So.....is laughing about that really appropriate or should there be a greater effort towards clear (and kind) communication?
I was laughing because....never mind, you would just read into it what is not there...never said I wouldn't try harder, been trying to learn your style of communication for a long time now, and it still baffles me what you do not understand.
The addition of "course jokes" confused me even more. Throwing in new concepts into an already misunderstood dialogue doesn't seem like a good idea.
really, you don't know that some course jokes can have "farts" imbedded in them? If it is a course joke that involves farts, it is one thing, if just about farts, another issue...the way most on here argue, if I said, being offended at fart jokes would be judgment, someone would come on and talk about course jokes with fart humor in them...come on, it's all about covering all the bases so that there is less opportunity for things to be twisted into something they are not, you know, like we have already seen on this thread.
I agree
No.....we aren't. Let's not add any more confusion.
So.....are you saying if it's someone being offended at fart jokes---it's something they need to work out on their own (as the sin is within them---they're judging others, not rightly so), and no other people need to be involved? Am I understanding you correctly?
what did I previously say? If I judge someone, and in that find offense, I need to 1. confess and repent of my sin, thus reconciling with God and 2. go to that brother and reconcile with him as to the unfair judgment I had for him. One thing I have learned from the counseling I have done, is that people perceive things more than we think they do. In fact, one woman I talk to often, perceives trouble in others all the time, but her perception is just off enough for her to turn it against her. So, application to this specific situation.
Person A is offended by person B laughing at "clear" fart jokes. (that is, not course) In prayer, Person A is convicted by God that they are judging and thus in sin. Person A then deals with that sin according to God, through repentance of that sin. All the while person B knew something was wrong, that something was keeping them from fellowship with person A, but has no idea why. Scripture tells us to confess one to another, we also know that we are to follow Matt. 18, and a few other dozen passages that tell us to address the issue with our brother B. So we go to our brother and say, brother B, I have sinned against you and against God, I repented of that sin and ask your forgiveness. At which point, we hope that brother B accepts the apology and the two are reconciled. But, how does Matt. 18 tell us to respond if they don't? Unforgiveness is also a sin, so now brother B if he is not willing to forgive is entered into sin and we went to him privately already...what to do...what to do? Take another brother, a witness, saying, dude, come on, we all make mistakes, brother A was wrong, he apologized, he wants to make amends and reconcile just like we are told to do....now, somehow, you find this method of reconciling offensive, what I am wanting to know is why? What do you find offensive in following this Matt. 18 model of reconciliation? Personally, if someone came to me, as above, and used that model, I'd be ecstatic, cause it means we were reasoning together in love.
One suggestion would be to realize that not everyone is on the same train of thought that you are. Also.....not adding in more to confuse the issue, would also help.
lol...really, you don't think I already know that, given how many times I have asked you to show me what I, not you..are missing on this issue.
As I said, the "adding" is nothing more than clarifying so that it is harder to twist things into something they are not.