not my job to reach anyone. Just say what God lays on my heart and back off, eh? There’s a novel thought).

I think listening to both sides of the story, and understanding people’s point of views, really helps make things better. Not all the time in every case, but often. Even if you STILL don’t agree with someone, isn’t it nice to say, “Wow. I can see why he’d think that way. I still he’s wrong, but I get where his thought process came from and how it then caused him to act the way it did.” In our leaving NH, this empathy helped me so much in protecting my heart from bitterness. I hope other people discover this handy-dandy tool of empathy in dealing with others that have hurt them.

So much for a short response. I’m sure I didn’t address all of Dashboard’s questions, but man, oh, man, do I have to? I do have SO MUCH to do to get ready for Christmas, not to mention that I was a grumpy frumpy mother today from being up so late and thinking so severely about this stuff.

If there is something urgent you feel I need to address, please let me know I’ll try my best to get to that. Otherwise, it is sayonara for The Mama (sounds like the wife of a Mobster) for a little vaccaciones.

Dashboard, I am looking forward to Heaven with you, Brother-in-Christ. (Dashboard is surely a boy name?)

Oh, one more question I’d better answer:
Dashboard asked, Would you agree that taking liberties is lying?

I agree that the term “taking liberties” can and often does mean lying. Do we KNOW that Anon 2/3 meant it this way? I read Anon’s words as saying, “Are you sure that’s how things went down? I don’t remember half of that stuff.” Semantics that can be understood differently by diverse readers. Even if you can prove “taking liberties” means lying by a dictionary definition, that isn’t the question here. The question is what did Anon 2/3 MEAN, not what did his word mean according to dictionary.com. (and actually “liberty” means freedom, so “taking liberties” could mean “using your freedom of opinion.” In that case, Anon 2/3 words would have read “Are you sure you aren’t using your freedom of opinion with this story?” and that’s the way I read it).
I don’t KNOW what he meant, and unless you know him (which you might – I don’t even know you) you can’t know what he meant either. Thus the question Miroslav asked originally, “I’m not taking liberties, nope. Can you remember something I left out, or do you remember it differently?” is a loving and strong-enough response to Anon 2/3, IMO.

And, Anon 2/3, if you are going to comment on this blog, you need be ready to stick around and clarify things (can I make a rule if it’s not my blog?). Otherwise just email Miroslav privately and keep us all from second-guessing your motives. DUDE.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 8:26:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

MT3SA,
Good final post there.

My thoughts,
You incorrectly quoted A2/3 as saying, “I didn’t mean that.” He never said such a thing. If he had, I believe he would have avoided this whole mess. Instead, he chose to deny having accused me in the first place which leaves a ton of ambiguety. (which is why I fully endorse your final "rule", btw. I think I stated a similar charge earlier in this jungle of a comment list...)

The only other point(s) I feel strongly about is that suggesting that there is even a remote chance that A2/3's use of the term "taking liberties" could possibly mean "using your freedom of opinion" is just nuts. I am also baffled how you can say that you did not accuse Dashboard of being deceitful. We must have different working definitions of the word accusation and possibly a different understanding of how the English language works or something. I do agree with you that Googling it out won't help the argument either way here. And again, as strongly as I feel on these two point, its coo' with me to let it go. Ain't all that important in the grand scheme o' things. You say potato, I say potatoe.

Anybody else with some final comments? (hint hint, nudge nudge A2/3...)

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 9:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

googled taking liberties

found

taking liberties v. 1. the breaking of rules, the taking of license, the crossing of boundaries as in the disregarding of social codes and niceties and being familiar in ways not generally permitted also refusing to mind one's own business often satirical or pretension deflating in intention



Libs:
Libs, short for Liberties, as in 'they're taking liberties (advantage) of me'



TA'KING, ppr. Receiving; catching; getting possession; apprehending.

1. a. Alluring; attracting.

LIB'ERTY, n. [L. libertas, from liber, free.]

1. Freedom from restraint, in a general sense, and applicable to the body, or to the will or mind. The body is at liberty, when not confined; the will or mind is at liberty, when not checked or controlled. A man enjoys liberty, when no physical force operates to restrain his actions or volitions.

Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dang! Daaang!!!
Well I must say that I made a few mistakes here, so lets get started.
First off I tried to mix humor with a very serious sub. and came off pretty badly. Second I didn't read all of the posts That miroslav typed regarding the NH sit. Thirdly I failed to convey my heart on the issue with any clarity.
I do however stand by these points, no matter how objective people are there is alot of emotion captured in this thing, and I think that that colors the discussion.
Lastly, I feel that there is truth to most every rebuke no matter how repulsive it may seem at the time and I always try to keep this in mind no matter how off the wall it may seem.

Thursday, December 22, 2005 11:18:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I stand with what I've said. To do otherwise would really go against my conscience. I see things EXACTLY as Miroslav has stated he sees things. When he says "I'm baffled", I am just as baffled too.

MT3SA's, how you read what you read, I just don't get it. Honest. I would have ABSOLUTELY conceded to you some points or even all of them if I saw that I needed to. ABSOLUTELY:

Proverbs 4:7
Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding.

and

Proverbs 13:10
Pride only breeds quarrels, but wisdom is found in those who take advice.

Even if it costs me my pride...even if it makes me look bad. Let me be the fool and God be glorified, Amen??

(okay, it might have took me a LITTLE bit to get humble-haha)

I hope everybody has a VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS and may Christ the King be found!

p.s. Dashboard is just the name of a tool (and it is totally not a gender-specific tool). The truth.

Sneaky, sneaky...

p.s.s. I can only say that I am honored to be a part of the Blog-post with the most comments on Miroslav's Musings.

YAY!!!

Thursday, December 22, 2005 12:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Couple of questions for Anonymousinfinity from his last post…

1. Can you clarify your heart on the issue?
2. You say you stand by “these points”. What are “these points”?
3. Were you accusing Miroslav of lying?
4. Do you have a different view of what happened? If so, than let’s hear it.
5. Are you a madman? Just kidding dashboard :)

I second Dashboad in hoping everyone has a VERY MERRY CHRISTMAS, and in all may God be glorified!

Thursday, December 22, 2005 1:49:00 PM  
Blogger David Porta said...

Some person wrote:
>taking any liberties with that story<

Some person pasted google results for "taking liberties," then spun to "liberty," which ended with this paste-on: "A man enjoys liberty, when no physical force operates to restrain his actions or volitions."

Here's one more copy and paste for you, from American Heritage Dictionary.

"liberties"
b. A statement not warranted by conditions or actualities.

And, spun from "A man enjoys liberty, when no physical force operates to restrain his actions or volitions," here's a Christmas present for everyone.

It's another copy and paste, a metaphysical poem by a POW soldier-poet from the 17th century, that I've just loved for years. (You might know: "Stone walls do not a prison make.")

(And I dunno how to indent lines, so I substituted "~~" instead.)

by Richard Lovelace
1649

To Althea, from Prison

WHEN Love with unconfinèd wings
~~Hovers within my gates,
And my divine Althea brings
~~To whisper at the grates;
When I lie tangled in her hair
~~And fetter'd to her eye,
The birds that wanton in the air
~~Know no such liberty.

When flowing cups run swiftly round
~~With no allaying Thames,
Our careless heads with roses bound,
~~Our hearts with loyal flames;
When thirsty grief in wine we steep,
~~When healths and draughts go free—
Fishes that tipple in the deep
~~Know no such liberty.

When, like committed linnets, I
~~With shriller throat shall sing
The sweetness, mercy, majesty,
~~And glories of my King;
When I shall voice aloud how good
~~He is, how great should be,
Enlargèd winds, that curl the flood,
~~Know no such liberty.

Stone walls do not a prison make,
~~Nor iron bars a cage;
Minds innocent and quiet take
~~That for an hermitage;
If I have freedom in my love
~~And in my soul am free,
Angels alone, that soar above,
~~Enjoy such liberty.

Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:03:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Good comments everybody.

ron burt aka,
oh come on man, you gotta have a better handle than THAT.

Anonymousinfinity (the commentor formerly known as A2/3) will likely not read this again for a little while, but I happened to just get off the phone with them and had many of the same questions for him. From our converstaion, I gathered:

1) This last post WAS his effort to clarify things. (scary thought, I know.)

2) When he wrote "these points" he intended to say "the following points" ... which he then outlined to be: 1) strong emotion colors this discussion, and 2) seemingly repulsive rebukes may carry truth in them.

3) He DID accuse me of lying (technically). Your question may be better asked, "Did you intend to accuse Miroslav of lying?" ... I believe he would answer "NO". I believe that what was technically an accusation was actually his way of saying "What?! This story sounds so whacked that I can't believe it is true. Is that really how it went down? I don't remember much of anything that happened around that time, but I think I would have remember this!" ... which I have already stated is likely because he was entirely focused and involved in a much more important struggle than our church drama at that time, namely... he was fighting for his marriage (a very noble thing btw).

4) His version of the story is not so much anything that contrasts what I said. He just doesn't remember. And by not remembering, he feels at liberty to say, "I don't remember it happening exactly like that..."

5) Yes, he is a madman. In a quirky, gotta love that crazy nucklehead, sort of way.

Did he piss me off? yes. Do I think his comments are... um... irresponsible? yes. But its kind of like, hey, this guy has a lot of strengths. Communication isn't one of them, and neither is empathy. I can either hang him out to dry for that, or accept it as part of who he is and work with it. I choose to work with it... not IGNORE it, but work with it. I've told him it hurt my feelings. I told him he should either "put up or shut up" with his suggestion that something else happened other than what I wrote. And I've told him that saying there could be truth in the pastor's rebuke to me is evidence that he does not understand how abusive maniuplative authority works (for surely the most effective manipulations do have a small grain of truth in them somewhere).

I know that there was no harm intended (which helps some), and I know he has nothing but love for me (another mitigating factor)... so it allows me to get by this blip. I'm not OBLIGATED to get by it... but I am in this circumstance. Does that make sense?

I think we have the responsibility to call a spade a spade with one another ... but we also have the liberty to overlook failures that we identify. Each of us draws that battleline of conscience somewhere differently.

Plus, I paid a hitman to give him a 5-stitch cut in his chin last weekend so... we will call it even for now.

Thursday, December 22, 2005 3:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymousinfinity -
For crying out loud!!!
Could you be more vague?
You're killing me here...
I have an idea. Take about 10 minutes and formulate on paper what it is you feel and know about this situation. Make an outline. Re read it a couple of time to make sure that it makes sense. Run it by an individual or two to make sure it makes sense to them. Sit down at the computer. Turn off the T.V. and radio and tell the wife or hubby that you need five minutes of total silence. Type out a thoughtful, comprehensive paragraph to answer the questions being posed to you here.
Thank you for your consideration!

Thursday, December 22, 2005 3:28:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

oh crap,
now you've done it. Suffer the wrath of Janice.
muahahaha .... ha.

Thursday, December 22, 2005 3:40:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Miroslav said:
"I believe that what was technically an accusation was actually his way of saying "What?! This story sounds so whacked that I can't believe it is true. Is that really how it went down? I don't remember much of anything that happened around that time, but I think I would have remember this!"

That, my friend, is what me and mama thought might be the case.

So when Dashboard says
"MT3SA's, how you read what you read, I just don't get it. Honest."

Well, we read somethin' right.



BTW - Your secret identity, Dashboard, has been revealed. Who else would know Voltron when he saw him!

Thursday, December 22, 2005 4:20:00 PM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

Ron,

Well... I think in this case, we are all right to some degree (obviously I'm the most right as usual. ;D ). Dashboard was calling A2/3 to the carpet for his irresponsibility, vagueness, and accusatory comments... and you and yer wife are pointing out that his heart may be much less malicious than his actions/comments appear to be.

BOTH are appropriate considerations. NEITHER should be ignored.

Old Czech Proverbs Say:
Non-malicious actions that cause pain still hurt pretty dang bad.
&
Ignorance is bliss ... for the offending party.

Thankfully, I had the luxury of talking directly to A2/3 aka Anonymousinfinity, and was able to discuss both sides of the coin with him. I am confident that if Dashboard or you and the wife were able to do the same (speak with A2/3)... a healthy balance would also have been struck.

Still, a somewhat sour taste is left in my mouth as A2/3 continues to act irresponsibly by throwing around subtly undermining statements without taking the time to defend them. Even the last post suggesting that my emotions color the story is kind of lame given the overall context of his previous comments.

But you know what. Enough time has been spent on his vague and unsupported critical remarks. The fact is that ON THE PHONE WITH ME, he is much more sympathetic and understanding about everything that happened to us. He does not challenge me on any part of the story I've told. I'm sure he is sad that my wife and I were treated the way we were.

It would have made me heart much happier had he chose to focus on those elements instead of casting doubt. But, whaddayado? We can't all be perfect. hehe...

Carry on. Nothing more to see here.

Thursday, December 22, 2005 5:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All you guys need to watch more TV or something...

Thursday, December 22, 2005 10:04:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If I composed my thoughts I might get hurt, I mean can a man walk alone unless he is all that he seems to want or know without the pretense of a enigma wraped in a riddle? I dont think so....
The reason my chin was hit was because I was covering my stomach...

Friday, December 23, 2005 10:52:00 AM  
Blogger Miroslav said...

DM,
LOL

Sidwards8,
LOLx2.
Just FYI, the guy who was supposed to hit your stomach didn't get paid. No blood, no money. I mean hey... you gotta draw the line somewhere.

Friday, December 23, 2005 11:02:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


www.flickr.com

"Deep Thoughts" from Saturday Night Live ...