At Crossroads -- Cf's Vision Discussion Thread (2) - Please Vote in Poll Thread

[WarriorAngel]

Why shouldn't they debate whether God exists? Is that not a valid question? What are you afraid of?
Ringo

Not afraid of the question, but the debating.
Are you willing to throw the small lambs to wolves?
What I mean IS THAT those who are new to Christianity and weak yet in faith, drinking milk...should they be forced to acknowledge the idealogies of athiests?

Because the debates are not productive to administering to the budding Christian.....

I voted for #2 simply because there are some Christians that just are not into debating, which the current systems forces everyone into. Some are good at debating, and others are not. There are some differences in Christians who are at different levels in their faith. It is a walk in Christianity, and we don't just "suddenly arrive" at being able to debate with just anyone.

I agree. And many folks are on new legs like fawns and cannot yet stand against some of the arguments.

It would be disasterous to see the Holy Spirit calling someone to the faith and have something snatch them away.

Anyone who claims persecution at a voluntary internet site has a fundamental lack of understanding of what it means to be persecuted.

I have a question: For those who are for option2, how many of you have actually fellowshipped with atheists?

Lisa

Fellowshipping is one thing...no problem, debating against Christianity at every opportunity is quite another.

I opt that we allow them in open threads to ask questions in the Christians area.
Or to fellowship....

But I do not find it prudent to allow them to come and blaspheme and cause Christians to be a part of slanderous scandals.

BTW, I belong[ed] to an athiest site. YOU want to talk about 'being excluded'.
I was forced to only have 4 posts per day [while remaining only in one area marked religion] because I didnt conform to their style of open mindedness. ..and my innappropriate discussions that didnt fit in their line of thinking.

Yep been there...did that. And they admitted that this was arbitrary.

Fair huh?

 

[ZooMom]

By that reasoning, half the voters want to exclude all non-Christians from the site.

Yep...which is, again, why I didn't vote...and probably doesn't accurately represent THEIR view any more than Option 1 represents those voters!

Almost everyone who voted posted caveats. Putting words into their mouthes and saying that all who voted for one want to deChristianize (I thinkI made up a word there) the site is wrong.

It's not wrong. It's how the poll is worded. *I'm* not putting words into anyone's mouth...the poll is misleadingly restrictive. Caveats or no...they are not reflected in the poll...and if any decisions for the site come from this they will based on the POLL and not on any caveats! Or...say it isn't so ...there will be yet another poll which will break down the 2 options even more, thereby making THIS poll a complete waste of time.

Loki...I assure you that I have no intentions of trying to make *anyone* on either 'side' out to be wrong or monstrous or evil. Too many people I love have their names in either box. I'm really trying to express myself as clearly as possible...and avoid misunderstandings. What I object to is that the 'choices' we've been given are, neither one, reasonable or accurate representations of the 'vision' most people have for this site. You said it yourself...alot of people voted for one, just to keep the other from getting ahead. It's disgusting and demoralizing to have these 'strawman' polls thrown up every other day...especially when all it seems to accomplish is more division, more bitterness, more rhetoric, and more sidestepping.

And until I see a poll that actually offers reasonable and charitable solutions...I will offer my opinion, and abstain from putting my name on something that doesn't represent my true feelings.


Peace be with you, my friend.

Sandy

 

[CaDan]

I hate this poll.

A lot of the discussion has been good, though.

 

[O.F.F.]

The objectives of Christian Forums have not changed since it's inception. They remain:

(1) to provide a safe haven online for Christians;

(2) to bring together Christians of all denominations; and

(3) to establish a Christian presence on the Web so that non-Christians may be outreached to.

Christian Forums has seen many people come to know the Lord through its ministry.

About Christian Forums (emphasis added)

Am I the only one who agrees with this?

 

[ScottBot]

Strawman. People by and large voted for option one to prevent option two from having an overwhelming consensus, and to protect the non-Christians from being excluded again.

So that non-Christians don't feel excluded from a site called "ChristianForums" and who's motto is "Uniting all Christians as One Body"

That is rich.

 

[Loki]

It's not wrong. It's how the poll is worded. *I'm* not putting words into anyone's mouth...the poll is misleadingly restrictive. Caveats or no...they are not reflected in the poll...and if any decisions for the site come from this they will based on the POLL and not on any caveats!

Believing in every tenet of something is not required to vote in it, whether it's for politicians, local propositions, or useless internet polls.

 

[CaDan]

So that non-Christians don't feel excluded from a site called "ChristianForums" and who's motto is "Uniting all Christians as One Body"

Yes.

That is rich.

In wisdom and compassion, yes.

 

[Davidnic]

Believing in every tenet of something is not required to vote in it, whether it's for politicians, local propositions, or useless internet polls.

But the question is, given how thisis worded...are people agreeing with the spirit of the options as far as they understand and then clarify (if so fine). Or voting for what they are reading into it and not saying anything else? The second does not help much.

 

[Davidnic]

The objectives of Christian Forums have not changed since it's inception. They remain:

(1) to provide a safe haven online for Christians;

(2) to bring together Christians of all denominations; and

(3) to establish a Christian presence on the Web so that non-Christians may be outreached to.

Christian Forums has seen many people come to know the Lord through its ministry.

About Christian Forums (emphasis added)

Am I the only one who agrees with this?

I agree. The execution would be the discussion. But that, I think, is good to start. The problem is how to bring it about. But it is a good touchstone. And Erwin would have to state how it fits the new reforms in a practical way.

 

[ZooMom]

Believing in every tenet of something is not required to vote in it, whether it's for politicians, local propositions, or useless internet polls.

It is for me. I'm not willing to compromise my integrity for the sake of politics....internet or otherwise. And I know that might sound harsh but I can't think of a different way to put it. Forgive me.

 

[Skripper]

I hate this poll.

Me too. I even regret having voted in it, since I don't truly like either option. Moreover, I think it's just going to end up being moot anyway, since Erwin is, thankfully, considering a 3rd option.

A lot of the discussion has been good, though.

Yup. I've even enjoyed reading some of your posts. (Did I just say that out loud? )

 

[Loki]

It is for me. I'm not willing to compromise my integrity for the sake of politics....internet or otherwise. And I know that might sound harsh but I can't think of a different way to put it. Forgive me.

Kudos to you then, but don't assume everyone who votes thinks the same as you.

 

[J4Jesus]

Criticizing Erwin for changing his mind or accusing him of lying, as some have done, doesn't help matters. The owner can do whatever he wants. If things were not going good or right and he wanted to make it better but it went from bad to worse to chaotic what does he do? Couldn't he and shouldn't he step in and try to salvage things? If one thing doesn't work I'd think he should try to do something else. Ultimately it is his responsibliity to do his best with want was given to him to do.

If any person, for that matter, trying to do anything makes a mistake do they just stay there in that mistake or try to make it right? If we do something wrong are we going to just stay in our pride and continue or admit it, do what's right and go on ? If someone thinks the Lord wants him to do something but maybe that wasn't the correct thing to do or the way to do it, or they didnt hear right, just plain did not or would not obey, or for whatever reason, shouldn't they try to get back on the right track?

Its a confusing time right now and we need to pull together, grow up and act like mature adults ( !!! ) and do our best in whatever way we can to make it better. Anything else is counterproductive.

Think about it.

 

[ZooMom]

I hate this poll.

A lot of the discussion has been good, though.

It has...what I've seen anyway. Is good that people are talking. It's bad that the poll has to be so polarizing.


Peace be with you!

Sandy

 

[ZooMom]

Kudos to you then, but don't assume everyone who votes thinks the same as you.

*sigh*

Loki...I don't assume that. My objection is to the poll...not the people.


Peace be with you.

Sandy

 

[Lisa0315]

<editted by staff to remove quote..

We have a ghetto here as well. Let me know if you would like to join the rest of us sinners over there.
It is currently called General Apologetics, but don't let the fancy title scare you away. It's really just plain folks who don't give a whit about making the society pages.

Lisa

 

[chrislife]

Criticizing Erwin for changing his mind or accusing him of lying, as some have done, doesn't help matters. The owner can do whatever he wants. If things were not going good or right and he wanted to make it better but it went from bad to worse to chaotic what does he do? Couldn't he and shouldn't he step in and try to salvage things? If one thing doesn't work I'd think he should try to do something else. Ultimately it is his responsibliity to do his best with want was given to him to do.

So why must we do these endless polls, if he's ultimately going to make the decision himself anyway?

I'd much rather see him take responsibility for making a decision -- ANY decision -- and let people decide whether to stay, than to create this endless polling, bickering, and nastiness. There's nothing Christian about it, and it's preventing us from doing the things we came here for: fellowship, witnessing, learning, and so on.

 

[Romanseight2005]

I think that option two is good except for one thing. Outreach should always be a goal. What that means to me is that non christians can come to some sites(maybe not others) but they always need to respect basic tenets of faith. In other words, the truth of the bible is assumed. Then outreach can take place for those who really want to know Jesus Christ. But not tolerate those who want to lead people astray into completely unbiblical stances. Does this make sense to anyone?

 

[nadroj1985]

"Option 2 is unChristian. Period."

No more than implying one knows Christianity better than those who voted for option 2.

Not necessarily. It could be that those who voted for option 2 know very well what Christianity is, and are just not living up to it particularly well in this case. Or it might be that they do not understand well enough what the consequences of option 2 might be. Both of these are quite possible.

But someone who honestly thinks that restricting the freedom of speech of this site and the often fruitful Christian-nonChristian dialogue that it supports is Christian, then yes, I have to say that that is mistaken. If someone thinks marginalizing certain groups because they disagree is Christian, yes I think they need correcting.

Even if I'm wrong, though, it still remains petty, exclusionary, and ignoble. So, no matter.

 

[ZooMom]

So why must we do these endless polls, if he's ultimately going to make the decision himself anyway?

I'd much rather see him take responsibility for making a decision -- ANY decision -- and let people decide whether to stay, than to create this endless polling, bickering, and nastiness. There's nothing Christian about it, and it's preventing us from doing the things we came here for: fellowship, witnessing, learning, and so on.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to chrislife again.


Dagnabit.