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

[Hentenza]

I look at the site name and motto and I get a visceral opinion of what this site is

ChristianForums, uniting all Christians as one body.

I don't read, OpenForums, uniting all people as one body.

The predisposing perception is a) this site is intended as a meeting and discussion place for people who identify themselves as Christian. b) is it a place for them to create unity amongst each other.

So, here are a few dilemmas I see.

1. How do you define Christian. I was a big fan of the Nicene Standard. It has been the standard of orthodoxy for 1700 years, why create a new standard?

2. What to do with people who don't fit into that definition? I am fine with having open areas for everyone and anyone to initiate and sustain conversation, but the preponderance of the site should be dedicated to the site's mission......uniting all Christians as one body. Not sure how an atheist, muslim, wiccan, or a follower of some non-Nicene pseudo-religion can help with that. My gut instinct tells me, they can't.

3. Regarding "perscution" which I keep hearing over and over. Unless someone officially affliliated with this site has come to your house, abducted you, chained you to a wooden table in a dank, musky root cellar while water drips on your forhead, and shoved bamboo slivers under your fingernails, you haven't been persecuted. Give up the pity party. Treated in a manner you consider unfair? Probably. But persecuted? Give it a rest. If you want to understand persecution, talk to the Christians in Darfur, Sudan.

I can agree with that!!! Well said!

 

[DMagoh]

The problem with Option 1 for "outreach to non Christians" is that: That's Not What Happens - The Non-Christians come in and immediately go on the war path denying God exists, making fun of Christians and Christian beliefs, etc. It would be different if the non-Christians came in with a different attitude - but they dont. Go back to Option 2

 

[GreenMunchkin]

The proposed changes ARE the happy medium. Have you ever spent any time in the General Apologetics section?

*snipped the rest*

GA is hi-octane, and not everyone can cope with it.

You seem to think your idea of CF is the only workable one. How is that any different from the people you're essentially accusing of the same thing?

You're blackmailing people into supporting your idea of what CF should be, and saying if they don't, they don't understand Christian values.

It's very subtly done, and very convincing, but it's simply not that easy.

There is middle ground where *everyone* can be happy; not just the people who frequent GA.

 

[Ack]

Hi! It's me again! Who am I do you say? Think back to the last reforms and you may remember!

Anywho, I have decided to come out of retirement and bring you this important anouncement!

This is a Website. A Christian Website. It should be brought back to what it once was. A place to Unite all Christians.

This was never meant to be a site to unite al Muslims, or all Athiests. If you want a site like that you can find them out there in the masses.

Right now I urge all of the Christians to stand up for CF! This is the time to reclaim the goal of Uniting all Christians!

I'm going to pass on the advice that was given to me at the last reforms. If you don't like it, leave.



*I would also like to note that this is a sock puppet, and it will not be used to vote. I'd like all of the iidb users to take note of this. One vote per person.

 

[KerrMetric]

This is true.

AOL, and some universities, apartment buildings, and businesses use a bank of dynamic IP addresses. It is therefore impossible to ban an AOL IP and for that reason some forums even forbid AOL members to participate.

In addition, Internet cafes offer their pay per use services, so that people who really want to pay for an extra fraudulent vote can go to different Internet Cafes just to set up accounts to get around the system. Others use the Internet Cafe because they cannot afford a home computer, so they would be victimized if an entire Internet Cafe site were to close based on the unethical behavior of one person.

People can always find ways to be dishonest. Only Christ our God knows what is in our hearts and He will be the final and just Judge.

Glory to Jesus Christ,
Glory to Him forever.

In principle that is true. But for the purposes of this vote and the fact we are sampling globally the odds that a genuine vote is discarded is far less than the odds you are catching genuine sockpuppets.

Lists of dynamic addresses are used by large ISP's but the odds someone votes here and then a few hours later someone does with the same IP are pretty slim.

 

[ALiberalTeen]

The problem with Option 1 for "outreach to non Christians" is that: That's Not What Happens - The Non-Christians come in and immediately go on the war path denying God exists, making fun of Christians and Christian beliefs, etc. It would be different if the non-Christians came in with a different attitude - but they dont. Go back to Option 2

Really?

most non-Christians were perfectly nice

 

[JimfromOhio]

I am going to wait this out..... I don't think we will accomplish much in this thread/poll. We still need more work.

 

[DMagoh]

Really?

most non-Christians were perfectly nice

This coming from an agnostic.

 

[Debi1967]

I look at the site name and motto and I get a visceral opinion of what this site is

ChristianForums, uniting all Christians as one body.

I don't read, OpenForums, uniting all people as one body.

The predisposing perception is a) this site is intended as a meeting and discussion place for people who identify themselves as Christian. b) is it a place for them to create unity amongst each other.

So, here are a few dilemmas I see.

1. How do you define Christian. I was a big fan of the Nicene Standard. It has been the standard of orthodoxy for 1700 years, why create a new one? Shouldn't we call an new Ecumencial Council for that?

2. What to do with people who don't fit into that definition? I am fine with having open areas for everyone and anyone to initiate and sustain conversation, but the preponderance of the site should be dedicated to the site's mission......uniting all Christians as one body. Not sure how an atheist, muslim, wiccan, or a follower of some non-Nicene pseudo-religion can help with that. My gut instinct tells me, they can't.

3. Regarding "perscution" which I keep hearing over and over. Unless someone officially affliliated with this site has come to your house, abducted you, chained you to a wooden table in a dank, musky root cellar while water drips on your forhead, and shoved bamboo slivers under your fingernails, you haven't been persecuted. Give up the pity party. Treated in a manner you consider unfair? Probably. But persecuted? Give it a rest. If you want to understand persecution, talk to the Christians in Darfur, Sudan.

 

[Beastt]

Erwin - take the middle road!

He tried. What he proposed was the middle road. Did you see anyone suggest that nonChristians should have total control of the site? That would be one extreme. Under the old system Christians (those claiming to be Christian), were in total control. That was the other extreme. Erwin suggested the middle road and people who claim to be Christians had a total hissy-fit!

Perhaps what needs to happen is that we need to redefine Christian values.

Tolerance is out. Zero-tolerance is the true Christian mandate

Equality is out. Only Christians are allowed to be "equal". NonChristians are to be seen as lesser beings.

Kindness can have no place in the treatment of the aforementioned "lesser beings". If you're not a Christian, you don't deserve kindness.

Godliness (as the common presentation that "God is love"), simply isn't allowed. It's the path to weakness and a total loss of the control that Christians should naturally practice over everyone else.​

There are a lot of Christians here who should take pause, reflect upon the values they actually wish to practice, and be ashamed.

 

[ALiberalTeen]

This coming from an agnostic.

I recently reconverted you goose

 

[KerrMetric]

*I would also like to note that this is a sock puppet, and it will not be used to vote. I'd like all of the iidb users to take note of this. One vote per person.

What is your other account called? Are you a Mod?

Things are above board or they are not - sockpuppets are not.

 

[intricatic]

He tried. What he proposed was the middle road. Did you see anyone suggest that nonChristians should have total control of the site? That would be one extreme. Under the old system Christians (those claiming to be Christian), were in total control. That was the other extreme. Erwin suggested the middle road and people who claim to be Christians had a total hissy-fit!

Perhaps what needs to happen is that we need to redefine Christian values.

Tolerance is out. Zero-tolerance is the true Christian mandate

Equality is out. Only Christians are allowed to be "equal". NonChristians are to be seen as lesser beings.

Kindness can have no place in the treatment of the aforementioned "lesser beings". If you're not a Christian, you don't deserve kindness.

Godliness (as the common presentation that "God is love"), simply isn't allowed. It's the path to weakness and a total loss of the control that Christians should naturally practice over everyone else.​

There are a lot of Christians here who should take pause, reflect upon the values they actually wish to practice, and be ashamed.

If this was a secular website, I'd agree with you 100%.

 

[MartinM]

Lists of dynamic addresses are used by large ISP's but the odds someone votes here and then a few hours later someone does with the same IP are pretty slim.

That assumes you can actually get the IP that was used to vote. Often the best a mod can do is get a list of all IPs used by an account, which would be far more prone to false positives.

 

[Beastt]

This coming from an agnostic.

Look again. His tag-line says he's gay and Christian.

 

[Philothei]

I voted option 2 and as others stated correctly before Christian forum should remain for Christians... there is no middle way it is either Christian or not....

Why we did not have this poll before the changes or the non-christians came in? beats me!


God bless,
Philothei

 

[BLUEEYEANGEL]

I agree with you BIG time. A NON believer wants Nothing to do with the belief of God.

So why should the non believers have the mod/leader position?! Why are Christians getting kicked into the corner and being persecuted?

An non-believer DOES NOT believe in God. I don't know how someone can serve on a Christian board if they are not Christian?! It's like throwing an atheist in a Church to preach as a Pastor to church people....it's not going to work!!

 

[GreenMunchkin]

He tried. What he proposed was the middle road. Did you see anyone suggest that nonChristians should have total control of the site? That would be one extreme. Under the old system Christians (those claiming to be Christian), were in total control. That was the other extreme. Erwin suggested the middle road and people who claim to be Christians had a total hissy-fit!


Perhaps what needs to happen is that we need to redefine Christian values.

Tolerance is out. Zero-tolerance is the true Christian mandate​

Equality is out. Only Christians are allowed to be "equal". NonChristians are to be seen as lesser beings.​

Kindness can have no place in the treatment of the aforementioned "lesser beings". If you're not a Christian, you don't deserve kindness.​

Godliness (as the common presentation that "God is love"), simply isn't allowed. It's the path to weakness and a total loss of the control that Christians should naturally practice over everyone else.​

There are a lot of Christians here who should take pause, reflect upon the values they actually wish to practice, and be ashamed.

You're charismatic, I'll give you that.

Very little valid, productive content in this post, though.

 

[Debi1967]

He tried. What he proposed was the middle road. Did you see anyone suggest that nonChristians should have total control of the site? That would be one extreme. Under the old system Christians (those claiming to be Christian), were in total control. That was the other extreme. Erwin suggested the middle road and people who claim to be Christians had a total hissy-fit!

Perhaps what needs to happen is that we need to redefine Christian values.

Tolerance is out. Zero-tolerance is the true Christian mandate

Equality is out. Only Christians are allowed to be "equal". NonChristians are to be seen as lesser beings.

Kindness can have no place in the treatment of the aforementioned "lesser beings". If you're not a Christian, you don't deserve kindness.

Godliness (as the common presentation that "God is love"), simply isn't allowed. It's the path to weakness and a total loss of the control that Christians should naturally practice over everyone else.​

There are a lot of Christians here who should take pause, reflect upon the values they actually wish to practice, and be ashamed.

This is overly dramatic to say the least

 

[Brimshack]

I agree with you BIG time. A NON believer wants Nothing to do with the belief of God.

Actually, that would be an unwarranted inference. What one believes to be true and what one wants are quite frequently different things.

So why should the non believers have the mod/leader position?!

Well, if one only wishes to keep track of two variables, a question of allegiance. If one wishes to break the nature of the tasks down into what a mod actually does, it is easy enough to see that ideological commitment is hardly prerequisite to effective moderating. So, the answer to your rhetorical question would actually be that some non-Christians have talent of use to the forum. Some are skilled in facilitating discussion and debate; some at technical matters involving computer software, some have extensive knowledge of subject areas relevant to this or that forum. These are useful skills that can be used to aid the forum. The question then becomes whether or not such skills are worth it in the context of any specific subforum. ...unless of course you would rather stick to the ideological test. It's a judgement call really.

Why are Christians getting kicked into the corner and being persecuted?

Please show us an example of a Christian being kicked to the corner as a result of these reforms. Please show us an example of a Christian that is being persecuted as a result of these forums?

An non-believer DOES NOT believe in God. I don't know how someone can serve on a Christian board if they are not Christian?! It's like throwing an atheist in a Church to preach as a Pastor to church people....it's not going to work!!

No, it's not like that. No-one is suggesting that an atheist should preach to the Christians. The suggestion is that non-Christians may have skills of use in some forums. Whether or not those skills are sufficient to warrant accepting them is then a question of VOTING. In those forums wherein belief is too central to the tasks of moderation, it is unlikely that non-Christians will apply, and still less likely that they will be voted in.

The mere possibility that a non-Christian COULD end up modding a forum should not be confused with a policy mandating that they SHOULD be put in there.