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

[openup4christ]

I agree that we should keep our christian base and i also agree that we keep things more open to everyone.... cant we kind some sort of middle ground here? Also please everyone respect eachother opinions this dosent need to get heated.

 

[Timothy]

Well, there is an old standby that some Christians like to use when they don't get their way:



It's stupidity. It muddles the issue, and it lends an appeal to emotion to the discussion which otherwise wouldn't exist.

And the cry of 'you're not treating us fairly, you're treating us like we're not equal' (also known as the appeal to Holocaust) is anything OTHER than an appeal to emotion, since it's not logical.

 

[""]

But still, if one says they are a Christian we are to accept that just because they say so.

"Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." -Mt. 7:20 (KJV)

I accept that you are, even if this entire thread is very lacking in fruity flavor.

Aside from that, I realize it's difficult to be confronted with people who call themselves Christian in one breath, and declare that they don't believe Christ was the Savior, in another. I get that.

In reality though, we don't need an icon to tell us who's who. Remember the fruit. Icons mean nothing.

Besides, there are going to be plenty of us, bearing those flashy icons, talking about how we did this for Jesus and that for Jesus, and the bible says that to some He will say "depart from me, I never knew thee."

He is G-d. I am not.
I don't need an icon to know who loves Him. I don't think He does either.

 

[ALiberalTeen]

I agree that we should keep our christian base and i also agree that we keep things more open to everyone.... cant we kind some sort of middle ground here? Also please everyone respect eachother opinions this dosent need to get heated.

 

[Loki]

She was only making a suggestion.

Your type of response tends to create a self fulfilling prophesy concerning such matters.


Be polite, and any differences in belief being debated should make no difference here. That is what this forum appears to be possibly heading towards.

Grace and peace, GeneZ
​

You're expecting perfection of those who a vocal section of CFers wish to exclude from the most thoughtful discussion that occurs on this site. We've experienced it before.

Expect the same perfection from your own people.

 

[openup4christ]

I accept that you are, even if this entire thread is very lacking in fruity flavor.

Aside from that, I realize it's difficult to be confronted with people who call themselves Christian in one breath, and declare that they don't believe Christ was the Savior, in another. I get that.

In reality though, we don't need an icon to tell us who's who. Remember the fruit. Icons mean nothing.

Besides, there are going to be plenty of us, bearing those flashy icons, talking about how we did this for Jesus and that for Jesus, and the bible says that to some He will say "depart from me, I never knew thee."

He is G-d. I am not.
I don't need an icon to know who loves Him. I don't think He does either.

u know what we should have a fruit Icon !

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

And the cry of 'you're not treating us fairly, you're treating us like we're not equal' (also known as the appeal to Holocaust) is anything OTHER than an appeal to emotion, since it's not logical.

Nuh uh.

Only when it progresses to "you're not treating us fairly, you're treating us like we're not equal -- you're like Nazis!" does it become an appeal to emotion. What you quoted is simply a statement.

 

[""]

I agree that we should keep our christian base and i also agree that we keep things more open to everyone.... cant we kind some sort of middle ground here? Also please everyone respect eachother opinions this dosent need to get heated.

Yes we can!

Lookie here!

http://www.christianforums.com/t5794084-what-would-option-3-look-like.html


People have been rambling on and on in this thread for hours, and completely missed that one up there.

Check it out. If you have trouble making it through the crowd, just give a shout. I'll pull you through.

 

[flaglady]

Option 2 without doubt or hesitation.

 

[GenemZ]

.The Nicene Creed as an absolute standard of who is considered a Christian.

The problem with that. And, I can tell you from personal experience.

One can agree with what the Creed states.

But? When interrogated on how one determined what is said" It had become the basis for locking out some.

Why? Certain church dogmas which do not agree with Scripture according to others, were used as the litmus test to see if one agrees with the Creed according to a particular church's dogma.

For instance? If one sees Mary as the mother of the humanity of Christ? And, not the mother of God (as if God can have a mother)? That one can be accused by RCC's and EO's of not seeing Jesus as being God.

Not here to debate the issue. Just to show you the troubles your desire has caused in the past.

For, a good number of those who were controlling according to the Creed, were also controlling according to certain doctrines of their particular denomination as the basis to determine if one truly agreed with the Creed.

They required one to agree with the Creed according to their churches teachings. I believe Jesus Christ is God. But, not according to the way certain moderators insisted I had to accept it to be. I agreed with what the Creed says. But not how some interpret Scripture to get there.

If we are to agree with the Creed?

Then its to be on its face value.

Not in determining how one gets to the point of accepting what it says. I was beginning to feel I needed to convert to Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy before my belief in the Deity of Christ would be deemed acceptable.

That is how the Creed was used against those Protestants who disagreed with many of the EO and RCC teachings. For many of us do not see Mary as being the Mother of God. We see God as being impossible to being born. For, God is the one who created what birth is.

In Christ, GeneZ
​

 

[Angel4Truth]

Nope, Angel. You're thinking of somebody else. I think I jumped on AgnosticTeen for making that comparison, in fact.

here is what you said where that was concerned

Christian-only or All-are-welcome. Conservative or Liberal. Church or Outreach. Elected Mods or Appointed.

It doesn't matter.

The problems will remain. The troubles aren't going anywhere. The only difference will be who's getting their throats cut.

I'd support whichever method gives me the best chance of defending myself against whichever vocal minority has currently made it their business to tell me what my business here is.

That method is personal freedom coupled with personal accountability -- which includes the freedom to determine who can hold me accountable.

I may be wrong about agreement but the post seemed apathetic or agreeing to me in context of the discussion. That is what you stated when agnosticteen made his comment about ghettos and the holocaust. The others called him down for the comment but you did not which made it appear to be agreement imo.

You called him down yes but not for that - instead it was for his comment about being able to hack votes(even though he also said he wouldnt do it but that he could) in the poll in response to saluecami saying he would pm 90 plus ex mods to come vote on this poll and then you said you could get 400 other members to swing the vote if you so desired.

Maybe you can show me where you jumped on him for the comparison to the holocaust because i cannot find it and i just read the whole exchange again. The fact is you did not.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

You called him down yes but not for that - instead it was for his comment about being able to hack votes(even though he also said he wouldnt do it but that he could) in the poll in response to saluecami saying he would pm 90 plus ex mods to come vote on this poll and then you said you could get 400 other members to swing the vote if you so desired.

Maybe you can show me where you jumped on him for the comparison to the holocaust because i cannot find it and i just read the whole exchange again. The fact is you did not.

Ah... yes. I knew I'd said something to him about something. Dunno why I didn't jump on him some for that. Probably because others had already done so.

Anyway, for the record, I don't support any false comparison which trivializes real-world pain and suffering.

This includes both Christian Persecution Complex and Holocaust Syndrome, among others.


I have no idea how the post you quoted is possibly relevant to the Nazi thing. And I think I only said I could get 70 other members to block any "swing vote". Besides, isn't that the thread segment where you demanded an apology from me for insulting you, when I was obviously speaking to AT ?

 

[ClaireZ]

ETA
also some of the staff forums such as the conference rooms, training area and HQ should be in private. I think the way the reports are working is fine. But there are things that need to be discussed privately...

I have to disagree with private staff forum areas. Personally I feel one of the best things about the reforms was to get rid of the secrecy and the temptation for gossip and abuse that was partly caused by the secret staff forums.

Anything that needs to be said, can be said openly and publicly or not at all.

 

[peepnklown]

I rather enjoy the discussion between different religions and non-believers and I hope whichever option is picked these types of debate/discussions between different people are not hindered.

 

[Lindon Tinuviel]

Have y'all seen the new (and I'm assuming informal) polls in the Wiki Rules Discussion Forum?

They're discussing and polling on things like hidden Staff Forums, Moderators, and Warnings.

 

[davedajobauk]

Hi Yall......... I voted Option 2.

this is not a secret-society
there are no secret-handshakes
there are no entrance exams
nor, induction ceremonies

spreading 'the word'
and, our testaments
just cannot, be-achieved
from behind 'locked doors'

I will pray, that what is now will grow
more COMPLETE tho' this may take some time

I SUPPORT ERWIN's VISION


davedajobauk

 

[Jonathan40]

option2

 

[Jonathan40]

option2 - life, option1 - death!

 

[Timothy]

I have to disagree with private staff forum areas. Personally I feel one of the best things about the reforms was to get rid of the secrecy and the temptation for gossip and abuse that was partly caused by the secret staff forums.

I've been on staff as all levels except Admin and Exec, and I can assure you I saw no gossip or abuse.

 

[NewSong]

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.