A new CF, an old vision (2)

[Abiel]

What liberals dont get is that truth is as important as love to some of us, indeed without truth you cant have love at all, just the sham sentimentality that motivates liberal thinking.

Nice use of the broad brush.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Where was it suggested that preaching the truth was going to be against the rules? I seriously doubt that part of Erwins dreams for Christian forums is that they don't have the Gospel preached.

This accusation always comes up whenever a board makes major changes.

It comes primarily from two camps, those who really feel that they'll be persecuted on their own board, and those who actually enjoy using the Bible to insult and belittle others.

The first group should have a little more faith in the board and in the people they've shared so much time with. They won't be persecuted for quoting Scripture.

The second group is usually the cause of the new rules, and they usually give the loudest opposition. Hence, the accusation spreads as though it were truth. They should be sent packing, IMO.

 

[EdmundBlackadderTheThird]

Oddly enough James was the "other" transition from old covenent to new covenent. I don't know what this is except a departure from the truth.

You are wrong. It is a departure of trying to enforce the truth. It is not a departure from the truth. You cannot discern a man's heart and if you claim you can then you are a liar. God is the only one who knows who will be saved. Not you. Not me. Not Erwin. This stops bad doctrine from being hidden and not addressed. It stops divisions amongst Christians. It stops the conservative elite from enforcing their ideals upon Christians who don't agree with their cabal. I am a conservative in both politics and religion and have no fear of these changes. I am not afraid of my faith being attacked. I am not scared of challenges to my beliefs. If those things strike fear then there are problems beyond an open forum that need to be dealt with.

This is a forum and not a church. The staff are not ministers they are janitors or should be. Conservatives, like myself, should not be more protected than liberals. Doctrine should not be enforced by the rules of a website. If doctrine cannot withstand attack then maybe we should reconsider our doctrine. If you can't handle assaults on your faith then your faith is lacking and not the rules of some website.

 

[Lisa0315]

This accusation always comes up whenever a board makes major changes.

It comes primarily from two camps, those who really feel that they'll be persecuted on their own board, and those who actually enjoy using the Bible to insult and belittle others.

The first group should have a little more faith in the board and in the people they've shared so much time with. They won't be persecuted for quoting Scripture.

The second group is usually the cause of the new rules, and they usually give the loudest opposition. Hence, the accusation spreads as though it were truth. They should be sent packing, IMO.

Yeah, Erwin did not say that the gospel would not be preached.

Lisa

 

[Brimshack]

I actually think there are two basic questions in these reforms and they keep getting confounded. One is what should and should not be happening on the board, and the other is how you go about bringing that about. I don't think Erwin has endorsed liberal views or non-Christian views at all. He has certainly not endorsed liberal theology or the view that everything is acceptable in a larger sense. What Erwin has done is to withdraw the command and control mechanisms by which CF has sought to enforce its views of what is and is not acceptable. The question is not whether or not CF endorses a mishmash of heresy, but whether or not its leadership will continue to claim the authority to enforce its own views on the subject. Command and control is NOT the only way to advance an agenda, and some ought really to rethink their own reliance on such tactics.

 

[pdudgeon]

And when that is not permitted?

my goodness. what is it that you are so afraid of? what can be taken away from you by men that God cannot restore 10 fold if He so chooses?

the last time i checked God was still in control of everything, so what is all this talk of fear over what may happen here? nothing has started, it's less than 24 hours, and already people are starting to run away? Why not wait and see what God will do?

 

[ProdicalChristian]

As a old member, I might "unretire" my old username.. but I will wait and see what happens first. I might like the NEW CF.

 

[Itznikinotnikki]

my goodness. what is it that you are so afraid of? what can be taken away from you by men that God cannot restore 10 fold if He so chooses?

the last time i checked God was still in control of everything, so what is all this talk of fear over what may happen here? nothing has started, it's less than 24 hours, and already people are starting to run away? Why not wait and see what God will do?

Amen!

 

[NewToLife]

Nice use of the broad brush.

The broad brush is more efficient, sometimes its inappropriate because it gets paint in the wrong places. This wasnt one of those times.

Why arent you calling out all the libs broad brushing conservatives as legalists et al as well..... Ah yes i think I can figure it out.

 

[Citizen of the Kingdom]

You are wrong. It is a departure of trying to enforce the truth. It is not a departure from the truth. You cannot discern a man's heart and if you claim you can then you are a liar. God is the only one who knows who will be saved. Not you. Not me. Not Erwin. This stops bad doctrine from being hidden and not addressed. It stops divisions amongst Christians. It stops the conservative elite from enforcing their ideals upon Christians who don't agree with their cabal. I am a conservative in both politics and religion and have no fear of these changes. I am not afraid of my faith being attacked. I am not scared of challenges to my beliefs. If those things strike fear then there are problems beyond an open forum that need to be dealt with.

This is a forum and not a church. The staff are not ministers they are janitors or should be. Conservatives, like myself, should not be more protected than liberals. Doctrine should not be enforced by the rules of a website. If doctrine cannot withstand attack then maybe we should reconsider our doctrine. If you can't handle assaults on your faith then your faith is lacking and not the rules of some website.

Well, I'm just not called to that, I don't think. I feel my calling is to seasoned Christians and I don't feel there is an area left for that. Cie la vie!

 

[Abiel]

Here's a question...Will those who were banned under the old rules be able to come back?

Lisa

They do now- once the ban (maximum one year ) is up. And I am sure there are many undectected socks out there.

 

[BeautifulWorshipper]

Ok...

I agree with some but it just means people willt ake advantage, they will swear, be nasty, Debates will get ahrsher becuase they wont get warnings...

 

[chaoschristian]

Well said Brimshack.

2 cents:

The prospect of non-Christian moderators some might consider rethinking their assumptions about the purpose of the forum(s) where such folks might exercise authority. An individual need not subscribe to the agenda of a forum to play a constructive role in its leadership; he need only have personal goals that are compatible with it. For example, would I subscribe to the agenda of promoting the Christian faith? No. But as someone with an interesting in promoting thoughtful discussion of a range of issues and fair treatment of participants in that discussion I could easily find a constructive role for himself in a forum with that larger goal (at least I could if I were better suited to the task). The point is that a non-believer could play a role in moderating some forums without necessarily playing the role of a spiritual leader. Much of what moderators do is pretty mundane stuff that has little to do with grand spiritual quests and ideological agendas. If the goals of the person and those of the forum proved incompatible, then one would certainly expect the individual non-believer to step down rather than to press goals inconsistent with the forum. Note that this too could be communicated effectively without necessarily using command and control tactics to force the issue.

I think the basic question here is which comes first, the respect for others and their personal judgement or the advocation of what you regard to be true/sound doctrine. This isn’t a question of doing one or the other, so much as a question of which will take priority when the two do seem to conflict. You can welcome somebody into your circle work with them and continually exhort them to your own beliefs, or you can hold them to an outer circle and do the same with a barrier between you. If the former approach comprises doctrine, the latter compromises personal integrity and poisons relationships.

To the best of my knowledge the Jesus of the gospels did not lay conditions on his company, even on his inner circle. He did not actively govern the actions of those with him. He did not in practice impose any hierarchy or any barriers between himself and those to whom he sought to preach his word. That’s approach to others is a powerful message in itself. There is a cost to be sure, it may be harder to communicate messages about doctrine with non-Christians getting more prominent placement. The advantage though is that it makes the message of love and compassion clear. So long as doctrinal issues divide up the community into those that can post here and there but not over here and those that can and cannot get access to the decision making process it’s that message of love that you muddy, a decision that has cost a lot of people a lot of hurt over the years.

It’s a question of priorities. In theory love and correct doctrine could go together; in practice you are constantly being asked (by both liberals and conservatives) to make a choice about which is more important to you. I think Erwin has made the right choice.

 

[No Swansong]

Lol, hiding behind a new name? Is the old one that infamous?

It is, our friend is well known I was just hoping to get him to tip his hand.

 

[Abiel]

The broad brush is more efficient, sometimes its inappropriate because it gets paint in the wrong places. This wasnt one of those times.

Why arent you calling out all the libs broad brushing conservatives as legalists et al as well..... Ah yes i think I can figure it out.

Becuase in this thread I haven't seen it.

 

[seekingmyLord]

Why is it Christians are afraid of liberal Christians, unorthodox Christians and athiests? Should Christians be afraid?

It is not fear. It is that not everyone welcomes the change.

When I signed up as a member not that long ago, it was in hopes of finding a place to rest with my Christian family. I am on other forums where I am a witness of my faith, but when I came here it was in hopes of fellowship with Christians. Now that the rules of membership have changed, it will be just like other the boards. It is no longer unique in the way that drew me to it.

 

[NewToLife]

I actually think there are two basic questions in these reforms and they keep getting confounded. One is what should and should not be happening on the board, and the other is how you go about bringing that about. I don't think Erwin has endorsed liberal views or non-Christian views at all. He has certainly not endorsed liberal theology or the view that everything is acceptable in a larger sense. What Erwin has done is to withdraw the command and control mechanisms by which CF has sought to enforce its views of what is and is not acceptable. The question is not whether or not CF endorses a mishmash of heresy, but whether or not its leadership will continue to claim the authority to enforce its own views on the subject. Command and control is NOT the only way to advance an agenda, and some ought really to rethink their own reliance on such tactics.

I think its safe to sat that pc standards will still rule the day. If the gloves were totally off it would be better but the reality is that certyain views are going to effectively be endorsed by silencing critics, unacceptable views will just get labelled unloving and such.

 

[Beastt]

You are wrong. It is a departure of trying to enforce the truth. It is not a departure from the truth. You cannot discern a man's heart and if you claim you can then you are a liar. God is the only one who knows who will be saved. Not you. Not me. Not Erwin. This stops bad doctrine from being hidden and not addressed. It stops divisions amongst Christians. It stops the conservative elite from enforcing their ideals upon Christians who don't agree with their cabal. I am a conservative in both politics and religion and have no fear of these changes. I am not afraid of my faith being attacked. I am not scared of challenges to my beliefs. If those things strike fear then there are problems beyond an open forum that need to be dealt with.

This is a forum and not a church. The staff are not ministers they are janitors or should be. Conservatives, like myself, should not be more protected than liberals. Doctrine should not be enforced by the rules of a website. If doctrine cannot withstand attack then maybe we should reconsider our doctrine. If you can't handle assaults on your faith then your faith is lacking and not the rules of some website.

Well spoken, Edmund.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

The broad brush is more efficient, sometimes its inappropriate because it gets paint in the wrong places.

A true artist rarely needs to use a brush that size.

 

[ProdicalChristian]

I enjoy debating and hated it when the moderators try to control my thoughts. LOL