A Statement of Faith for the Traditional Adventists Forum

[FreeinChrist]

Yes. I'm referring to the DD area.

I don't mind exchanging ideas and even debate with non-SDA members. But a few come here just to disagree. One even admitted in a recent post he got 'hit over the head' with too much Adventist doctrine in his past Adventist upbringing. He comes here just to exact some personal vendetta.

This forum has been quiet, almost dead for a long time. Many members left and won't return because of this kind of repeated fighting.

We should use this opportunity to address this problem.

That is a problem. IMHO, the statement that one cannot debate against the 28 Fundamentals Beliefs may not be enough.

It might be that "Debate" needs to be taken out of "Discussion and Debate". But then what would the area be for? Wat can be discussed?

I will say that I can see where there were times that one of 28 FB was debated against - note the bold:

18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)

It would have helped to have those posts reported with the FB quoted as above.

 

[DarylFawcett]

Respectful discussion and/or debating is one thing, but disrespectful discussion and/or debating is a no, no and are the type that definitely should be reported.

 

[DarylFawcett]

Does this new wording take care of any/all concerns that was previously posted here?

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, you may discuss and debate issues in Discussion and Debate, but you may not post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. You may post in fellowship in the Main Area.
​

 

[OntheDL]

There is no 'report' button at the end of each post.

Even there is a report button, I don't see the point of reporting if the inappropriate messages are staying and the offenders continue to post.

How is the new wording different from the previous one?

The old rules weren't the problem. The enforcement (the lack of) was. Please address that.

 

[reddogs]

That is a problem. IMHO, the statement that one cannot debate against the 28 Fundamentals Beliefs may not be enough.

It might be that "Debate" needs to be taken out of "Discussion and Debate". But then what would the area be for? Wat can be discussed?

I will say that I can see where there were times that one of 28 FB was debated against - note the bold:

It would have helped to have those posts reported with the FB quoted as above.

This is the heart of the issue, either we allow 'debate' with rules and enforcement, or its just 'discussion' which in my view makes it the same as the Main Trad forum. We have to decide this first, then make the rules accordingly.

 

[DarylFawcett]

The way the House Rules are presently worded, posts against any of the 28 FBs is not permitted, which allows for discussion and debating, but at the same time limits discussion and debating.

 

[DarylFawcett]

This is what the report a post icon looks like -->

which is the 2nd icon to the right of each post number.

 

[reddogs]

The way the House Rules are presently worded, posts against any of the 28 FBs is not permitted, which allows for discussion and debating, but at the same time limits discussion and debating.

Then members must understand they will be discussing and 'debating' with those of other faiths who may not necessarily agree with Adventist view and that is allowed. Now if they post directly against any of the 28 FBs, then it needs to be reported or brought to the attention of the mods if maybe its a newbie that needs to be reminded.

 

[OntheDL]

The way the House Rules are presently worded, posts against any of the 28 FBs is not permitted, which allows for discussion and debating, but at the same time limits discussion and debating.

I don't understand it.

It allows discussion and debate on 28 FBs, but does not allow posts against the 28 FBs.

That's ambiguous and contradictory.

How can you have a debate on the 28FBs by a non-SDA that's not against the 28 FBs.

 

[OntheDL]

That is a problem. IMHO, the statement that one cannot debate against the 28 Fundamentals Beliefs may not be enough.

It might be that "Debate" needs to be taken out of "Discussion and Debate". But then what would the area be for? Wat can be discussed?

I will say that I can see where there were times that one of 28 FB was debated against - note the bold:

18. The Gift of Prophecy:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen. G. White . As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10.)

It would have helped to have those posts reported with the FB quoted as above.

Hi FIC,

When we study the history of Adventist movement, we see that the Adventist beliefs were not molded by Ellen White's writings. What grown men in the mid-1800s would listen to an uneducated teenage girl? Adventist beliefs came by exhaustive bible studies and earnest prayers. It's much later, after the doctrines had already been formed, Ellen White's testimonies confirmed what the Adventist pioneers came to understand.

I understand two people reading the same bible verse will have two different interpretations and I'm ok with that. However not everyone who comes here has the intention of asking honest questions. We have seen a few came just to disagree. That has led many to leave the forum.

I don't mind defending my faith and sharing it with others. I'm more zealous than most. But there is a place for them. CF has them: GT and denom-spec theology.

I just want to have some peace and exchange ideas and grow with like-minded believers, instead of being on the defensive and repeating the same things 100 times to the same few people.

 

[thecountrydoc]

The first thing that is needed is to understand the correct deffinitions for the words DISCUSSION & DEBATE. These deffinitions should be clearly stated and postewd in both the main forum and the D&D sub-forum. It should also be noted that this topic can already be discussed in the main forum as a discussion. With the foregoing in mind the 28 FBs should not be debated or discussed in the D&D sub-forum.

If these changes were adopted there would be the additional benefit of having more members stopping by the main forum and and not just coming to the D&D.

Respectfully, your brother in Christ,
Doc

 

[DarylFawcett]

Tell us what you want in regards to discussion and debate and we will look at modifying the proposed House Rules to reflect what you want, however, you need to be together and unified on what you want or what you do not want in regards to this.

I must let you all know that there is a time limit on discussing this, and time will soon be running out.

 

[DarylFawcett]

Here is a list of what we have to choose from so far:

Choice Number 1:

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, you may discuss and debate issues, but you may not post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. You may post in fellowship.


Choice Number 2:

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, you may discuss and debate issues in Discussion and Debate, but you may not post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. You may post in fellowship in the Main Area.


Choice Number 3:

A modified proposed one will be done, if the one of the first two choices are not satisfactory.

The way the first two are worded, neither of them allows for any discussion and debate against any of the 28 FBs, however, they do allow for discussion and debate on other theological issues, as long as they do not go against any of the 28 FBs, which, if reported, will be looked at by the mods in relation to the 28 FBs.

Do you all follow me regarding this so far?

If, however, you do not want any discussion or debating, then choice number 3 could be:

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, you may discuss and debate issues, but you may not post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. You may post in fellowship.

This choice would obviously remove the need of a Discussion and Debate sub-forum.

Now a choice number 4 could be:

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, only those identifying as members may discuss and debate issues in Discussion and Debate, but nobody will be able to post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Anybody may post in fellowship in the Main Area.

If you were making a choice of any of the above, which one would be your first and only choice?

If, however, you can't choose any of the above, then write one up using the same format that would express what you want.

 

[OntheDL]

Rules 1 - 3 are similar to what we have had before. Judging on the results from previous years (split forum, constant fighting, members leaving), I'd say lets try #4.

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, only those identifying as members may discuss and debate issues in Discussion and Debate, but nobody will be able to post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Anybody may post in fellowship in the Main Area.

 

[DarylFawcett]

We presently have one person requesting to go with choice number 4, however, in order to determine what the consensus is hear in relation to one of these four choices, we need to hear from more of you.

 

[RND]

1 and 3 seem cool. Personally, I vote for better moderation myself.

 

[reddogs]

As choice 5, I would propose the following:

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, only those identifying as members may start threads on issues in Discussion and Debate, but nobody will be able to post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Anybody may post in fellowship in the Main Area.

 

[honorthesabbath]

1 and 3 seem cool. Personally, I vote for better moderation myself.

This is what I meant RND when I said that the TRAD area cannot have fairness. We didn't get it when we were being harassed when the forum split and we don't get it now--and we NEVER will. Don't forget who owns this site and the hidden policies at work.

But as far as the rules go, here is what I would like to add...

Choice Number 2:

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, you may discuss and debate issues in Discussion and Debate, but you may not post against any of our 28 Fundamental Beliefs NOR start threads in the D & D area.You may post in fellowship in the Main Area.

 

[DarylFawcett]

Thank you all for your various suggestions on the different wordings of the House Rules, which now gives us a better idea of what each of you would like.

I will be reviewing each and every post here to see if I can find any type of consensus on which wording is most to your liking as a participating group here, however, I can only pass this on as a proposal/recommendation. It isn't completely our, as in FreeinChrist and I, decision to make.

 

[DarylFawcett]

From the various choices here is another wording, which we will refer to as choice number 7:

Choice Number 7:

House Rules:
All posts must adhere to the site wide rules found here. In addition, if you are not a member of Traditional Adventists, you may not debate issues or teach against this denominaton's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of Seventh-day Adventists will be considered off topic.

How does this one look to all of you here?