Yes, of course, most do but a genuine and critical thinker will have their moments. Then facts will either overtake faith or faith repress the facts in my personal experience.
Were and are men in the One Man Show Ministries like Herbert Armstrong, Garner Ted, Dave Pack, Gerald Flurry and Ron Weinland sincere? Did and do they personally and sincerely believe, I mean deep down believe, that what they say, believe and do? Do they ever have their moments? Do you?
Do Dave Pack and Gerald Flurry really believe they are spoken of in scripture? Did Ron Weinland really believe 2008 was it? Does Bob Thiel really believe, I mean really down deep believe he is the One True Church on Earth and he it's one true prophet? Does he ever doubt "double portion" threw him down a rabbit hole?
Do people really truly believe that others, not them, will burn and fry and scream and cry for eternity in a Hell fire or deserve being thrown off a cliff into the Lake of Fire? Or do we just kid ourselves on that stuff? Most I know have doubts but also fears expressing them. I can't imagine members in Pack's, Flurry's or Weinland's fanatical church believe all they hear. Most just quietly wait with a "we'll see." Why do they do that? The price of being mistaken in Dave's church is going to be very high.
Here are a few opinions on the question "Do Preachers believe what they preach?"
"Is the sun a planet? Is the moon a star? Is the earth yellow and full and made of cheese? "
'I would like to think pastors believe in what they preach, but truthfully it is dependent on the individual pastor. The one thing we tend to forget is that the pastor is human which means the pastor is subject to the same temptations as ordinary people"
"Most do some don't. Those that don't just keep doing it probably because they're worried about what others would think. Also, they're obviously not there for "money" because you don't really become a pastor for the great salary that it pays"
"yeah they spend their lives convincing themselves"
In the interest of transparency and as long as I can look back on my own experience with the topic It's only fair I answer the question myself. I'll be as brief as possible.
As a teen, believing I was to be in ministry, yes I was very sincere and believed what I read. It was the Bible after all and I grew up with "the Bible says" in spades. I was a sincere believing AC student. An outsider for sure and I recall the first words out of my mouth to a Men's Club icebreaker were "I don't know all the church teaches or why but I have read enough to want to find out."
I felt strongly about being in the ministry because my dad shared with me AFTER I told him I was going to be in it and heading first to Minneapolis that when he realized his first born son, my brother, was as damaged as he was, dad prayed that , "If you give me a healthy son, you can have him." Smultsy I know, but evidently I was God's answer to my dad's prayer. I have never been sure he should have told me that as it may have kept me in ministry longer than I personally wanted to be as the drama and trauma of WCG unfolded.
I believed the basics. Second Coming, Baptism, preaching the Gospel, living the life, Holydays and Sabbath. In hindsight it all pointed to a better future. It was the 60's and 70's after all. How much longer can this go on?
But over the years, I have to say I believed it less and less as I studied more and more into the origins etc of the Bible. The lost career wish of paleontology, cosmology etc that also was a part of me from my youth called to me and I lost my view of Bible literalism. I also saw contradictions and after pastoring thousands, religion didn't really change us much.
The ministry was boring to me personally as well. There was no room for innovation and dealing with the findings of science vs the Bible. Churches can't do that with set beliefs. It is the "faith restrictions" that keep it all in place. I don't think that way and learned that I truly am not faith based but rather evidence based in my thinking. I came into the church because it seemed to provide evidence but as I grew older, it was just faith not evidence that is was so.
I did not give sermons, however, on things I did not believe. I skipped over British Israelisms, Divine Healing with no medical considerations, divorce and remarriage issues until they changed to what they should have been to begin with, The Place of Safety and whether the air in your tires counted as leavening...
I did not give sermons, however, on things I did not believe. I skipped over British Israelisms, Divine Healing with no medical considerations, divorce and remarriage issues until they changed to what they should have been to begin with, The Place of Safety and whether the air in your tires counted as leavening...
At times I drank too much, a skill I learned mostly in my Chicago experience at 24ish. I never drank a thing until I went to AC and then sparingly "for my health." The ministry? Different story. I grew up around drink but I found that stress (I got caught up in "the East Coast Rebellion of 74", fired and rehired etc) made me withdraw and want to be left alone. Theological stress and the stress of the idealism of religion and actual behavior of humans was a challenge. I had no experience in it. It was not a part of my growing up religion and I had no coping skills. I did not sign up for all the shit WCG could dish out for minister to handle.
I got a DUI in the 90's when it all was reaching a bitter end for me, spent a night in a SC jail terrified and knew I had to get out of this whole mess and find some peace NOT in WCG and not in religion. It's hard to tell this but necessary. I accept my humanity and had no special feelings about being "the minister." I never did drink much along the way. Just badly. I don't any longer. There seemed also to be a tendency in our history I was not aware of until it came up with others. In hindsight, I was badly handling the pressure and stress of seeing the church unravel and realizing I did not believe or have faith of any kind in any of it anymore. Over drinking is a sign of personal stress and an indication that internal stress and issues are not being addressed head on. I tried pot in Oregon because it was legal and the store just down the street. I never smoked so opted for edibles. I soon could not recall what I just said or anyone just said so conversation was futile. I went to bed. Got that out of my system and curiosity! lol. I have to say, the shops were set up like jewelry stores and pharmacies. Very cool.
So the best I can say is that I personally was sincere until I wasn't. Transitions are messy. Mine was very messy. Divorce that my wife did not deserve and more experiences, out of "no one is going to tell me what to do" all reactions to letting others tell me how it all is when it was not. I found comfort and understanding in a relationship outside "the rules" because no one inside the church listened or cared much what I felt or thought. I did and she did.
I learned several time over the years in ministry not to naively trust my peers or the administration with personal feelings, thoughts and challenges. It just never turned out right. I was criticized for being depressed and getting professional help. The encouragers were never encouraging.
In hindsight It's probably why I wrote: https://ezinearticles.com/?Everyone-Wears-Masks---Your-Pastor-and-Priest,-Your-Mom,-Dad,-Family,-and-YOU!&id=168861
I did not stay for the pay. The pay was not all that great and I never made what my dad did at Kodak even. My parents died at just under 100 and I credit that to them living in the same house for 78 years in the neighborhood they grew up in, never having to move and attending a sane local church up the street with lifetime friends. I stayed too long because I did care about the local church people. I found out they did not care much for me and it got easier to leave them behind too. When WCG went Protestant, it simple was not going to happen for me. The Wheel of Religion had been reinvented for me. Joe and others thought it all was Jesus performing a great miracle.
Lots to share. Some pretty crazy but on with the posting... There were failings of practicing what I preached, but often what I failed in, I did not preach either. I found myself very willing to listen, support and share with others in both ministry and member the same things they failed to practice but said they believed. I know lots of COG people, member and minister alike who failed to practice what they preach. It's the challenge of being human in a should/should not, must/must not culture.
The topic has been studied and the painful questions asked.
"With the help of a grant from a small foundation, administered through Tufts University, we set out to find some closeted nonbelievers who would agree to be intensively — and, of course, confidentially–interviewed… For this pilot study we managed to identify five brave pastors, all still actively engaged with parishes, who were prepared to trust us with their stories. All five are Protestants, with master’s level seminary education. Three represented liberal denominations (the liberals) and two came from more conservative, evangelical traditions (the literals)"
The quotations from the pastors are heartbreaking. In some cases, they’ve been entrenched in their faith for so long that they don’t know what else to do. As one pastor puts it, it’s like trying to switch your major when you’re so close to graduating: Why not just finish up what you started?
Once you’re locked into the role, it’s very difficult to leave.
Here’s what one pastor said:
“Here’s how I’m handling my job on Sunday mornings: I see it as play acting. I kind of see myself as taking on a role of a believer in a worship service, and performing. Because I know what to say. I know how to pray publicly. I can lead singing. I love singing. I don’t believe what I’m saying anymore in some of these songs. But I see it as taking on the role and performing. Maybe that’s what it takes for me to get myself through this, but that’s what I’m doing.”
What do all these pastors have in common? The authors write:
So I simply ask if Dave Pack, Ron Weinland, Gerald Flurry and all others of course, actually believe down deep the stories they tell and the views they have of themselves. How can someone believe such insane teachings to begin with? How can a man be so consistently wrong and still preach with straight face? How can a man see himself spoken of in the scriptures? How can you demand people give up all and follow THEM? What's wrong with those who follow them we might also ask? Or are they stuck in place having said too much with no way out?The loneliness of non-believing pastors is extreme. They have no trusted confidantes to reassure them, to reflect their own musings back to them, to provide reality checks. As their profiles reveal, even their spouses are often unaware of their turmoil. Why don’t they resign their posts and find a new life? They are caught in a trap, cunningly designed to harness both their best intentions and their basest fears to the task of immobilizing them in their predicament. Their salaries are modest and the economic incentive is to stay in place, to hang on by their fingernails and wait for retirement when they get their pension."
Even Paul, who promised a soon return of Jesus and told people how it all was going to be for them and how they should do or not do this or that because of time being short, seems not have been able to admit or face the fact he was mistaken. No apologies. No recognition save for "I have fought a good fight...there for there is laid up FOR ME...." it seems. Why is it so difficult to say "I was wrong-I'm sorry-Please forgive me-I love you."? It's hard to back out of a mistake gracefully.
So...Do they really believe it. Are they really untouched by their own humanity?
How about you?
(I'm gonna regret pushing the publish button)
:)
31 comments:
On the topic of believing I do recommend the lighthearted Israeli movie: "Through the Wall" aka "The Wedding Plan"/ aka Laavor et Hakir.
No of course it is not a blockbuster. But it is lighthearted movie about a woman who truly believes and has her doubts but does not doubt.
nck
Authenticity, I believe, has always been more important to me than belief. These quotes resonate with me.
“That inner voice has both gentleness and clarity. So to get to authenticity, you really keep going down to the bone, to the honesty, and the inevitability of something.” – Meredith Monk
“Honesty and transparency make you vulnerable. Be honest and transparent anyway.” – Mother Teresa
“Just be what you are and speak from your guts and heart – it’s all a man has.” – Hubert Humphrey
“No one man can, for any considerable time, wear one face to himself, and another to the multitude, without finally getting bewildered as to which is the true one.” – Nathaniel Hawthorne
“Be your authentic self. Your authentic self is who you are when you have no fear of judgment, or before the world starts pushing you around and telling you who you’re supposed to be. Your fictional self is who you are when you have a social mask on to please everyone else. Give yourself permission to be your authentic self.” – Dr. Phil
“Be yourself – not your idea of what you think somebody else’s idea of yourself should be.” – Henry David Thoreau
) “Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of other’s opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most importantly, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.” – Steve Jobs
etc...
"I got caught up in "the East Coast Rebellion of 74", fired and rehired.. I did not stay for the pay. The pay was not all that great"
This is a non-sequitur on a number of levels: If you were 'on-board' with the '74 rebellion, you were already an Armstrongism skeptic, so there's an element of hypocrisy extant. And Armstrong's pay was good (consider Rader, Hoeh...salaries.) By comparison, how much could you have made hitting the street in 1975? To answer that question, compare what do you make annually now to your peak inflation-adjusted Armstrong salary?
Basically, I believe that some or all of us are in search of enlightenment. By that, I mean some indefinable thing or process which takes us beyond the accumulated wisdom of man, and into an entirely different realm, one that you can feel by the seat of your pants, one that takes over and is self-perpetuating, feeding upon itself, constantly providing positive feedback. The big disappointment with Armstrongism is that it failed to provide that sort of enlightenment. There were a handful of exceptional people who had an elevated human understanding, one that made it easy to mistake for enlightenment, but in the final analysis, they were just like us in that they had no special prescience. It just seemed that they did at the time.
BB
Most people under the tutilage of a “guru” such as Herbert W. Armstrong eventually realize that it’s not delivering, but then hey lower their expectations, imagining that others in the group have received enlightenment, and settling into the rituals, assuming that eventually it will come. Many Armstrongites came to the “realization” that it will come at a future time; it has been deferred to the millennium for those who “qualify”, and not in this lifetime. That sustains some.
As for pot, it can be a communal experience, allowing one to share some time with others without some of the normal barriers, but it also causes short term memory loss, a general dulling, and heightened paranoia. Although it is relaxing, it has side effects that a thinking person will eventually not want to endure. It’s not any sort of key to real enlightenment.
BB
714. I did not buy into it. O wascassistamt to one of the leaders of it in Chicago. I got fired by association. Rehired by request and explanation of that. I was fully WCG in board at that time
Dr Phil has also written that if you are a public figure and admit your mistakes, it will be used as club against you by your enemies.
Be authentic? In a ideal world, yes. But this ignores that some are surrounded by human monsters who brutalize those who don't do or say the 'right' thing. People do have a right to hide.
I recall a minister in spokesmen's club who encouraged the members to be very open. The reason? Information is ammunition. He wanted information to use against his congregation.
This same minister hid and lied about his true evil character and motivations. So it's the one standard for me, and another for thee, double standard.
Why aren't I surprised that Dennis the spiritual menace is pushing this unbalanced advice?
I don't argue the pay issues and judgements. It's endless and we lived very tight to the amount. I have explained all this over the last decade here.
I probably lived on the tithes of my parents and inlaws if that helps you. I had 35 extended family in wcg
Ministry as is constructed today in virtually all religions is too orientated on too few.
There is no way that someone can love, care for, be involved with, bare the pains and sorrows of 50 people or more. The burden of such a task is too much for anyone.
Jesus intimately only worked with 12. He was very close to 3.
Working with only 12 is actually a lot even. In my career, or with friendships, I have found that working with about 5 people intimately is about the limit that one can have and to do it half way right.
However, money and power drives everything, and church , for the most part, is an entertainment and social venue, thus , consolidation and "the show must go on", becomes the driver.
Ministry, forced to wear many hats, PLUS providing the drama, entertainment, and being the guru, will burn out the best of men.
Christianity really only functions in the quiet of the moment, privately, and personally. The structure of church and sociality really needs to be rethought and reinvented.
Once again, my good friend Dennis asks some excellent questions -- like "Do preachers really believe what they preach?" We know from church history that many do not. Especially those on some church payroll.
And Dennis' question leads us to the next question -- "Do preachers really believe what their organizations preach?" I am astounded at the number of preachers who do not! I can't count the number of preachers I have known who did not or do not believe in many of their organizations' principle doctrines! I have had numerous confidential chats with guys who practice this.
My first experience with this was in the 70s when we found that many on the AC faculty didn't believe various church doctrines.
Back then and today, their justification for remaining silent can take on different forms:
"Other ministers are teaching this. I do not. And since I personally don't preach these things, my conscience is clear."
"Suppose I were to convince the other ministers that this particular doctrine is wrong and then they stop preaching it, it could really hurt the organization. Our members love this doctrine. So, for the good of the church, I will continue to stay quiet."
"Regarding these doctrines that I disagree with, they're not that important."
"I am so close to retirement and I have no pension or social security to fall back on. I have no choice but to keep quiet and go along. I have to put food on the table."
Armstrongism is a sad state of affairs. Good job, Dennis.
--Wes White
714 said: "This is a non-sequitur on a number of levels: If you were 'on-board' with the '74 rebellion, you were already an Armstrongism skeptic, so there's an element of hypocrisy extant. And Armstrong's pay was good (consider Rader, Hoeh...salaries.)"
First of all, I explained the "getting paid" issues from just about every angle others who think being in ministry doesn't think you have a family, need a place to live and eat. Secondly, wherever the pay was "good", I was not Radar, or GTA, of Hoeh or even other ministers who had connections and grew up with their now administrative buddies. Good lord, I pastored 14 congregations over five states and no one ever thought to ordain me a "Pastor". I was a "Preaching Elder" all those years. The rank think was meaningless to the work.
In 1974 I was two years into the ministry. I was brought into Chicago by the new Regional Coordinator who liked me in college and my attention and grades in his Epistles classes etc. I was his assistant and it was a miserable experience over all. He and Ken Westby were the leaders of the "Rebellion" of which I knew virtually nothing until I did. I went to what I thought was just a ministerial meeting only to learn about it all there in his home while the loyalists , I later understood, took license plate numbers of us inside. I was and stayed pro WCG. That is what I came for and it hit hard and fast. I got fired with my RD by association. Not wanting to be fired, I called HQ explained the guilt by association concept but not in reality and was rehired, sent to Findlay Ohio to pastor and get on with my life in WCG. I didn't care about GTA being in or out. That was his problem and I figured HWA didn't have much life left and he'd have the wisdom to do whatever the right thing was. He didn't of course.
The "you took pay while having question and should have just quit" concept is bullshit. Life, change and transitions don't work like that but it seems a real sore spot with some who think that in ministry, one must immediately do the noble and right thing. The noble and right thing is not as clear as one's hindsight makes it out to be.
I worked hard, visited often, encouraged and supported until I didn't and that's just how it works.
If it helps you, I expect just the tithes of my parents and inlaws more than paid my weekly salary. I had 35 extended family in WCG the men being full time pastors as well, Local church elders, deacons and deaconesses.
But this post is not about me and I won't make it about me. It's about do we think that the psychopaths of the Splinters are sincere and believe their own insane views of seeing themselves in scripture or being the representatives of the one and only true church on earth. Stick to the topic. I was open so I could ask the question freely of others. I am long past caring what anyone thinks of me personally in all this Church of God drama and trauma.
Thanks Wes and thanks for your ongoing friendship behind the scenes. I don't believe the concept of "we must all speak the same thing" the reason ostensibly being "that there be no division in the church." That' is just now how life and belief works. It's an idealist comment at best and ignorance at worst. Also seems like the formula for keeping one's real self and beliefs in "go along to get along" mode.
You don't see doctrinal agreement in the NT between the Apostle types. It is obvious there were lots of ideas floating around always about who and what Jesus was. Some even got to the place where they doubted "Jesus was come in the flesh"
"2 John 1:7 7I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist."
The meaning is disputed as are most other scriptures that annoy but whether they didn't believe Jesus ever lived on earth or that he doesn't enter into people in some way is moot. It was a problem and members and elders seemed to debate it or have to deal with it. Lots of topics in the NT like this.
I have talked plainly and openly with a number of mainline Christian ministers who have this struggle both with their denominations spin and what they actually know about the Bible in their much better than AC training.
Dennis, I respect your honesty and willingness to lay everything bare. You don't play games or try to justify anything. You face it squarely, as I try to do. I know from experience that it takes real guts to face the facts, be totally open about them, etc. The emotional angst involved is tremendous. It's like tearing pieces off yourself and throwing them away. But, I've found, it's well worth it in the end.
I can honestly say that I never delivered a message in print or in person that I did not believe myself. Having said that, however, I can identify with those who avoided certain subjects so as to not contradict church teachings (which I now regret). And, while I believe that it is ethical to not remain silent about important disagreements, I also understand that it is sometimes right to exercise restraint to show respect and prevent unnecessary discord.
I also freely admit that many of the things which I have spoken and/or written about in times past no longer conform to my current belief system. And although that was not intentional, I now regret that I had any part in promulgating/supporting those errors.
On a more personal note, I know a great deal about wearing masks. I was in denial about the reality of my sexual orientation until thirty something and remained in the closet for many years thereafter. When I did finally decide to "come out," my decision to finally be honest with myself and others was not met with universal acclaim and acceptance (we sometimes pay a high price for being honest with others).
Finally, while I do not believe that my sexual orientation is a moral failure, I have quite deliberately remained celibate in large part to give my arguments greater moral weight and consequence. Hence, I believe that speaking to others about moral and spiritual matters carries some heavy responsibilities for those who choose to engage with others on these matters. I don't believe a lustful, adulterous, incestuous pedophile should have much to say to anyone about their sexual life.
Thanks Allen, And I yours through the years. Most are afraid to either admit to being a bit more human than their religious affiliations and even faith would wish them to be. Life is experiences and my observational experience is that portray themselves as "above their fellows" are usually hiding their humanity afraid that to expose themselves is some grievous failure. It is freedom actually.
I go back to Paul's statement of regrets and struggle where he admits the struggle be it of unbelief or some weakness one always prays to God no one discovers. Here he admits to, feels he has to blame something so he blames "the sin that is in me", and not himself but never shares what exactly the struggle was. That would have been nice. It probably would have relieved millions.
Romans 7:15-20 New International Version (NIV)
15 I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but WHAT I HATE, I DO.
16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me.
18 For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature.[a] For I have the desire to do what is good, but I CANNOT CARRY IT OUT. 19
For I do not do the good I want to do, BUT THE EVIL I DO NOT WANT TO DO—this I KEEP ON DOING.
20 Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it."
Personally, here is a man who does not take personal responsibility for his life. He doesn't "own it" as we say. In effect he is falling back on "the Devil made me do it" as his defense. Why does he have to be defensive. Why not just say "I screw up" or "I made a mistake"? Pack, Weinland and Flurry can't seem to utter those words. I guess they'd have to see they actually made mistakes to do so.
I notice that when Dave tells his wonderous story about what will be and his amazing understanding he talks about "I" this and "I" that. When it all goes South, does not come to pass and is simply wrong, he says "We never understood," "We could not have known", "We were wrong..." Of course, no one but himself was wrong.
Anyway, one of the perks of getting older, if one is lucky to do so, is to feel the freedom of just being one's self and admire those who learned that way younger in life than we did stuck in the crazies of the WCG and COGs. Sincerely so for the most part and having to grow through messy transitions. Some of my friends in ministry and members did not make it through choosing to take their lives and end the pain not being able to be authentic and not care about the consequences.
I prophecy that Gerald Flurry will die shortly after reading this article.
"Dennis, I respect your honesty and willingness to lay everything bare. You don't play games or try to justify anything."
Certainly true. On some issues.
Now let's hope that Commie girl will come clean and admit her worship of the Trotsky loving neocons.
Wes
Many ministers don't even agree with the ten commandments. This is obvious from their behavior.
PCG's prophet has lots of hooplah about earthquakes and fires surrounding "gods former house" as some kind of curse.
It makes no mention whatsoever of the 9 earthquakes around their HQ starting 24 hours after Rosh Hasjannah. The 40 earthquakes the past week leading up to the Holy Day and the 1000 earthquakes so far THIS YEAR only.
So NO they obviously do not believe what they preach OR have direct contact with a TRUMPIAN God denying his involvement in the OK earthquakes and blame it all on Satan.
While Satan was obviously occupied preparing the Christmas festival and Halloween.
So whodunnit mistah??
Nck
I enjoy your way of writing, very good information, thank you for posting.
What are you really seeking Dennis C Dhiel? A debate with God about human nature? A verbal punch up with Apostle Paul?
Wes White comments that Armstrongisim is in a sad state of affairs because there are pastors influx over doctrines and being authentic.
I disagree that this situation is sad because it's Churchianity that is in a sad state of affairs. Not Christianity.
God has always been in charge not the old man.
I read a story about a rabbinical student whose school invited a very prominent rabbi to come and speak. The guest admitted, to the shock of students, that he didn't believe in God.
"Why did you become a rabbi?" he was asked. He said that he loved the culture of Jewish life and wanted it to continue. He said that being a rabbi was a role he played, that they all were playing a role. The scripts have already been written for us. You learned what to say, how to acts, etc. We're all just playing a role, like in a play. I imagine that there are pastors whose youthful enthusiasm to make the world a better place, to turn the world upside down, has all but died out. Some are just marking time until their 401K grows and he is eligible for his pension and benefit package. In fact, there were several high profile pastors who have some out as atheists in recent years and to my surprise, the denomination and church they were serving said that it was OK with them. They liked their pastor, regardless.
There is the concept of the socio-emotional selectivity theory which says, as we get older we are more selective in who we spend out time with and what we do with our time. It's like when you are three days before payday, money is running low, and you are more selective in how you spend your remaining dollars. We, as we get old, are more selective in how we spend our time and who with. We say NO more often to invitations and done put with the company of idiots or stupid activities just because it is expected of us. To bad I wasn't able to exercise this selectivity earlier in life.
3:08 clearly needs to replace their tinfoil.
Dennis, you sure have a lot of problems. It must be awful walking in your shoes. Perhaps a new pair would be worth trying.
That's an asinine comment Sweetblood. I'm fine thanks. The difficult times were 25 years ago in Church
6:11 Like Franklin said: “Life's tragedy is that we get old too soon and wise too late.”🤦♂️😭😂
3.08 PM is Dave Pack.
Everybody has a lot of problems. It’s part of the human condition. There’s abundant diversity in the explanations individuals give for the existence of the problems, and how they handle them. Some people are naturally internal processors, and some are external processors. There are also mentor-types who would normally process internally, but feel that sharing might be edifying for others with similar problems.
Obviously, there is always the potential for embarrassment and criticism when one does share. I’ve met some who shared because they were brave, and others who shared out of sheer stupidity. Lot of variables possible there, so the only way to judge is by net effect of the sharing. Did it help others?
BB
Post a Comment