A new CF, an old vision (4)

[sparklecat]

Erwin. Let's be real. There was a world of middle ground. You've opened up areas where *vulnerable* and *baby* Christians will be at the mercy of people who think Christianity is ridiculous.

A simple rule in the majority of the formerly CO subforums, such as 'keep the apologetics discussions out of here' would take care of that.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Double post

 

[GreenMunchkin]

A simple rule in the majority of the formerly CO subforums, such as 'keep the apologetics discussions out of here' would take care of that.

You personally have no desire to cause problems. *Most* of the non-Christians here have no desire to cause problems. However some do. A community-created rule will have little bearing on their desire to disrupt and inform all Christians that they're delusional.

Apologetics shouldn't be forfeited in any way.

Non-Christians should NOT be treated as lower class members.

However, nor should Christians. And as things stand, a forum whose mission is now purely relatavistic, Christians who believe the Bible to the inerrant Word will be treated as such. This is unacceptable.

And your response still doesn't deal with the issue of vulnerable and baby Christians. They are a very real concern. Just as much as providing outreach to non-Christians.

 

[Leanna]

GM, this discussion has already been done and its 4 threads long now, do you really think you're bringing something new? If pleading and cajoling was going to work it would have already worked.

 

[sparklecat]

You personally have no desire to cause problems. *Most* of the non-Christians here have no desire to cause problems. However some do. A community-created rule will have little bearing on their desire to disrupt and inform all Christians that they're delusional.

Apologetics shouldn't be forfeited in any way.

Non-Christians should NOT be treated as lower class members.

However, nor should Christians. And as things stand, a forum whose mission is now purely relatavistic, Christians who believe the Bible to the inerrant Word will be treated as such. This is unacceptable.

And your response still doesn't deal with the issue of vulnerable and baby Christians. They are a very real concern. Just as much as providing outreach to non-Christians.

I'm a bit confused; what would you have done, then, to protect them? If the rules don't allow the non-Christians to come in and preach/debate Christianity in certain subforums, what more do you think is needed?

 

[GreenMunchkin]

You're *incredibly* rude, Leanna. Kudos.

 

[GreenMunchkin]

I'm a bit confused; what would you have done, then, to protect them? If the rules don't allow the non-Christians to come in and preach/debate Christianity in certain subforums, what more do you think is needed?

An example, k?

When people become Christians, they frequently find themselves coming under spiritual attack. Severe depression is the most common. If a baby Christian was to join specifically to get advice as to what to do, or to ask why it was happening, and they were to go to the Spiritual Warfare forum... if someone who is now allowed in there says: "you're just mentally sick." Or "Oh, just kill yourself..." or "There's no such thing as the devil, or spirits. You're mental..." you've *no* idea how much damage that can do. None whatsoever.

There needs to be safeguards in place. There absolutely needs to be if this is going to remain a Christian site in any way. The priority now is on non-Christians, and that's wrong. It needs to be on *all* people.

 

[*Starlight*]

An example, k?

When people become Christians, they frequently find themselves coming under spiritual attack. Severe depression is the most common. If a baby Christian was to join specifically to get advice as to what to do, or to ask why it was happening, and they were to go to the Spiritual Warfare forum... if someone who is now allowed in there says: "you're just mentally sick." Or "Oh, just kill yourself..." or "There's no such thing as the devil, or spirits. You're mental..." you've *no* idea how much damage that can do. None whatsoever.

There needs to be safeguards in place. There absolutely needs to be if this is going to remain a Christian site in any way. The priority now is on non-Christians, and that's wrong. It needs to be on *all* people.

That could be dealt with by a forum-specific rule that spiritual warfare can't be debated there.

 

[Lisa0315]

An example, k?

When people become Christians, they frequently find themselves coming under spiritual attack. Severe depression is the most common. If a baby Christian was to join specifically to get advice as to what to do, or to ask why it was happening, and they were to go to the Spiritual Warfare forum... if someone who is now allowed in there says: "you're just mentally sick." Or "Oh, just kill yourself..." or "There's no such thing as the devil, or spirits. You're mental..." you've *no* idea how much damage that can do. None whatsoever.

There needs to be safeguards in place. There absolutely needs to be if this is going to remain a Christian site in any way. The priority now is on non-Christians, and that's wrong. It needs to be on *all* people.

Was it a Christian or a non-Christian who did this recently, GM? Secondly, was it a newbie or a seasoned CF poster? My gut tells me it was someone who has not been around very long.

Lisa

 

[GreenMunchkin]

That could be dealt with by a forum-specific rule that spiritual warfare can't be debated there.

Except that sort of rule wouldn't prevent someone from doing that. Certain forums need to go back to being CO. Not fellowshipping ones, not games ones, not even theology ones. But forums geared solely towards receiving and giving Christiand advice and prayer need to stay CO.

 

[sparklecat]

An example, k?

When people become Christians, they frequently find themselves coming under spiritual attack. Severe depression is the most common. If a baby Christian was to join specifically to get advice as to what to do, or to ask why it was happening, and they were to go to the Spiritual Warfare forum... if someone who is now allowed in there says: "you're just mentally sick." Or "Oh, just kill yourself..." or "There's no such thing as the devil, or spirits. You're mental..." you've *no* idea how much damage that can do. None whatsoever.

There needs to be safeguards in place. There absolutely needs to be if this is going to remain a Christian site in any way. The priority now is on non-Christians, and that's wrong. It needs to be on *all* people.

Well, telling anyone who's depressed to just kill themselves isn't something I see being allowed by the core rules. Regarding the issue in general though, it isn't a good idea to rule out the idea that it might be actual clinical depression either. If that opinion and suggestions to see a doctor can be expressed in a polite way, I don't think that's a bad thing. Do you?

So while a subforum rule such as 'you may not suggest getting medical advice rather than seeking only a spiritual solution' might not be warranted, something such as 'do not demean people's beliefs while offering secular advice' could do something to address this. This is obviously just off the top of my head - people dedicating more than five minutes to writing such a rule could probably do more to protect people.

 

[Lisa0315]

Except that sort of rule wouldn't prevent someone from doing that. Certain forums need to go back to being CO. Not fellowshipping ones, not games ones, not even theology ones. But forums geared solely towards receiving and giving Christiand advice and prayer need to stay CO.

I agree with that also.

Lisa

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Was it a Christian or a non-Christian who did this recently, GM? Secondly, was it a newbie or a seasoned CF poster? My gut tells me it was someone who has not been around very long.

Lisa

Non-Christian... however their tenure as a member has little bearing in terms of the affect they would have on the person seeking help. A new member doing that would be just as detrimental as a seasoned member.

 

[Brimshack]

Actually, I think several of those comments would be forbidden under a no preaching rule. I could very well see making the suggestion that someone seek the aid of a mental health professional, but I think tht would have to be done without dismissing the possibility of actual spiritual warfare. The question then would be whether or not that is enough. Would that suggestion alone be sufficient to count as a challenge to the beliefs in question?

 

[sparklecat]

Would you have a problem with a non-Christian theist going into a prayer forum and saying they were praying for someone?

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Well, telling anyone who's depressed to just kill themselves isn't something I see being allowed by the core rules. Regarding the issue in general though, it isn't a good idea to rule out the idea that it might be actual clinical depression either. If that opinion and suggestions to see a doctor can be expressed in a polite way, I don't think that's a bad thing. Do you?

I'm confused... do you think Christians would never advise someone to seek medical advice?

So while a subforum rule such as 'you may not suggest getting medical advice rather than seeking only a spiritual solution' might not be warranted, something such as 'do not demean people's beliefs while offering secular advice' could do something to address this. This is obviously just off the top of my head - people dedicating more than five minutes to writing such a rule could probably do more to protect people.

There shouldn't have to be rules. Forums such as prayer requests/Christian advice and spiritual warfare need to remain CO. Not to exclude people, but to allow vulnerable people to feel safe.

 

[*Starlight*]

Except that sort of rule wouldn't prevent someone from doing that. Certain forums need to go back to being CO. Not fellowshipping ones, not games ones, not even theology ones. But forums geared solely towards receiving and giving Christiand advice and prayer need to stay CO.

Maybe you're right, but it probably wouldn't happen often (most non-Christians aren't trolls ), and would be quickly deleted by moderators, because it would be clearly against the rule

 

[Lisa0315]

Non-Christian... however their tenure as a member has little bearing in terms of the affect they would have on the person seeking help. A new member doing that would be just as detrimental as a seasoned member.

Well, that is true, but I was just thinking that a new member would soon learn that that kind of thing doesn't fly around here. This is not Fundies Say the Darndest Things.

I think that your experience is something that we all need to consider. It may be, GM, that God allowed this so that it would bring it to the forefront, and remind us that we do have vulnerable people that need to be protected.

If Erwin refuses to allow any section closed to non-Christians, what do you think we can do? What is an alternate to having a closed section? Are there any other options?

Lisa

 

[GreenMunchkin]

Would you have a problem with a non-Christian theist going into a prayer forum and saying they were praying for someone?

If someone wants prayer from their Christian brethren, then I think it would be wholly inappropriate, yes.

If someone wants prayer from people who have differing views from their own, then that's entirely fine.

Don't forget, we are taught that Jesus is the only Way to the Father. Many, many Christians wouldn't want non-Christians praying for them. Not because they judge, or look down upon. Simply because the two belief systems don't interlace, at all.

 

[sparklecat]

I'm confused... do you think Christians would never advise someone to seek medical advice?

I have, unfortunately, seen it happen before. I don't think the majority would, but it's very very dangerous when it does happen.

There shouldn't have to be rules. Forums such as prayer requests/Christian advice and spiritual warfare need to remain CO. Not to exclude people, but to allow vulnerable people to feel safe.

Well... to be blunt, Erwin has already stated that this is how it's going to be and opened up the forums. Right now, we need to focus on what we can do to help and protect people. It might be a little more difficult to have to draft rules, but functionally speaking, if they're done well enough, the results should actually be even better than when the areas were CO. I know you wouldn't tell me that Christians never attack their own, for instance.