Trump said he is «the chosen one»

[Bek]

You can be still neutral if you do what journalists do, i.e. use quotes or indirect speech as in Trump is believed or said to be such and such or Trump is "such and such". That wouldn't not mean that you agree with the description or its source. 

[Stormswift]

1 hour ago, Hun said:

You can be still neutral if you do what journalists do, i.e. use quotes or indirect speech as in Trump is believed or said to be such and such or Trump is "such and such". That wouldn't not mean that you agree with the description or its source. 

Still slippery ground though Hun ... if you use third party quotes enough it could be reinforced in your thinking process.

It's better to stay clear of any emotionally charged statements in my humble opinion. 

 

 

[BenJepthah]

17 hours ago, Lance said:

We have had to hide a number of comments from various ones.... and probably should hide some more..🙈

This is a politically charged subject which takes a great deal of finesse to  navigate...

 

Just think if you were in Brother Christianson’s place right now .... what would your comments be about Mr Putin...or any other leader 

Or if you were in Hong Kong or China.....were there is next to zero internet privacy... 

Would they interpret our stand as neutral or biased in some way....?

‘We can make comments...about news events etc...but please be a bit “more discrete”... calling leaders all sorts of dysfunctional names or titles ...Is being as cautious as a Zebra in a flock of flamingos.....😎

 

As this world gets closer to the brink this is going to be one of the main testing points .... practice now   

 

 

A second key to maintaining our neutrality is to be “cautious as serpents and yet innocent as doves” when facing challenges. (Read Matthew 10:16, 17.) We show caution by recognizing dangers early, and we remain innocent by not letting them lead us into compromise. Consider some potential challenges and how we can deal with them.

Thank you Thank you Thank you 

[BenJepthah]

9 hours ago, Hun said:

You can be still neutral if you do what journalists do, i.e. use quotes or indirect speech as in Trump is believed or said to be such and such or Trump is "such and such". That wouldn't not mean that you agree with the description or its source. 

You can. But only if you give equal time to any and all opposing parties and views without editorializing or offering any personal opinion. In short , it is very very difficult to not let your own biases show though in your writing. 

[Bek]

41 minutes ago, BenJepthah said:

You can. But only if you give equal time to any and all opposing parties and views without editorializing or offering any personal opinion. In short , it is very very difficult to not let your own biases show though in your writing. 

I respectfully have to disagree with you, Br. David. Take, for example, the organisation's magazines, books and videos or public talks you hear every weekend. How do brothers pull off such things without compromising neutrality? Using quotes and indirect speech is one of the ways to do that. You say something and then use a quote from some source to back up or reinforce your statement. In our case, we often use the Bible or some worldly sources. You can then say: "these are not my words. They are from the Bible, an encyclopedia or some newspaper or whatever. I am totally neutral and unbiased". And you will be right. 

 

In other words, you don't have to use all the tools of journalism to speak or write impartially.  As long as your words are not slanderous or libelous and you are not taking sides, you should not be accused of anything if you do things right. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 23, 2019 by Hun

[Stormswift]

1 hour ago, Hun said:

I respectfully have to disagree with you, Br. David. Take, for example, the organisation's magazines, books and videos or public talks you hear every weekend. How do brothers pull off such things without compromising neutrality? Using quotes and indirect speech is one of the ways to do that. You say something and then use a quote from some source to back up or reinforce your statement. In our case, we often use the Bible or some worldly sources. You can then say: "these are not my words. They are from the Bible, an encyclopedia or some newspaper or whatever. I am totally neutral and unbiased". And you will be right. 

 

In other words, you don't have to use all the tools of journalism to speak or write impartially.  As long as your words are not slanderous or libelous and you are not taking sides, you should not be accused of anything if you do things right. 

 

 

 

 

Yes but they aren't stand alone quotes, they will be a. factual and b. applied to either bible prophecy or a scriptural lesson. 

 

I guess it's about intent.

[ChrisC]

I was recently sent this as a picture:

 

[Thesauron]

He might be chosen, but chosen to do what exactly?

[Cushi]

What gets me is Obama was criticized for every single thing he did and this guy gets away with everything...

[Mei]

On 9/1/2019 at 4:19 AM, Thesauron said:

He might be chosen, but chosen to do what exactly?

Mr. Trump's reference to "being the chosen one" referred to him being "willing and capable to stand up to China’s decades-long trading practices which have taken billions of dollars from the U.S." 

Does anyone remember when many Catholics chanted Mr. Obama was the "Messiah"?  Even Barbara Walters admitted she thought Obama was the Messiah. 

How one interprets quotes is based on their on understanding or interpretation of things. 

[BenJepthah]

20 hours ago, Mei said:

Mr. Trump's reference to "being the chosen one" referred to him being "willing and capable to stand up to China’s decades-long trading practices which have taken billions of dollars from the U.S." 

Does anyone remember when many Catholics chanted Mr. Obama was the "Messiah"?  Even Barbara Walters admitted she thought Obama was the Messiah. 

How one interprets quotes is based on their on understanding or interpretation of things. 

I agree with your assessment.  Sadly it is quite common for world leaders to have a real big ego. And even when they don’t we can count on unrealistic expectations and inappropriate labels to be thrust upon them. 

[Miss Bea]

Guess I’d best be grateful my post was, well, okay enough to not be deleted. 

We are walking a fine line. And it’s hard for some of us.  My husband is a person who, um, has a dislike for certain political figures. So, you know what I am exposed to. 

I try to go back to our Ezekiel book. That nationalism is just another false religion Satan has put in front of us. When we take sides...it’s like taking sides in a Babylonish issue. 

We have been told. Not our business. Not our business. 

[Hammerhead]

Very interesting when this man was running for president, various groups would be against it to the point they expressed fear, needed safe spaces, others would have hissy fits and 3 year old temper tantrums. Now that Mr. Trump is president, I don't recall seeing so much bickering and fighting from the opposite party to the point they are looking for any means to impeach. Clay and iron in the feet is so evident.
However Jehovah ends it will be in a way that is not expected. We know false religion will be done away with, but will there be a specific catalyst that will start it?
Stay Strong remain faithful.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk