At Crossroads -- Cf's Vision Discussion Thread - Please Vote in Poll Thread

[Miracle Storm]

Word, M_S.


For some odd reason, I keep thinking of that new Tracy Lawrence song, "Find Out Who Your Friends Are" right now...or maybe I'm just overly tired.

This one...

Run your car off the side of the road
Get stuck in a ditch way out in the middle of nowhere
Or get yourself in a bind,
Lose the shirt off your back,
Need a floor, need a couch, need a bus fare…

This is where the rubber meets the road
This is where the cream is gonna rise
This is what you really didn't know
This is where the truth don’t lie

Find out who your friends are
Somebody’s gonna drop everything
Run out and crank up their car
Hit the gas, get there fast
Never stop to think “what’s in it for me?”
Or “it’s way too far”
They just show on up
With their big ol’ heart
Find out who your friends are.


Everybody wants to slap your back
Wants to shake your hand
When you’re up on top of that mountain
Then one of those rocks will get wet
And you slide back down
Look up and see who’s around then

This aint where the road comes to an end
This aint where the band wagon stops
This is just one of those times when
A lotta folks jump off.

Find out who your friends are
Somebody’s gonna drop everything
Run out and crank up their car
Hit the gas, get there fast
Never stop to think “what’s in it for me?”
Or “it’s way too far”
They just show on up
With their big ol’ heart
Yeah find out who your friends are.

When the water’s high
When the weather’s not so fair
When the well runs dry
Who’s gonna be there?

Yeah find out who your friends are
Somebody’s gonna drop everything
Run out and crank up their car
Hit the gas, get there fast
Never stop to think “what’s in it for me?”
Or “it’s way too far”
They just show on up
With their big ol’ heart
Find out who your friends are.

Yeah yeah

Find out who your friends are.

Run your car off the side of the road
Get stuck in a ditch way out in the middle of nowhere
Man I been there
Or get yourself in a bind
Lose the shirt off your back
Need a floor, need a couch
Need a bus fare…
Man I been there
Man I been there…

I'm sleep deprived too, btw...

 

[GenemZ]

1. A safe social community site with a heavy and strong Christian influence (with the vision being to offer a safe online community, and a secondary vision being to allow Christians to outreach to non-Christians) - which will allow for a name change;


2. Return to a more restricted Christians-only site with a heavy emphasis on uniting mainstream Christians only with a less emphasis on outreach, in which case we keep the name.

Why even need a name change?

What difference should that make with either option?

If you had not included the name change issue, I might have voted.

We can have a forum uniting all Christians. In the sense of uniting all who wish to debate their differences of point of view. There never will be an agreement on all issues by all Christians.

Its not in God's plan!

1 Corinthians 11:18-19 (New International Version)
​

"In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it.

No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval."
​

Now? If those who have God's approval are in the minority here?

Then they will be the first ones attempted to be excluded!

Jesus warned that in the mainstream the majority will choose the path of the "broad and wide." In contrast, the way that leads to the life (more abundantly), he said only a few will find in this life time.

Jesus was speaking to those who had already believed in him. He was not speaking about only a few finding salvation, as some claim it to mean. He was warning against wide and varied choices for false teachings that will appeal to the emotions of the majority.

Matthew 7:13-15 (New International Version)

"Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves."
​

Jesus spoke those words to believers!

He was warning believers about what was to come!

Unbelievers can not enter into unbelief! We are all born that way! Jesus was warning believers about not entering into something! The majority of believers will be wrong in their chosen way on the broad and wide road of choices on how to serve the Lord! They enter into denominational systems that have been devised to appeal to their dispositions and personal feelings.

2 Timothy 4:3 (New International Version)
"For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear."
​

Grace and truth, GeneZ
​

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

I very much doubt that anyone here has God's approval.

 

[Antihero202]

Out of curiosity, if it turns out the majority of CF users want option 2 (inclusive with CO sections and a return to NC'ers being restricted to the lesser populated areas), why host a place for NC involvement at all?

I say this with NO SARCASM.

It's a genuine question. I know a lot of people say they wanna come here with like-minded individuals to escape the trials of the world, not emulate them. I guess I can understand that, even as an Agnostic.

Why not just make us pick up our ball and go home? It would be a lot less complicated and a lot less trouble for the majority, I presume. This is, after all, Christianforums.

If that isn't what anyone wants, then I am just curious as to what the goal is behind any of this? Instead of everyone picking apart each other's statements, why not just continue posting a complete list of what you want, like that LEAF person did earlier and others have done since? I know arguing can be good and fun, but the first 15 or so pages disturbed me. I didn't know this was such a big issue.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

The goal....

People don't want fairness. People don't want to be united.

People want to be privileged. People want to rule.

That's people. That's the goal.

 

[DeaconDean]

Whatever your opinion is, the "reforms are not working. Disharmony is increasing.

And the thing that seems to be overlooked most is groups of people who deny the diety of Christ, one of the most sacred things in Christianity regardless of denominational doctrines, is being trodden under foot.

Groups who believe that Jesus and Satan were brothers are being allowed to call themselves Christian. Why? Because it is part of the new reforms. Jesus Christ, the second person of the Godhead is being trodden down for the sake of "reforms."

Groups that teach there is no "Trinity" or Jesus was really Michael the archangel are being allowed to call themselves Christian?

What does it mean to call oneself a "Christian?"

Chris·tian (kr

s

ch

n)
adj.
1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.

n.
1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Christian

All these things we hold dear, fight for, die for, are now being discounted. And anybody wonders why there is a mass exodus from CF?

Non-Christians being allowed to moderate in rooms that are Christian is preposterous.

If they are curious, by all means let them ask.

But to give them "free reign?"

Erwins intentions were well meant. But it isn't working. In the former "Christains only" sections, groups are scrambling to set up rules to exclude any and everybody who does not fit their description of what a Christian is. These areas are quickly becoming guilty of Orthooxy. Anybody read Romans 2 and it will become crystal clear.

Are the new rules working? Barely.

The old rules were not the best in the world, but they did work.

The future of this forum is set. The handwritting is on the wall. And it says:

"MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN." -Dan. 5:25 (KJV)

Something needs to be done and done soon. Should the site split? I don't think that is the answer.

Whatever has to be done should be done soon, and very soon. Membership down, staff unhappy, members unhappy?

I don't know much, but I see a lot going on now that wasn't going on before.

My two cents worth.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[pete56]

Well I have voted for Option 2.

Why is it that Christian Forums needs to change again? We haven't even bedded in the new regime yet! Heck we haven't even got to an agreed set of rules and protocols yet, I was told that could take up to 6 months!

So why try to set out some sort of new vision and mission statement? either we are here to unite ALL Christians (however, that gets defined) or we are not. And if we are not I don't think we need a name change, we need a mind change!

As for those that are advocating outreach as a mission for all Christians - I will point you to the scripture that Jesus spoke - By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, that you have love for one another!

This is Christ's great call to unity and it says to me that if we are unified and love one another as He called us to, then the people out side will be attracted to ask what it is that we have - that is what happened in the book of Acts after all, people were added daily to their number!

 

[Miracle Storm]

You know I'm like [--] close to never logging in to a forum again.
I created friendships here, I thought were real if even just on a computer.
Some were not so real.
others well I look forward to one day seeing you in heaven.
If changes don't take place I'm gone from here and forums all together. And whoever wants to cheer go ahead.
Just makes me want to cry....this has been going on to long..............

 

[GenemZ]

I very much doubt that anyone here has God's approval.

To think what you did? Is to think God can not produce what he wishes to find. God does not fail.

Who those ones are approved of? God only knows. Because, everyone here who holds a view in contrast to another, thinks his view is the one approved of.

What comforts me is knowing God is fair, reasonable, and just. If its not me? I know I will agree with his approved choice approvingly when we are all in Heaven. At that time we will not have the option of functioning in pride and in the flesh. For its pride and the flesh that cause divisions in the body of Christ. In Eternity we will not even remember what that is like, anymore you can now remember wetting your diapers as a baby.

Grace and peace, GeneZ
​

 

[""]

As for those that are advocating outreach as a mission for all Christians - I will point you to the scripture that Jesus spoke - By this shall all men know that you are my disciples, that you have love for one another!

This is Christ's great call to unity and it says to me that if we are unified and love one another as He called us to, then the people out side will be attracted to ask what it is that we have

But brother, since when does Unity mean "keep me all to yourselves"? and how can they be attracted to what we have if they cannot even be a part discussing it?

- that is what happened in the book of Acts after all, people were added daily to their number!

So people were added daily by the sheer examples of Christian love between the apostles? Or was it perhaps by the sharing of Christ's truth with them? Jesus set the example for them, by teaching the lost about G-d's love for them with these three things: His life, His communication with them, His death & resurrection. The last one was the ultimate sacrifice, and demonstrated G-d's love for all, in the most powerful way.

So I would ask, are we desiring to keep CF to ourselves for us, or for Him?

Just some things for you to think on brother. G-d bless you.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

To think what you did? Is to think God can not produce what he wishes to find. God does not fail.

Who those ones are approved of? God only knows. Because, everyone here who holds a view in contrast to another, thinks his view is the one approved of.

What comforts me is knowing God is fair, reasonable, and just. If its not me? I know I will agree with his approved choice approvingly when we are all in Heaven. At that time we will not have the option of functioning in pride and in the flesh. For its pride and the flesh that cause divisions in the body of Christ. In Eternity we will not even remember what that is like, anymore you can now remember wetting your diapers as a baby.

Grace and peace, GeneZ
​

Ok

 

[GenemZ]

You know I'm like [--] close to never logging in to a forum again.
I created friendships here, I thought were real if even just on a computer.
Some were not so real.
others well I look forward to one day seeing you in heaven.
If changes don't take place I'm gone from here and forums all together. And whoever wants to cheer go ahead.
Just makes me want to cry....this has been going on to long..............

Where are you to go to find what you are looking for? I think you should stay and first find out what the changes will bring. Right now you are allowing your worst imaginations to form into self willed reality. Be patient... Give it some time.

Grace and peace, Gene

 

[karen freeinchristman]

A quick repeat of something I said in the other thread, since I got positive feedback by both conservative Christians and non-Christians on it:

A lot of people are rather inbetween Choices 1 and 2. Even though I voted 2, I really, as my previous post indicates, like many of the reforms.

Here's what I really think:

Good Things

1. Increased access for non-Christians.
   • Especially to congregational forums
   • The ability for them to staff non-theological forums and subforums
2. Congregational forums' ability to establish rules within their individual space.
   • The ability to say who is considered a member, full or partial, and who is considered a guest
   • The ability to vote upon their own rules
   • The ability to vote upon their own moderators
   • The ability to determine the rights and privileges of non-Christians therewithin, including perhaps the right or privilege to moderate there
3. Open reports and applications to staff
4. Term-base appointments/election of staff
5. Allowing people to decide themselves if they are married, etc (with one exception; see below)

What should be Brought Back

1. A strong, universal set of rules that are not up to any debate.
2. The Nicene Creed as an absolute standard of who is considered a Christian.
3. A system of warnings and infractions.
4. A "Christian area" but where non-Christians have the privilege to post in instead of being automatically prohibited from posting in.
5. Only allowing Christians to staff theological forums.
6. Appointment and non-election by members of non-congregational staff with a twist: members would still be able to make comments (see above) and be able to appeal an appointment if the vote were either narrow or if there was genuine concern about the ability of the individual to function as staff
7. Appeals (was that actually removed?)

I really think a "1.5" choice is most realistic that keeps most of the major reforms while returning to tried-and-true methods, particularly in moderating but allowing congregational forums to keep their right to "semi-autonomy" in terms of staffing.

I like this, PV!

you know, i find it sad that those of you who sya that only Christian mods can give any kind of advice or care or help seem to forget that just bc someone isn't a Christian, it doesn't mean they don't have compassion.

a non Christian has morals too ya know. just bc they aren't Christian doesn't mean they cna't give good advice. why does their advice HAVE to be from the Bible? why can't they just sit and listen to someone who needs comfort adn be a shoulder for them to lean on?

oh yea, that's right THEY CAN!

So true!

 

[DeaconDean]

Keeping in mind the "reforms," with what I previously said, reachout to others yes, but to let others trod under foot the dearest of all doctrines...

When we, who are called by His name, compromise this, well, Jesus said it best:

"Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men." Mt. 5:13 (KJV)

And even God said there was a time to give up:

"And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man," -Gen. 6:3 (KJV)

Does this sound like God had "religious tolerance?"

God Bless

Till all are one

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

You ain't God. What doctrine has been "trod underfoot"?

 

[WatersMoon110]

You know I'm like [--] close to never logging in to a forum again.
I created friendships here, I thought were real if even just on a computer.
Some were not so real.
others well I look forward to one day seeing you in heaven.
If changes don't take place I'm gone from here and forums all together. And whoever wants to cheer go ahead.
Just makes me want to cry....this has been going on to long..............

Perhaps, because I don't know you, I fail to understand why the current "rules in progress" system is keeping you from having friendships here and on other internet forums. If you possibly could, I would very much appreciate it if you could explain to me what it is that is keeping you from interacting with your friends, because I am trying to better understand both the Pros and the Cons of the CF changes.

Thank you.

 

[GenemZ]

Out of curiosity, if it turns out the majority of CF users want option 2 (inclusive with CO sections and a return to NC'ers being restricted to the lesser populated areas), why host a place for NC involvement at all?

I say this with NO SARCASM.

So Christians can debate Biblical issues with other Christians from a Scriptural perspective.

The other section will be not about debating differences, so much. It will be one of deflecting attacks against what we believe, and why we believe.

Christians can debate amongst themselves on what the Trinity means. But, we are not debating about the veracity that God exists. Atheists do that. That is why there should be two sections.

The Christian section is for debating on what we believe as Christians, with other Christians who hold different points of view.

The other section is to debate why we are justified to believe, against those who can not see any justification for our faith in God.

Grace and peace, GeneZ
​

 

[""]

Does this sound like God had "religious tolerance?"

I know of no Christian here that is promoting religious tolerance. Tolerance is one of my least favorite words, because it's so PC.

This isn't about religious tolerance. It's about leaving open the door to witness. If we can't witness, and minister to those who are hurting and without Christ, then what good are we? I can only sing hymns for so long, before a broken person catches my eye, and I have to stop, and talk to them about why I'm singing in the first place. Aren't we all like that? Christians, I mean. Don't we all desire this? Am I confusing us with somebody else?

 

[WatersMoon110]

A quick repeat of something I said in the other thread, since I got positive feedback by both conservative Christians and non-Christians on it:

A lot of people are rather inbetween Choices 1 and 2. Even though I voted 2, I really, as my previous post indicates, like many of the reforms.

Here's what I really think:

Good Things

1. Increased access for non-Christians.
   • Especially to congregational forums
   • The ability for them to staff non-theological forums and subforums
2. Congregational forums' ability to establish rules within their individual space.
   • The ability to say who is considered a member, full or partial, and who is considered a guest
   • The ability to vote upon their own rules
   • The ability to vote upon their own moderators
   • The ability to determine the rights and privileges of non-Christians therewithin, including perhaps the right or privilege to moderate there
3. Open reports and applications to staff
4. Term-base appointments/election of staff
5. Allowing people to decide themselves if they are married, etc (with one exception; see below)

What should be Brought Back

1. A strong, universal set of rules that are not up to any debate.
2. The Nicene Creed as an absolute standard of who is considered a Christian.
3. A system of warnings and infractions.
4. A "Christian area" but where non-Christians have the privilege to post in instead of being automatically prohibited from posting in.
5. Only allowing Christians to staff theological forums.
6. Appointment and non-election by members of non-congregational staff with a twist: members would still be able to make comments (see above) and be able to appeal an appointment if the vote were either narrow or if there was genuine concern about the ability of the individual to function as staff
7. Appeals (was that actually removed?)

I really think a "1.5" choice is most realistic that keeps most of the major reforms while returning to tried-and-true methods, particularly in moderating but allowing congregational forums to keep their right to "semi-autonomy" in terms of staffing.

I agree with this also, though I'm a bit iffy on the Nicene Creed rule (but I'm not a Christian, so I feel it probably isn't my place to make rules about such things).

I really like the idea of allowing non-Christians to post in Christian areas, but as guests (allowing them to be regulated under different rules so as to better protect Christian members in Christian areas) thus allowing those causing problems to be confined to the non-Christian area.

 

[HisGrace58]

Option 2 thank you.