2.3 Wiki rules discussion

[djconklin]

Something from history to consider before we go voting to restrict subjects.

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/galileo.html

I think Woob's assertion that previously that his Bible quote shows we should not even talk about theistic evolution is a good example of someone who has taken his own interpretation not found in the Bible.

Notice you who are new to the discussion that this is only about there being the freedom to discuss things which are already discussed in the Adventist church, in books, in magazines and in 3 faith and science conferences.

Thanks for the nice quotes Ron, but there is no way that theistic evolution could possibly be a biblical teaching.

 

[djconklin]

SassySDA: "Admittedly I have not been here at CF as often as I used to in the past. I am a moderator now on a HUGE prison support site, and it takes up a huge amount of my time. I honestly do NOT see the amount of backbiting, and ankle-nipping there that I see in this forum every time I come here. It gets OLD. I finally get enough of it and leave because I can't stomach it any longer."

The bad news is that it is rather "tame" here compared to other forums! And the worst news is that on other forums they don't even restrict themselves to using decent vocabulary.

 

[StormyOne]

As is their custom, only the Traditional SDA's believe that they are the "real" adventists, and they then question whoever disagrees with them as to whether or not they are "real adventists. So then according to the TSDA's here everyone else just calls themselves adventist but they are not....

T&O I suspect you will be more readily welcomed by a progressive sda than a progressive sda is welcomed by a traditional sda. This subforum is proof of that.....

 

[sentipente]

Notice you who are new to the discussion that this is only about there being the freedom to discuss things which are already discussed in the Adventist church, in books, in magazines and in 3 faith and science conferences.

Well, the 3 faith and science conferences should provide enough material to go anywhere, given what I read of them in summary.

 

[DarylFawcett]

I think it is a good idea to express why my vote will be no in regards to 2.3

2.3 There is a specific Creation & Evolution forum, which would provide greater opportunity for discussion if the interest is to debate evolution without God’s involvement versus intelligent design. Therefore, the topic of atheistic evolution is not to be discussed/debated in the SDA forum, nor is the topic of theistic evolution to be discussed/debated in the SDA forum.

I totally and completely believe in an instantaneous and literal six day creation. As far as evolving goes, I believe the opposite has happened in that we, including the animals, etc., devolved instead of evolved since the Fall, therefore, I do not believe in, neither an atheistic, nor a theistic evolution.

After saying this though, I feel we need to be able to proclaim this as well as challenge or enter into debate with those who believe in, either an atheistic, or a theistic evolution in prayerful hopes of winning them over to the truth, which I can't see happening as easily over in the Creation & Evolution forum due to the type of atmosphere that would obviously exist there.

There was supposed to have been a debate on Creation vs. Evolution in one of our local secular universities. The Christians there had challenged the Evolutionists to a formal debate. The Evolutionists backed down, therefore, the debate never took place. With the scientific findings of Dr. Robert Gentry of an instantaneous creation that you can read for yourself at http://www.halos.com which hadn't been discovered scientifically back then, we as Christians are on a very solid footing both biblically and scientifically.

This is why I am concerned about not allowing any discussion or debate on this, which is why my vote is against this proposed rule, if it makes it back into the Wiki again.

 

[sentipente]

Are those who support 2.3 fearful that their position is not supported by the facts? Only toddlers believer that covering their eyes maked them invisible. The facts cannot be denied by ignoring them.

 

[JonMiller]

I am against limits such as this one.

JM

 

[JonMiller]

The Bible makes no statements about the scientific process of evolution.

JM

 

[JonMiller]

However, this is an Adventist forum and you bet it should reflect Adventist beliefs.

This is an adventist forum, and should allow the discussion that adventists wish to engage in.

JM

 

[SassySDA]

Why is a debate on evolution a No, No?

Because it is a debate that never ends. That's why.

It goes on and on and on, and it always ends up in a boxing match over who's right and who's wrong.

Nothing is ever accomplished by that, not that I've seen anyway.

 

[TrustAndObey]

This is an adventist forum, and should allow the discussion that adventists wish to engage in.

JM

JM, atheists are going to be allowed to come into our forum now. That opens up an entirely new can of worms as far as evolution debates are concerned.

You're right, evolution is not supported by the bible. And if we're in a discussion with an atheist they will laugh at us for using the bible. They do not believe in the Word of God to begin with, so it is not an easy debate....and you HAVE to bring science into it.

We're Christians, not scientists.

 

[JonMiller]

The thing is, most of them are not scientists either. Oh, and evolution is not disallowed by the Bible either. It doesn't say anything on the topic.

JM
(I am a scientist, but not a biologist)

 

[TrustAndObey]

The thing is, most of them are not scientists either.

JM
(I am a scientist, but not a biologist)

Oh but they sure make it sound like they are. There is a LOT of cutting and pasting in evolution debates. I know, I've been in a lot of 'em. They go NOWHERE and nobody wins or loses.

It's a big circular argument.

~Lainie
(Just finished Microbiology and ALL my science classes )

 

[sentipente]

Because it is a debate that never ends. That's why.

It goes on and on and on, and it always ends up in a boxing match over who's right and who's wrong.

Nothing is ever accomplished by that, not that I've seen anyway.

If the problem is with the conduct of the debate maybe it is time to approach the issue differently. Censorship is not the answer, unless you think you have all the knowledge you need to have and have nothing else to learn.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Sentipente, I'm curious...have you ever heard of an IP packet sniffer?

 

[sentipente]

Sentipente, I'm curious...have you ever heard of an IP packet sniffer?

Does it have anything to do with discussions about evolution and creation?

 

[TrustAndObey]

Does it have anything to do with discussions about evolution and creation?

This particular discussion, yes.

 

[RC_NewProtestants]

JM, atheists are going to be allowed to come into our forum now. That opens up an entirely new can of worms as far as evolution debates are concerned.

Yes Atheists may ask questions in the main SDA forum but if they desired to debate it would only be in the debate sub-forum as our first set of wiki rules were laid out.
--
http://www.christianforums.com/t5674237
1. Main SDA Forum

1.1 This is a non-debate area, reserved for fellowship and questions. Questions on doctrines and beliefs can be asked in the Main SDA Forum. Questions that are likely to lead to debate should be asked in the Debate/Discussion Sub-forum.

1.2 To avoid confusion and debate, questions posed in the Main SDA Forum will generally be directed to official church statements such as the Fundamental Beliefs. This is to provide clear and consistent answers to questions without provoking debate.

Sub-forums

2. Debate/Discussion

2.1 The majority of the Debate/Discussion Sub-forum users will identify as Seventh-day Adventist, so discussion will probably be in an Adventist context though there is a diversity of opinions held by Seventh-day Adventists. Other Christians and non-Christians are allowed to debate respectfully.

2.2 Topics can include, but are not limited to, SDA theology, history, culture, and personalities.

2.3 There is a specific Creation & Evolution forum, which would provide greater opportunity for discussion if the interest is to debate evolution without God’s involvement versus intelligent design.
---

So that any atheist would have to be in the sub-forum and would have to be respectful and would likely realize that the forum is addressing issues in an Adventist context. We also had the following:

4. Both the Main SDA Forum and Sub-forums

4.1 Please stay on topic as much as possible. Temporary deviation from the topic will be permitted as long as the integrity of the topic is not compromised.

So you will not have Atheist interrupting a thread to talk of evolution and if they start a thread in favor of evolution you don't have to read it or respond to it. I don't see this fear of atheists as anything to worry about.

 

[DarylFawcett]

RC,

Very good points you presented here.

I think this proposed rule is made out of fear and, thus, is making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Those rules haven't been approved yet.

I'm not going to argue about this anymore. We're just going to have to vote on it.