New Statement of Purpose

[skylark1]

I think, as with discussions in GT that involve negative aspects of other religions, that as long as it was clarified by scripture it is OK. That is where the XYZ forumla comes in handy. For example, instead of them saying "We don't believe you are saved because you haven't been baptized by an LDS priesthood member", they could say "According to our scripture (list scripture), we believe that one must be baptized by one having authority".

Does that help?

I understand what you are saying. I believe strongly that in the long run, posters will forget to be careful to distinguish the difference.

I think that a lot of LDS would be likely to say that their church teaches that one must be baptized by one having authority in order to be saved in response to a question, without citing one of their scriptures to support the belief.

 

[A New Dawn]

I really was not asking why anyone would want to promote their religion. I think that should be obvious to anyone. (Edit: I had missed your other post responding to this question when I wrote this.)

I was trying to clarify the rules and how they would be applied.

Here is an old announcement thread discussing how promotion was to be defined at Cf, and what would and would not be allowed; what promotion is and isn't. I thought that it might help.

http://www.christianforums.com/t6856148/

From the link:

Promotion is statements made to convert or encourage conversion to non-Nicene/non-Christian beliefs or religions.

This is pretty much what I said, just in different words. Promotion for the purpose of conversion, and salvation as a result. Otherwise, there is no need for conversion.

I understand that you were not asking why people promote, but from understanding why they would promote, you come to understand what promotion means. IMO.

 

[A New Dawn]

I understand what you are saying. I believe strongly that in the long run, posters will forget to be careful to distinguish the difference.

I think that a lot of LDS would be likely to say that their church teaches that one must be baptized by one having authority in order to be saved in response to a question, without citing one of their scriptures to support the belief.

We use the XYZ formula in most of the other Theology forums, and we don't require each post to have the scripture posted, but as long as it is there to be referenced, it is OK to state your denominational belief. It is still not ever OK to state someone is not a Christian if they have self-identified as a Christian, and I should be plain in speaking that we mean what Christians mean when they say that.

 

[skylark1]

From the link:


This is pretty much what I said, just in different words. Promotion for the purpose of conversion, and salvation as a result. Otherwise, there is no need for conversion.

I think that it is very different from what you wrote.

It mentioned conversion, and said nothing about salvation.

The link also clarified that promotion is not:

[3] Posts or threads intended to inform about non-Nicene beliefs is not to be understood as promotion.

[4] Offering a non-Nicene belief as a statement of fact is not to be understood as promotion. *​

I do not know if this is how CF now views promotion.



(I hope that you didn't miss my other two posts. I do not usually submit three posts in a row.)

 

[Norah63]

Being sort of new to forums, I had only posted on one other before finding this christian forums site. Wow, I was thrilled and went to general christian to start. When the original man that was in charge there died, someone else tookover and told me I was not allowed because they had seen that I had posted on a mormon type of forum.
Now just this, uno and the non-dom are where I post.
They should just say trinity forums instead of christian.
I still believe a christian is one who declares Jesus Christ as Lord.

The bashing gets tiresome but still we all hopefully learn by reading each others hearts.

 

[A New Dawn]

I think that it is very different from what you wrote.

It mentioned conversion, and said nothing about salvation.

The link also clarified that promotion is not:

[3] Posts or threads intended to inform about non-Nicene beliefs is not to be understood as promotion.

[4] Offering a non-Nicene belief as a statement of fact is not to be understood as promotion. *​

I do not know if this is how CF now views promotion.



(I hope that you didn't miss my other two posts. I do not usually submit three posts in a row.)

I am just not sure what the issue is. Maybe I am missing your point. Maybe you missed my earlier comment where I said "I understand that you were not asking why people promote, but from understanding why they would promote, you come to understand what promotion means. IMO." IMO, people try to convert others because they believe that what they have is what is necessary for salvation and others are lacking it. That is where I was speaking from. IMO, what I said and what you linked are saying the same thing. Perhaps to you they are not, but conversion is frequently linked to salvation. One who is unorthodox cannot say "If you don't join my church you cannot be saved".

Non-Nicene persons cannot post with the intention of converting people to their religion. A specific example is that they may not start a "Ask a Mormon/JW/Non-Trinitarian/Universalist/etc." thread.

 

[skylark1]

I am just not sure what the issue is. Maybe I am missing your point. Maybe you missed my earlier comment where I said "I understand that you were not asking why people promote, but from understanding why they would promote, you come to understand what promotion means. IMO." IMO, people try to convert others because they believe that what they have is what is necessary for salvation and others are lacking it. That is where I was speaking from. IMO, what I said and what you linked are saying the same thing. Perhaps to you they are not, but conversion is frequently linked to salvation. One who is unorthodox cannot say "If you don't join my church you cannot be saved".

Non-Nicene persons cannot post with the intention of converting people to their religion. A specific example is that they may not start a "Ask a Mormon/JW/Non-Trinitarian/Universalist/etc." thread.

I do not think that the only reason why someone promotes a theology or religion is because they think that others lack what is necessary for salvation.

People can promote conversion to a theology or religion because people think that it is true, because they think that it will improves one's life, increase membership numbers in their church, or other reasons. One can promote conversion to a theology merely to increase the numbers of those who adhere to a belief or religion, so that the belief or religion becomes accepted by more people. There could be many reasons.

There is a difference between saying that "promoting is seen, basically, as something someone requires for salvation. You cannot say your beliefs are necessary for salvation. You may believe it, you may try to show why you believe it, but you cannot say it. Nor can you use it to say someone who self-identifies as a Christian, isn't," and saying that "Promotion is defined as encouragement of the progress, growth, or acceptance of something."

I could offer an example to try to help you understand. Someone could say that their religion teaches that X is required for salvation. To me, this would not be promotion, but stating their beliefs. However, if the person said Dawn, I urge you to do X so that you can be saved, that would be promotion. The first is a statement of beliefs, while the second involves encouragement.

Here is another example that does not directly involve the idea of salvation. Someone may ask, "does X group teach Y?" Someone could merely state what they teach, or they could say "come to our church next Sunday and find out for yourself!" Or, "why don't you meet with the missionaries to discuss this?" I would consider the second to be promotion. It is encouragement of acceptance of something.

My concern is that people will state their beliefs and inadvertently violate the no promotion rule (as you have defined it) by saying what they believe is required for salvation. There is also a very distinct possibility that they will be set up by others to violate the rules.

Defining promotion as saying that something is necessary for salvation also seems to negate these views that were once expressed:

[3] Posts or threads intended to inform about non-Nicene beliefs is not to be understood as promotion.

[4] Offering a non-Nicene belief as a statement of fact is not to be understood as promotion.​

It is possible to merely inform of beliefs without promoting that belief. Even beliefs concerning salvation.

 

[A New Dawn]

I think the rules are pretty clear that neither of those would be mistaken for promotion anymore now than they ever have been. Nothing in that regard has changed.

I will edit my statements regarding what is considered promotion till I get a consensus from the other admins, then I will post it here.

 

[Anto9us]

I must point out that the version of the Nicene Creed used on CF does not contain the FILIOQUE clause.

(I know that many of you will already be jumping off buildings and committing suicide when you realize this.)

Most Roman Catholic Churches and the Episcopal Church in its Book of Common Prayer DO include the FILIOQUE.

Greek Orthodox Churches do NOT include the FILIOQUE.

The whole issue is whether the Holy Spirit, "proceeds from the Father"

as CF version has it

or "proceeds from the Father AND THE SON" as Book of Common Prayer and a lotta cathlicks have it

I don't see why origin of the Nicene Creed cannot be discussed

of course Gnostics and Unitarians and those who are not "Nicene Groupies" like myself

need not concern themselves with the FILIOQUE

but us Nicene Groupies have to PAY ATTENTION about it -

because you don't want to be the ONLY ONE IN CHURCH to blurt out "and the Son"

if a non-FILIOQUE version of the Creed is used

and you don't want to FAIL TO SAY "and the Son" if a FILIOQUE version of the Creed is used

so you better LOOK AT YOUR BULLETIN EVERY TIME or look at the Prayer Book or whatever

cuz if ya MESS UP -

they might kick ya outta the Nicene country club

then you REALLY WILL need this Unorthodox Forum!

 

[A New Dawn]

That is true. We did used to use the version with the Filoque, and had an asterisk below for the Eastern Orthodox members.

 

[skylark1]

I think the rules are pretty clear that neither of those would be mistaken for promotion anymore now than they ever have been. Nothing in that regard has changed.

I will edit my statements regarding what is considered promotion till I get a consensus from the other admins, then I will post it here.

I did not think that it was clear. That is why I asked for clarification.

Thanks.

 

[Anto9us]

I have heard that even at the Vatican itself - there is CARVED INTO THE STEPS a version of the Creed WITHOUT THE FILIOQUE.

I can neither personally confirm or deny this, but I was told it by a Greek Orthodox friend that I trust.

Those ASTERISKS may be the only way to go - else someone may be offended either way...

 

[A New Dawn]

I did not think that it was clear. That is why I asked for clarification.

Thanks.

The definition I gave (and have removed) was a much less vague definition than the one that you quoted. It was very specific, and nothing I said indicated that that those things would even be considered close to promotion. In fact, I indicated how using the XYZ formula (now required in this forum) will remove any question about statements being promotional in nature. Going back to the more vague definition of promotion, as I indicated, will necessarily preclude certain discussions.

When the admins reach a consensus regarding this issue, I will post it here.

 

[Raimi Stranger]

As I said , there is no OPEN discussion possible on this site about this central issue... some of my friends fell for the TRAP of the covert censored non-public supposed discussion and just got banned for quoting scripture on the subject... it is censored and TABOO here because of the private beliefs of the owners which are not open for rational discussion by anyone here... not subject to questioning by God's word in scripture...

 

[A New Dawn]

As I said , there is no OPEN discussion possible on this site about this central issue... some of my friends fell for the TRAP of the covert censored non-public supposed discussion and just got banned for quoting scripture on the subject... it is censored and TABOO here because of the private beliefs of the owners which are not open for rational discussion by anyone here... not subject to questioning by God's word in scripture...

I don't know who 'some of your friends' are, but nobody posting their concerns in the Members Services Center ever get banned for expressing their concerns.

Now, again, this is not the place to discuss this issue, and further discussion along these lines will be deleted. If you wish to go to the Member Services Center, I will speak with you about your concerns there. This thread is to discuss the SoP for this forum.

 

[Meta Tron]

/

 

[A New Dawn]

This is the definition of promotion we decided to go with.

What constitutes proselytizing or promotion is explained in more detail as follows:
Proselytizing: To induce or recruit someone to convert to or join a non-Nicene religion.
Promotion: To encourage the progress, growth, or acceptance of a non-Nicene religion.
Promotion includes posts which are invitational in context or give guidance in practicing a non-Nicene religion.
All "Ask a [fill in the blank]" threads are considered promotion threads and will not be allowed. Out of respect, Nicene Christians will not make any "Ask a [fill in the blank]" threads either.

 

[drstevej]

Looks good.

 

[Der Alte]

No offense intended, but, prior to the "new SoP", I had already concluded for myself that UT was far too vitriolically contentious to be of any serious intrinsic value to either orthodox or non-orthodox perspectives of theology.

Entirely devoid of value except as a venue for antagonism.

Unworthy of serious input.

New SoP? Nothing new here.

I would argue that you are incorrect. Including myself there are at least three people active in this forum who know different. Is it often contentious here? Absolutely!

Unfortunately that seems to be the nature of these discussions. Not long ago my wife, who is foreign born, and I, were entering one of the chain supermarkets. Just inside the door a younger and an older lady were exiting, they were speaking my wife's native language. My wife, who will witness to anyone at any time, stopped and started talking to them. They belonged to a certain religious group which began in the mid 1800s. I went into the store and bought what we came for, when I returned my wife was walking away, the younger lady was screaming at her, while the older lady tried to restrain her. My wife told me later that when she told the ladies our denomination, both the ladies became angry and confrontational telling her that we were wrong, going to hell, etc.

 

[Albion]

I will make your suggestion to the other administrators.

Freemasonry was confined here a few years back because people were debating it in the General Theology forum. Since it is not a General Theology topic, it was confined here. I do not see a problem moving it to the Philosophy forum.

Well, was a decision made yet? And if it was decided not to move Freemasonry to a more correct forum, is there no explanation?

I'm sure that all the Masons who are members of CF expect that hearsay and malicious gossip was not what governed the decision.