Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
An atheist defending his view on a forum not intended for it. Hm.I tend to think that "show me an example" implicitly includes an expectation that you'll explain why example applies.
And I can't read minds; if you can't find a reasonable answer to my challenge, then I can only assume that you're copping out.
An atheist defending his view on a forum not intended for it. Hm.
Then when it gets moved, a cute context-switch occurs. Suddenly newbies are dropped wholesale into a debate forum.
Great effect. Well considered.
=smirk= Yeah, and the others that I've noticed clearly don't have an agenda either. Just honest mistakes, all of 'em.Sounds like an honest mistake to me. I'm not sure why you assume he had an agenda...
*shrugs* Again, sounds like a fluke. I don't understand why you seem so sure that there's an agenda behind it.
=smirk= Yeah, and the others that I've noticed clearly don't have an agenda either. Just honest mistakes, all of 'em.
But still, if this is the way some non-Christians are going behave, it's the best argument yet for denying access to certain forums. If they're going to neglect the posting guidelines, then simple. Prohibit their access to the forums that are sensitive to this kind of neglect.
Frankly, y'know how I found out about ChristianForums the first time?
I was researching someone's username and stumbled onto the fact that they were bombing CF with one-off atheism questions. They were blogging their results.
But still, if this is the way some non-Christians are going behave, it's the best argument yet for denying access to certain forums. If they're going to neglect the posting guidelines, then simple. Prohibit their access to the forums that are sensitive to this kind of neglect.
I too, like the idea of keeping the name and having Christian and Non-Christian sections.
To discuss some issues, there are certain things both parties have to come to the table agreeing on. For example, quoting Scripture to an Atheist usually does no good, because he does not believe in God anyway. Quoting Scripture to a fellow believer however, can carry much weight and can be very useful in resolving a matter.
99 or 1?I don't think it's very fair to judge and exclude an entire group based upon the actions of a few.
99 or 1?
In other words, is this from a standpoint of assimilation / separation?
Already predicted, Steve. Already predicted.You're sounding rather paranoid here; why don't you show me some more examples so I don't end up thinking that?
Ah. Now that I meet one hoop you want me to jump through another. I'm sure it'll just go on & on this way.
What? Baiting new Christians?I see no reason to believe that this is a problem exclusive to non-Christians - or even more prevalent among them than it is among Christians.
You say they're insecure about their own beliefs.That's too bad that they felt so insecure about their own beliefs that they had to do that, but I still don't see how the presence of non-Christians keeps Christians from experiencing fellowship.
Already predicted, Steve. Already predicted.
It's your responsibility to back up your own argument, not mine. If there is an example of a majority-Christian forum in which new Christians are frequently baited, then it's up to you to find it - not me.What? Baiting new Christians?
Tell ya what. google up the data you may wish to see. Don't race around in ignorance when the opportunity for data's such a few clicks away.
Again, I don't see any reason to believe that the non-Christians here have that much of an agenda beyond not being treated as second-class citizens or spiritual predators.You say they're insecure about their own beliefs.
Unlikely.
They'll have far more fodder no matter what Erwin does. He's essentially been led into a political trap.
Tell me why a non-Christian is interested in making and originating post to New Christians forum. How might his purpose be served by posting to this forum?I don't think I quite understand what you're asking; would you mind rephrasing?
Tell me why a non-Christian is interested in making and originating post to New Christians forum. How might his purpose be served by posting to this forum?
How many declared non-Christians have posted there without an interest in subversion or ridicule?
Tell me why a non-Christian is interested in making and originating post to New Christians forum. How might his purpose be served by posting to this forum?
How many declared non-Christians have posted there without an interest in subversion or ridicule?
How many have posted with no interest in such?
There's an express purpose in answering New Christians' questions. Do you expect non-Christians to answer these questions ever in ways that match up to the purpose? Why?
No. It's not. Your responsibility was to seek out the truth, and yet you expect someone else to force you to drink it in. Sorry, truth doesn't work that way.I'm sure it has been, but it doesn't change the fact that the ball's kinda in your court on this one...
It's your responsibility to back up your own argument, not mine. If there is an example of a majority-Christian forum in which new Christians are frequently baited, then it's up to you to find it - not me.
Again, I don't see any reason to believe that the non-Christians here have that much of an agenda beyond not being treated as second-class citizens or spiritual predators.
No. It's not. Your responsibility was to seek out the truth, and yet you expect someone else to force you to drink it in. Sorry, truth doesn't work that way.
You come up with an argument of "It was an innocent mistake", someone posting to "New Christians" forum, saying he's not debating, declaring his dislike for Christian thought, and then ... debating -- in a place declared for New Christians, declared as a non-debate area, having his thread moved to a debate area.
I'm not bothered by your disbelief. Reality doesn't change because you disbelieve.
Yet there's no provision for that in option 1. And you're not making the options. The only place for that is in option 2, "only with a less emphasis on outreach."As KomissarSteve said, I agree that there may be some cases where a subforum would be better closed simply because no non-Christian has a serious reason to want to be able to post there in a helpful manner. I was more addressing the theory behind your post, of shutting out a group because of how some members behave.
Yet there's no provision for that in option 1. And you're not making the options. The only place for that is in option 2, "only with a less emphasis on outreach."
Your advocacy of option 1 flies in the face of your statements. It's rather similar to a carnivore promising to advocate vegetarianism so as to make slaughterhouses rare. Why'd you believe him? Why would I?
Yet there's no provision for that in option 1. And you're not making the options. The only place for that is in option 2, "only with a less emphasis on outreach."
Your advocacy of option 1 flies in the face of your statements. It's rather similar to a carnivore promising to advocate vegetarianism so as to make slaughterhouses rare. Why'd you believe him? Why would I?
No, it's not. You have a vested interest in being right. If you have a vested interest in being right, do the research.Hey, I don't have any vested interest in your argument being proven correct. You do. So I'm sorry to tell you, yes - it is your responsibility, not mine.
And they only appear to have them when you say so. Like when people oppose what you think.That's right I do, because I don't make a habit of ascribing sinister motives to people who don't appear to have them.
Yes, I do. You come in here with suspicion based on absence of information, and expect someone else to present hard data to change your mind.All I'm asking for is a little evidence to back up what you say; I don't think that's THAT unreasonable of a request, do you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?