CF is Changing... Now what do we do about it?

[woobadooba]

As many now know, CF is going to undergo some radical changes. Some of these changes are for the good, while most of them are not so good.

Nevertheless, the changes that are for the good will allow us to push aside the ones that aren't so good (only in this forum)

At this point, it's all a matter of putting our thinking caps on...

Hence, we ought to take full advantage of this opportunity to come together and make this into a forum that properly represents what the Bible really teaches us.

Since it is a majority rules vote, this shouldn't be a problem, because most of us in here agree that there are certain teachings that are blatantly heretical, not only to the SDA church, but to Christianity at large.

Therefore, we need to come to an agreement on what will and won't be permitted to be taught/discussed in this forum, as well as to come to an agreement on what constitutes appropriate discussion (goodbye 3ABN and Ellen White bashing threads).

If done properly, this could serve as a safeguard for us in many ways, and may even encourage a lot of people that have left our forum as a result of the behavior of hostile conservatives and liberals, to return.

So, the task at hand now is to unite in making decisions on what is going to happen in this forum. We can't control what goes on in CF in general. However, we can control what happens in here, especially since it is now up to the people to make up the rules that will govern each forum on a majority rules basis.

 

[JonMiller]

It seems to me that one of the main areas of discussion are progessive vs traditional vs historical vs evangelical. They have some what been divided here in two, but there are really 4 positions.

This often happens here in in this forum. And actually, EGW is one of the central issues of disagreement among the four main positions of adventism.

The progressive forum is mostly dead, I don't go there often. The Traditional forum includes many (who might not be traditional even) who post about themselves, etc (That is where all the intros seem to be).

I have to say, I am not certain about what will happen after this shakeup.

I almost think that there should be an SDAiscussion forum, which is like this, for us to have discussion in (anyone who self identifies as SDA). And then a SDA:Fellowship forum, which would be a debateless forum for those who self identify SDA. Traditional (I don't mean Historical, I mean following the current church's positions) Adventists should probably be the moderators of the Fellowship forum, and move out any debate to the discussion forum (but allow adventists who aren't traditional to continue to post there). The moderators for the discussion forum should be broader, and should allow more.

Note, I do think that as long as most members of the site self identify and proclaim their Christianess, that this will be a Christian site.

JM

 

[JonMiller]

An overview of the 4 positions:

Traditional: the 28 fundamental beleifs...

Historical:the semi-arrianism of the past, heavy use of EGW, beleif that SDA is the remnant, beleif that we are to become perfect before Christ's return

Evangelical: less emphasis on legalism and IJ, but otherwise like traditionals

Progressive: no 7 day creation/etc, no EGW, etc (the mainstream liberal Christian position)

JM

 

[woobadooba]

I think it's best to deal with this in baby steps. It's going to take quite a while to adjust. Possibly months!

The first thing that I think we should do is come to an agreement on what we will allow to be taught/discussed in this forum.

Once that is established it should be posted in a sticky for all to see.

This will serve as a safegaurd for us against trolls that would like to come in here to stir up trouble. Believe me, there are MANY that have done this in the past, and I anticipate that there will be even more that will attempt to do this in the near future as a result of these rule changes!

The next step would be to decide what constitutes a good forum moderator, and then find people to fit that description.

 

[woobadooba]

Mark my words, atheists will come in here and try to shipwreck the faith of many, as well as to create even greater division in this forum.

To safeguard ourselves from such attempts, we can essentially deal with this potential spiritual hazard in one blow...

We should make it a rule within this forum that the teaching of evolution will not be permitted to be taught, or discussed in here.

This teaching is blatantly false, and has no official standing in the SDA church. In fact, even most liberal SDAs don't agree with it.

What this should really come down to is what does the Bible say about creation?

Teachings that are obviously false according to the Bible ought not to be identified as SDA, or Christian.

We have to protect what belongs to us. Please try to see the big picture here.

Discussion is always welcome; but the devil ought not to be given any place in this forum. He has already done enough damage.
Let's not give him more space to do his dirty work.

So essentially what this comes down to is we need to establish rules that will determine how atheists and non-Christians
are going to interact in here. It is vital that we address this matter as a soon as possible.

 

[Windmill]

Though I do enjoy discussing new ideas with people, there are some times when you just want to say, talk to Christians/adventists, and this is what this forum is great for.

I second the evolution thing. I don't want to have to go through discussing about evolution. I don't know... the changes are reasonably large (though, it probably won't have as great of an effect as we think it will) so I've gotta think about it some more O_O

 

[JonMiller]

Mark my words, atheists will come in here and try to shipwreck the faith of many, as well as to create even greater division in this forum.

To safeguard ourselves from such attempts, we can essentially deal with this potential spiritual hazard in one blow...

We should make it a rule within this forum that the teaching of evolution will not be permitted to be taught, or discussed in here.

This teaching is blatantly false, and has no official standing in the SDA church. In fact, even most liberal SDAs don't agree with it.

What this should really come down to is what does the Bible say about creation?

Teachings that are obviously false according to the Bible ought not to be identified as SDA, or Christian.

We have to protect what belongs to us. Please try to see the big picture here.

Discussion is always welcome; but the devil ought not to be given any place in this forum. He has already done enough damage.
Let's not give him more space to do his dirty work.

So essentially what this comes down to is we need to establish rules that will determine how atheists and non-Christians
are going to interact in here. It is vital that we address this matter as a soon as possible.

The scientific theory of evolution is not opposed to the creation story.

JM

 

[woobadooba]

I second the evolution thing. I don't want to have to go through discussing about evolution. I don't know... the changes are reasonably large (though, it probably won't have as great of an effect as we think it will) so I've gotta think about it some more O_O

Well, we should also keep in mind that since we are allowed to make up our own rules by majority vote, we could just simply not allow atheists to post in our forum except to ask questions.

This would certainly solve the problem of identifying sincere seekers of truth, as opposed to those who have nothing better to do with their time than to insult Christians and try to tear down our faith.

In fact, I think this rule should go into effect immediately.

However, judging by the slow response I'm getting in this thread, it doesn't appear that we are going to get anywhere anytime soon.

 

[IntoTheCrimsonSky]

Wow! There's going to be changes in CF? What have I missed? Can someone point me to where this is announced or something, I feel rather lost. *lol*

I think some great suggestions have been made so far and this could be a great opportunity to get some things worked out. My only concerns with putting limits on topics to be discussed, and the idea that athiests shouldn't post except questions (Although I do see the point) is that it's closing doors on things.

For one thing, having to discuss evolution is something that I even have to face at home, since my mom fully believes in it. I came from a background not long ago that believed God was the one who 'created' evolution. I still can be shaky on the idea, but I try to just take the Bible for what it says and leave it at that.

Point being, that's one of the things I love about this forum. I rarely get to interact with fellow Adventists, so here is a wonderful place where I come and could ask questions about different things and to see how you guys apply or feel about it. I fear that putting too many rules can limit what knowledge can be gained.

Also, we can't stop athiests from challenging us in a real world environment..so limiting it here can also have it's downsides because it's a good place to grow and be able to learn how to express our beliefs in a loving way to even those who are just coming to discredit us. I know I'd rather get used to it here, surrounded by others of my faith, than out in the world where I have to handle it alone. Maybe a sub forum would be best for that kind of thing, though. Of course..as I said..I can see what you guys are saying, also.

I think I'm a bit of all the types of Adventist listed above, too! *lol* Well, except maybe Progressive. I had no idea there was that much division within the church...

Anyway, I don't want to say more untill I better understand what all this CF change is about. I'm sure God will bless us with benefits from it, though.

Blessings and Love,
Sarah

 

[woobadooba]

Wow! There's going to be changes in CF? What have I missed? Can someone point me to where this is announced or something, I feel rather lost. *lol*

I think some great suggestions have been made so far and this could be a great opportunity to get some things worked out. My only concerns with putting limits on topics to be discussed, and the idea that athiests shouldn't post except questions (Although I do see the point) is that it's closing doors on things.

For one thing, having to discuss evolution is something that I even have to face at home, since my mom fully believes in it. I came from a background not long ago that believed God was the one who 'created' evolution. I still can be shaky on the idea, but I try to just take the Bible for what it says and leave it at that.

Point being, that's one of the things I love about this forum. I rarely get to interact with fellow Adventists, so here is a wonderful place where I come and could ask questions about different things and to see how you guys apply or feel about it. I fear that putting too many rules can limit what knowledge can be gained.

Also, we can't stop athiests from challenging us in a real world environment..so limiting it here can also have it's downsides because it's a good place to grow and be able to learn how to express our beliefs in a loving way to even those who are just coming to discredit us. I know I'd rather get used to it here, surrounded by others of my faith, than out in the world where I have to handle it alone. Maybe a sub forum would be best for that kind of thing, though. Of course..as I said..I can see what you guys are saying, also.

I think I'm a bit of all the types of Adventist listed above, too! *lol* Well, except maybe Progressive. I had no idea there was that much division within the church...

Anyway, I don't want to say more untill I better understand what all this CF change is about. I'm sure God will bless us with benefits from it, though.

Blessings and Love,
Sarah

The rules can be found here: http://www.christianforums.com/t5657050

Keep something in mind: Always try to see the big picture. If atheists are given a license to come in here and do as they please, this forum will soon turn into a very unpleasant place.

I suspect that most of the members here will leave as a result of this, as will many other members from other forums.

I used to spend a lot of time in GA. I know how these people are. For the most part they are not civil; and they do have an agenda to tear down our faith. I know this for a fact because I was given an insight some time ago by another member of CF that most people are not aware of about a plot that many atheists share in to bring the faith of many on CF to ruin.

Again, they should only be allowed to ask questions. They should not be allowed to promote their devilish ideas in this forum. Allowing them to do this would be utterly foolish.

 

[IntoTheCrimsonSky]

The rules can be found here: http://www.christianforums.com/t5657050

Keep something in mind: Always try to see the big picture. If atheists are given a license to come in here and do as they please, this forum will soon turn into a very unpleasant place.

I suspect that most of the members here will leave as a result of this, as will many other members from other forums.

I used to spend a lot of time in GA. I know how these people are. For the most part they are not civil; and they do have an agenda to tear down our faith. I know this for a fact because I was given an insight some time ago by another member of CF that most people are not aware of about a plot that many atheists share in to bring the faith of many on CF to ruin.

Again, they should only be allowed to ask questions. They should not be allowed to promote their devilish ideas in this forum. Allowing them to do this would be utterly foolish.

Wow. You have such strong feelings on this issue. I can respect that, and understand the concern you have. I'm very much aware of the idea that many wish to bring ours, and other Christian faiths down. My own mom believes fully that God has shown her that the Christian church will fall and spritualism will be the final beliefs..because Jesus would never come back untill it does. I'm rather used to that kind of thing. *lol* Also, coming from the fact I was never an athiest but was completely against organized religion in general up untill 2 years ago..

So yeah, I can see your point. I just have trouble not accepting people to speak freely regardless of motives. Maybe that's just me though.

 

[JonMiller]

I agree CrimsonSky

JM

 

[DarylFawcett]

If the majority can decide what topics stays or goes, then we had better make sure we have the right type of majority here, otherwise, some of the wrong topics may stay and some of the right topics may go.

 

[longhair75]

Good evening friends,

I haven't been a moderator here long enough that I would inspire much confidence from you people, but I am very glad to see that the SDA forum is working on a plan. If there is anything I can do to help, please do not hesitate to ask.

 

[tall73]

If you all haven't already seen it there are some guidelines now:

http://www.christianforums.com/t5670030-initial-guideline-for-the-creation-of-subforum-rules.html

Therefore everyone will be able to post. Some may not be able to debate, and some topics could be off-limits.


Just a little note for folks to ponder. Whatever issues you don't permit Adventists to discuss here will be pushed to GT etc. which are far busier and folks will be less sympathetic to traditional Adventist views. For those who have been around a while, consider the EGW threads in GT started by YMS and Goya..

You may be wise to keep in-house issues in house.

Moreover, having seen what rules such as the no discussion of annihilationism one did, I don't know why we would want to be ruling out topics. I say those who value truth also value the openness to discuss all options. Just my take.

 

[Goodchild]

..

 

[tall73]

Hey! Mostly just wanted to say "Hi!" to Tall, my favorite Adventist

I made a suggestion over in the Catholic rules wiki that you all might want to consider. If you wish to limit debate from non-Adventists, then consider limiting only that which is considered canonical in the Adventist statement of faith (assuming you have such). I am sure there are many former Adventists that could still provide accurate knowledge in a respectful manner.

Also, if I'm understanding correctly it is possible to have sub-forums created in your forums. Perhaps a rule that disallows debate in this, your congregational forum, but the creation of a sub-forum within it specifically for debate of Adventist doctrine?

Just some thoughts, trying to help out

cya around Tall!

Glad you dropped by our little corner of CF

It must be nice to be able to now!

I am hoping we just allow debate period, but we will see.

Truth is when Adventists are not debating they don't know what to do with themselves. It has been that way since its founding. In fact, some of the early churches were formed when an Adventist minister would come through town, challenge the most prominent local pastor to a debate, and then if they won, get some followers.

 

[Goodchild]

..

 

[DrStupid_Ben]

An overview of the 4 positions:

Traditional: the 28 fundamental beleifs...

Historical:the semi-arrianism of the past, heavy use of EGW, beleif that SDA is the remnant, beleif that we are to become perfect before Christ's return

Evangelical: less emphasis on legalism and IJ, but otherwise like traditionals

Progressive: no 7 day creation/etc, no EGW, etc (the mainstream liberal Christian position)

JM

There is actually a much more detailed spectrum than that. Think calculus!

These labels are quite misleading. Most "traditional" and "evangelical" Adventists would fall under the banner of mainline Evangelical Christians. The doctrinal differences between the two are not that significant in the larger theological spectrum.

Also, Adventists who consider themselves progressive are quite different to liberal Christians. Just look at the "progressive" blogs. An Adventist has to go a long way before he/she becomes liberal. "Progressive" Adventists are a lot closer to "Progressive" Christians, or "Progressive" Evangelicals like Jim Wallis. They are less concerned with doctrinal differences and more concerned with issues like social justice, human rights, equality, peace. These are more your "moderates". Progressives are alot closer to the "centre" than most other groups because they are less focused on the differences between left and right. They probably seem more liberal to conservatives because they are more open to discuss issues that conservatives wouldn't normally discuss.

You will more likely find that the differences in Adventism don't fall under 4 neat catagories, but more like 20 or 30 points between ultra-conservative and somewhat-liberal. To try and seperate everyone into their own segment of Adventist theology and experience would do more harm than good.

 

[Sophia7]

There is actually a much more detailed spectrum than that. Think calculus!

These labels are quite misleading. Most "traditional" and "evangelical" Adventists would fall under the banner of mainline Evangelical Christians. The doctrinal differences between the two are not that significant in the larger theological spectrum.

Also, Adventists who consider themselves progressive are quite different to liberal Christians. Just look at the "progressive" blogs. An Adventist has to go a long way before he/she becomes liberal. "Progressive" Adventists are a lot closer to "Progressive" Christians, or "Progressive" Evangelicals like Jim Wallis. They are less concerned with doctrinal differences and more concerned with issues like social justice, human rights, equality, peace. These are more your "moderates". Progressives are alot closer to the "centre" than most other groups because they are less focused on the differences between left and right. They probably seem more liberal to conservatives because they are more open to discuss issues that conservatives wouldn't normally discuss.

You will more likely find that the differences in Adventism don't fall under 4 neat catagories, but more like 20 or 30 points between ultra-conservative and somewhat-liberal. To try and seperate everyone into their own segment of Adventist theology and experience would do more harm than good.

Yes, it is overly simplistic to divide Adventists into two or four factions. The only reason that it was done here at CF was because of the two subforums--it would have been impractical to have even more subdivisions and also impossible to moderate--but I've never liked labeling people in that way because not everyone fits neatly into one category.