Matt22:37-39
New Member
ZAAC WE ARE NOT UNDER THE LAW BUT GRACE....so really it doesn't matter does it?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Do Christians Show Favoritism Towards Themselves?
- Thread starter Zaac
- Start date
Zaac
Well-Known Member
Precisely and as grace has been given , grace should be extended. Which again begs the point as to how Christians could be okay with the death penalty meted out by anyone but GOD Himself when we have been saved by His merciful grace through faith though we are deserving of death?
Matt22:37-39
New Member
OK, lets use your logic
So what you are saying is N
NE should be held accountable for anything wrong they do...juts forgive?
that is what you are saying right?
So what you are saying is N
NE should be held accountable for anything wrong they do...juts forgive?that is what you are saying right?
Matt22:37-39
New Member
THE PSYCHOPATH - The Mask of Sanity http://www.cassiopaea.com/cassiopaea/psychopath.htm
Special Research Project of the Quantum Future School
Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken.
And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools.
Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless.
You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess at your condition.
In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world.
You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences will most likely remain undiscovered.
How will you live your life?
What will you do with your huge and secret advantage, and with the corresponding handicap of other people (conscience)?
The answer will depend largely on just what your desires happen to be, because people are not all the same. Even the profoundly unscrupulous are not all the same. Some people - whether they have a conscience or not - favor the ease of inertia, while others are filled with dreams and wild ambitions. Some human beings are brilliant and talented, some are dull-witted, and most, conscience or not, are somewhere in between. There are violent people and nonviolent ones, individuals who are motivated by blood lust and those who have no such appetites. [...]
Provided you are not forcibly stopped, you can do anything at all.
If you are born at the right time, with some access to family fortune, and you have a special talent for whipping up other people's hatred and sense of deprivation, you can arrange to kill large numbers of unsuspecting people. With enough money, you can accomplish this from far away, and you can sit back safely and watch in satisfaction. [...]
Crazy and frightening - and real, in about 4 percent of the population....
The prevalence rate for anorexic eating disorders is estimated a 3.43 percent, deemed to be nearly epidemic, and yet this figure is a fraction lower than the rate for antisocial personality. The high-profile disorders classed as schizophrenia occur in only about 1 percent of [the population] - a mere quarter of the rate of antisocial personality - and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that the rate of colon cancer in the United States, considered "alarmingly high," is about 40 per 100,000 - one hundred times lower than the rate of antisocial personality.
The high incidence of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized. The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth.
Yet surprisingly, many people know nothing about this disorder, or if they do, they think only in terms of violent psychopathy - murderers, serial killers, mass murderers - people who have conspicuously broken the law many times over, and who, if caught, will be imprisoned, maybe even put to death by our legal system.
We are not commonly aware of, nor do we usually identify, the larger number of nonviolent sociopaths among us, people who often are not blatant lawbreakers, and against whom our formal legal system provides little defense.
Most of us would not imagine any correspondence between conceiving an ethnic genocide and, say, guiltlessly lying to one's boss about a coworker. But the psychological correspondence is not only there; it is chilling. Simple and profound, the link is the absence of the inner mechanism that beats up on us, emotionally speaking, when we make a choice we view as immoral, unethical, neglectful, or selfish.
Most of us feel mildly guilty if we eat the last piece of cake in the kitchen, let alone what we would feel if we intentionally and methodically set about to hurt another person.
Those who have no conscience at all are a group unto themselves, whether they be homicidal tyrants or merely ruthless social snipers.
The presence or absence of conscience is a deep human division, arguably more significant than intelligence, race, or even gender.
What differentiates a sociopath who lives off the labors of others from one who occasionally robs convenience stores, or from one who is a contemporary robber baron - or what makes the difference betwen an ordinary bully and a sociopathic murderer - is nothing more than social status, drive, intellect, blood lust, or simple opportunity.
What distinguishes all of these people from the rest of us is an utterly empty hole in the psyche, where there should be the most evolved of all humanizing functions. [Martha Stout, Ph.D., The Sociopath Next Door] (highly recommended)
Special Research Project of the Quantum Future School
Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken.
And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools.
Now add to this strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free is nearly effortless.
You are not held back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre, so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess at your condition.
In other words, you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible to the world.
You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences will most likely remain undiscovered.
How will you live your life?
What will you do with your huge and secret advantage, and with the corresponding handicap of other people (conscience)?
The answer will depend largely on just what your desires happen to be, because people are not all the same. Even the profoundly unscrupulous are not all the same. Some people - whether they have a conscience or not - favor the ease of inertia, while others are filled with dreams and wild ambitions. Some human beings are brilliant and talented, some are dull-witted, and most, conscience or not, are somewhere in between. There are violent people and nonviolent ones, individuals who are motivated by blood lust and those who have no such appetites. [...]
Provided you are not forcibly stopped, you can do anything at all.
If you are born at the right time, with some access to family fortune, and you have a special talent for whipping up other people's hatred and sense of deprivation, you can arrange to kill large numbers of unsuspecting people. With enough money, you can accomplish this from far away, and you can sit back safely and watch in satisfaction. [...]
Crazy and frightening - and real, in about 4 percent of the population....
The prevalence rate for anorexic eating disorders is estimated a 3.43 percent, deemed to be nearly epidemic, and yet this figure is a fraction lower than the rate for antisocial personality. The high-profile disorders classed as schizophrenia occur in only about 1 percent of [the population] - a mere quarter of the rate of antisocial personality - and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that the rate of colon cancer in the United States, considered "alarmingly high," is about 40 per 100,000 - one hundred times lower than the rate of antisocial personality.
The high incidence of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized. The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth.
Yet surprisingly, many people know nothing about this disorder, or if they do, they think only in terms of violent psychopathy - murderers, serial killers, mass murderers - people who have conspicuously broken the law many times over, and who, if caught, will be imprisoned, maybe even put to death by our legal system.
We are not commonly aware of, nor do we usually identify, the larger number of nonviolent sociopaths among us, people who often are not blatant lawbreakers, and against whom our formal legal system provides little defense.
Most of us would not imagine any correspondence between conceiving an ethnic genocide and, say, guiltlessly lying to one's boss about a coworker. But the psychological correspondence is not only there; it is chilling. Simple and profound, the link is the absence of the inner mechanism that beats up on us, emotionally speaking, when we make a choice we view as immoral, unethical, neglectful, or selfish.
Most of us feel mildly guilty if we eat the last piece of cake in the kitchen, let alone what we would feel if we intentionally and methodically set about to hurt another person.
Those who have no conscience at all are a group unto themselves, whether they be homicidal tyrants or merely ruthless social snipers.
The presence or absence of conscience is a deep human division, arguably more significant than intelligence, race, or even gender.
What differentiates a sociopath who lives off the labors of others from one who occasionally robs convenience stores, or from one who is a contemporary robber baron - or what makes the difference betwen an ordinary bully and a sociopathic murderer - is nothing more than social status, drive, intellect, blood lust, or simple opportunity.
What distinguishes all of these people from the rest of us is an utterly empty hole in the psyche, where there should be the most evolved of all humanizing functions. [Martha Stout, Ph.D., The Sociopath Next Door] (highly recommended)
Zaac
Well-Known Member
OK, lets use your logic
So what you are saying is N
that is what you are saying right?
Nope. Just saying that God hasn't given us the right to take a life. Punish all you want. But God hasn't given us the right to take a life as punishment.
Matt22:37-39
New Member
You're right, He hasn't given each individual person the right to take a life He has given the government the job to do so.
The word MURDER is not the same as the word KILL
Someone who MURDERS is doing it for selfish motives...that in God's eyes is wrong.
But to kill, is a whole different story...sometimes it takes taking a LIFE TO SAVE MANY OTHERS LIVES!...there is such a thing as RIGHTEOUS indignation...that is justified. Like what God is going to do with those who have rejected him, not because He hates them but to not do so would go against His nature.
Hope that helps...
The word MURDER is not the same as the word KILL
Someone who MURDERS is doing it for selfish motives...that in God's eyes is wrong.
But to kill, is a whole different story...sometimes it takes taking a LIFE TO SAVE MANY OTHERS LIVES!...there is such a thing as RIGHTEOUS indignation...that is justified. Like what God is going to do with those who have rejected him, not because He hates them but to not do so would go against His nature.
Hope that helps...
Matt22:37-39
New Member
Question: "Why is 'You shall not murder' in the Ten Commandments?"
Answer: Simply stated, the sixth of the Ten Commandments forbids the unjustified taking of a human life. However, the commandment itself has a couple of interesting elements that bear mentioning. First and foremost, different Bible translations give the appearance of different meanings, and there is potential for misunderstanding the actual meaning of the verse. Second, man was never created for the act of murdering another, and there needs to be an explanation for such a violent and final act towards another human being. Third, because of the translational challenge, we need to understand the difference between “murder” and “killing.” And last but not least, how does God view murder? To God, murder is not just physical in nature but also the condition of one’s heart towards another.
There are two different Hebrew words (ratsakh, mut) and two Greek words (phoneuo, apokteino) for “murder” and “killing.” One means “to put to death,” and the other means “to murder.” The latter one is the one prohibited by the Ten Commandments, not the former. In fact, ratsakh has a broader definition than the English word “murder.” Ratsakh also covers deaths due to carelessness or neglect but is never used when describing killing during wartime. That is why most modern translations render the sixth commandment “You shall not murder” rather than “You shall not kill.” However, a very large issue can arise depending on which translation one studies. The ever-popular King James Version renders the verse as “Thou shalt not kill,” therefore opening the door to misinterpreting the verse altogether. If the intended meaning of “Thou shalt not kill” was just that—no killing—it would render all of the God-endorsed bloodletting done by the nation of Israel a violation of God’s own commandment (Deuteronomy 20). But God does not break His own commandments, so, clearly, the verse does not call for a complete moratorium on the taking of another human life.
Why does man murder? We know that we were created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27) and we were made to live in harmony with God and with our fellow man. This harmony became impossible once sin entered into the picture (Genesis 3). With sin came the propensity for acting violently against one another. Anger, jealousy, pride and hatred can fuel man’s evil bent towards life-ending aggression. The first recorded act of murder was when Cain killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:8). From that moment on, taking the life of another has been commonplace and, in some circles of society, acceptable. However, to God every life is important, and since God knew that man was sinful and evil and had become “lawless,” He enacted guidelines that would seek to modify man’s behavior (1 John 3:4).
So, is there a difference between murder and killing? First, it is important to note that not all killing is wrong. For instance, the apostle Paul talks about the right of the state to take the lives of evildoers (Romans 13:1-7). This relates to what is commonly referred to as capital punishment. Most countries have consequences for murder. In some cases this requires the life of the perpetrator and a suitable means of putting one to death is chosen and administered (Matthew 5:21; Exodus 21:14). Another instance of acceptable “killing” is that which is done during times of war and at the command of superiors. There were quite a few instances in Scripture where God endorsed and allowed the taking of other lives (1 Samuel 11; Judges 6–7). And finally, although far from acceptable, manslaughter is yet another form of killing someone. This unintentional act apparently happened so often in biblical times that cities of refuge were designated for the manslayer to seek refuge in (Exodus 21:13; Joshua 20). Again, it was never God’s intent to have to use such a drastic measure as taking one’s life to rectify a situation. So, God does make exceptions for the taking of another’s life as long as it lines up with His will. However, premeditated murder of an individual is never God’s will.
What is murder in God’s eyes? From the human perspective, murder is the physical act of taking another’s life. However, we also must consider that God defines murder as any thought or feeling of deep-seated hatred or malice against another person. In other words, it is more than just a physical act that constitutes murder to God, who tells us that “everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15 ESV). When we harbor hatred in our hearts for another, we have committed the sin of murder in God’s eyes. The disdain towards another person never has to be demonstrated outwardly because God looks upon the heart for the truth (1 Samuel 16:7; Matthew 15:19). As Christians and as human beings, we know that unjustified killing is wrong. God’s Word is very clear on this point: “You shall not murder.” And what God says we must obey, or we face the consequences on judgment day.
www.gotquestions.org
Answer: Simply stated, the sixth of the Ten Commandments forbids the unjustified taking of a human life. However, the commandment itself has a couple of interesting elements that bear mentioning. First and foremost, different Bible translations give the appearance of different meanings, and there is potential for misunderstanding the actual meaning of the verse. Second, man was never created for the act of murdering another, and there needs to be an explanation for such a violent and final act towards another human being. Third, because of the translational challenge, we need to understand the difference between “murder” and “killing.” And last but not least, how does God view murder? To God, murder is not just physical in nature but also the condition of one’s heart towards another.
There are two different Hebrew words (ratsakh, mut) and two Greek words (phoneuo, apokteino) for “murder” and “killing.” One means “to put to death,” and the other means “to murder.” The latter one is the one prohibited by the Ten Commandments, not the former. In fact, ratsakh has a broader definition than the English word “murder.” Ratsakh also covers deaths due to carelessness or neglect but is never used when describing killing during wartime. That is why most modern translations render the sixth commandment “You shall not murder” rather than “You shall not kill.” However, a very large issue can arise depending on which translation one studies. The ever-popular King James Version renders the verse as “Thou shalt not kill,” therefore opening the door to misinterpreting the verse altogether. If the intended meaning of “Thou shalt not kill” was just that—no killing—it would render all of the God-endorsed bloodletting done by the nation of Israel a violation of God’s own commandment (Deuteronomy 20). But God does not break His own commandments, so, clearly, the verse does not call for a complete moratorium on the taking of another human life.
Why does man murder? We know that we were created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27) and we were made to live in harmony with God and with our fellow man. This harmony became impossible once sin entered into the picture (Genesis 3). With sin came the propensity for acting violently against one another. Anger, jealousy, pride and hatred can fuel man’s evil bent towards life-ending aggression. The first recorded act of murder was when Cain killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:8). From that moment on, taking the life of another has been commonplace and, in some circles of society, acceptable. However, to God every life is important, and since God knew that man was sinful and evil and had become “lawless,” He enacted guidelines that would seek to modify man’s behavior (1 John 3:4).
So, is there a difference between murder and killing? First, it is important to note that not all killing is wrong. For instance, the apostle Paul talks about the right of the state to take the lives of evildoers (Romans 13:1-7). This relates to what is commonly referred to as capital punishment. Most countries have consequences for murder. In some cases this requires the life of the perpetrator and a suitable means of putting one to death is chosen and administered (Matthew 5:21; Exodus 21:14). Another instance of acceptable “killing” is that which is done during times of war and at the command of superiors. There were quite a few instances in Scripture where God endorsed and allowed the taking of other lives (1 Samuel 11; Judges 6–7). And finally, although far from acceptable, manslaughter is yet another form of killing someone. This unintentional act apparently happened so often in biblical times that cities of refuge were designated for the manslayer to seek refuge in (Exodus 21:13; Joshua 20). Again, it was never God’s intent to have to use such a drastic measure as taking one’s life to rectify a situation. So, God does make exceptions for the taking of another’s life as long as it lines up with His will. However, premeditated murder of an individual is never God’s will.
What is murder in God’s eyes? From the human perspective, murder is the physical act of taking another’s life. However, we also must consider that God defines murder as any thought or feeling of deep-seated hatred or malice against another person. In other words, it is more than just a physical act that constitutes murder to God, who tells us that “everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him” (1 John 3:15 ESV). When we harbor hatred in our hearts for another, we have committed the sin of murder in God’s eyes. The disdain towards another person never has to be demonstrated outwardly because God looks upon the heart for the truth (1 Samuel 16:7; Matthew 15:19). As Christians and as human beings, we know that unjustified killing is wrong. God’s Word is very clear on this point: “You shall not murder.” And what God says we must obey, or we face the consequences on judgment day.
www.gotquestions.org
Zaac....
....I am curious as to what you think of abortion? This isn't even punishement, yet thousands of babies die each day, just because someone decides they don't want the responsibility for reaping what birth control could have helped them to avoid.
I am jumping in this late, but, abortion is much more rampid than execution. So I am curious why you are not taking this topic on.
....I am curious as to what you think of abortion? This isn't even punishement, yet thousands of babies die each day, just because someone decides they don't want the responsibility for reaping what birth control could have helped them to avoid.
I am jumping in this late, but, abortion is much more rampid than execution. So I am curious why you are not taking this topic on.
If you are casting darkness over those who may seem to be questioning another's salvation, are you not doing something similar by telling those who disagree with you that they are "just wrong?" This seems to me to be on the verge of being hypocritcal. As marginal as it mmay appear to you, wht deems you worthy to tell another that the are just wrong, while you cower under the protection of the BB rule on questioning anothers salvation? They are close to crossing over the line, either way. Apples and oranges?????? :BangHead:
saturneptune
New Member
I totally disagree. Jerk is a matter of opinion. It is in the eye of the beholder. Also, a saved person is a giver, by nature, not a taker. A person who constantly takes is focused on him or herself, and not Jesus, and therefore, not saved. The moment of salvation brings a change from taker to giver. When one is focused on Jesus, one does not worry about themselves.Zaac, you've heard it said that there are 2 types of people in this world GIVERS and TAKERS....I have noticed that even God doesn't change ones personality when they get saved....in my 28 years of being saved I have noticed that if someone was a JERK before they got saved now they are juts a SAVED JERK...for the one who is naturally born a giver, loving others is quiet easy...
For the one born a taker, it is possible to become a giver if they are filled with the Holy Spirit and allowing God to change them for the inside out...otherwise we just have a bunch of people claiming to be Christians yet being a very poor example of Christ and His love.
BTW, Jesus only gave us 2 commandments in which all the commandments fit into...Matt22:37-39..."LOVE the Lord your God with all your heart mind and LOVE and OTHERS as yourself"....
That is why many Christians are walking around being SELFISH and MEAN!
Your last statement, many Christians are "selfish and mean" is not true. First of all, everyone who does not get along with you is not selfish and mean. Getting along or not getting along with you is not the standard the world goes by. The standard is a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.
For example, if I am married, and there is a disagreement about how to raise a child, an issue with a parent, or a money issue, that does not make the person mean, and selfish, or a jerk. Maybe in your eyes, but not in the eyes of God. That is where working on a marriage comes in, with BOTH partners being lead by Christ, the head of the marriage.
If there was a situation where say over money, a wife wanted to spend $15,000 on a cruise, but a loan would be required. If the husband said no, we cannot afford it, it does not make him "mean, selfish or a jerk." If on the other hand, there is plenty of money to do so, and it is the desire of his wife to take the cruise, and he says no but takes the $15000 and gambles it away, yes, IMO, he is "mean and selfish" and a "jerk." If he takes money for himself and the bills do not get paid or groceries bought, he is certainly focused on himself. Common sense goes a long way. That is why there is a Holy Spirit, and why marriage takes work.
From the names you have called others on this board, who is the "jerk." I have know many on this board for years, and most, I would be honored to serve with in the same church if I could see them eye to eye. I have no idea what happened in your marriages, but to come on this board with a slash and burn attitude towards members here who have been married for decades served no purpose. I have read everyone of your posts, and read everyone of the responses, and no one has said one thing to you that was mean or selfish. No one has been a jerk to you. At certainly , even if they were mean, selfish and a jerk, the languague that has been edited out of many of your posts was not justified.
Righteous Dude, Yeshua, Don, and Zaac have given you excellent responses in this thread alone. In other threads, Gregory and Iconoclast come to mind that have given you advice that is very spiritual and sound. In any community, there are jerks, and I am not going to mention the names. You can figure that out. I will tell you that the true jerks on this board have not interacted with you yet.
Last edited by a moderator:
Matt22:37-39
New Member
You need to get over yourself.
I will use whatever name I want to describe those in the church who are selfish.
boards like these prove my point that most who claim to know God are selfish and mean.
believe what you want but my experience has been people are more into themselves than focused on others....that is what you get when the whole counsel of God isn't preached.... legalist are judgmental and liberals anything goes (pleasure seekers)
https://www.google.com/search?q=why...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
I will use whatever name I want to describe those in the church who are selfish.
boards like these prove my point that most who claim to know God are selfish and mean.
believe what you want but my experience has been people are more into themselves than focused on others....that is what you get when the whole counsel of God isn't preached.... legalist are judgmental and liberals anything goes (pleasure seekers)
https://www.google.com/search?q=why...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
Matt22:37-39
New Member
BTW, Saturnneptune THANKS FOR PROVING MY POINT!
Every one of your posts to me have been mean, wrong, rude and unedifying.
Every one of your posts to me have been mean, wrong, rude and unedifying.
You just disgreed with Jesus, he said that they WILL be varying degrees of punishent in hell, as God will deal with each according to the light they had, and what they did with that light!
ALL sinners who are not saved by God thru the Cross are guilty and go to hell, but not all Hell same for all, it would appear!
Same fashion, ALL saved get to heaven, but God also has etrnal rewards going on, so not all have same heaven experience!
Last edited by a moderator:
Zaac
Well-Known Member
A life is a life. And that's why I have said repeatedly in the past it creates confusion when we're so gung ho about the sanctity of life on one end, but will seemingly make exceptions about the right to take a life on the other end.
Zaac
Well-Known Member
I'm talking about DEATH. Separation from Christ. I am not talking about the varying degrees of punishment that are meted out.
All of us deserve to face hell, but the Lord does NOT say that all sinners suppossed to be killed off for all crimes, but he did say they should for capital crimes!
Zaac
Well-Known Member
Then a lot of stuff must qualify as a capital crime.
We're not attempting to muddy the water with us deserving hell. We're talking about the death penalty. And there is simply nothing of Scripture that shows after the fulfillment of the law that God has given His authority to fallible men to take the life of other fallible men.
just stick to the crome as defined by god BEFORE the law, which was someone murdering another in cold blood!
Zaac
Well-Known Member
And you know this was the exclusive definition how? If we're going to jump to the conclusion that this was the law before the physical law was given, then we should also conclude that the other stuff that was later given as warranting capital punishment was also part of the definition before the law was given.
We must be consistent.
saturneptune
New Member
So would you please explain to me, if I am mean and a jerk as you describe your partners, based on a posting, then why is one woman still married to me? And how do you come to that conclusion about me since you never saw me?
I will tell you this about my wife. If there was ever any hitting or violence, that would be it, no second chances. She would never tolerate it. Same goes for cheating. No marriage counselors, regaining trust, etc.
So, would you please explain how I am a jerk and mean, and what I said that warranted the F word in a previous response?