Ad Hominem???

WORDS, WORDS. AND WORDS.

Ad Hominem is supposed to be a fallacy apparently but I have the hardest time to totally separate 

something said 

from WHOM said it. 

It is quite important to me to know the source to explain some context and understand some interpretation and some misunderstanding.

Even though the text before seems to be quite innocent, the man himself has caused his mega share of suffering in my life and the life of my family.

His book, the cost of discipleship, was and still is I am sure an all-time favourite among cult leaders à la Jim Jones, David Koresh, and others; the same kind who use Watchman Nee as gospel truth.

The only purpose of it, the way it is used anyway, is to break any self-will, instil a sense of sacrifice, and mould a “disciple” to the leader’s will.

It was read out loud religiously in our cult group as a model to follow and as a brainwashing technique as good as any marines training.

So when a pastor comes to talk about stupidity obviously he is not talking about the vain belief in a dark ages’ gods and some literature he considers sacred as opposed to others.

For him to believe in a genocidal god is not stupid
 and therefore the hinch * and the paradox.

So what is a man to do now?

Ad Hominem is too easy to call 

and I don’t see it as Ad Hominem

since I don’t attack the author on other faults or on him being a criminal etc.

I question his whole being his whole belief his philosophy,

HIS CONTEXT which is as important as HIS TEXT 

if not more.

*hinch

A combination of the words hint and pinch. Applied in situations where someone doesn't get the hint, which is a common enough occurrence to necessitate the extension of a pinch.