Christian World Outreach - Two Forums?

[tucker58]

Christian World Outreach - Two Forums?

Guys, if "The Christian World Outreach" forum was divided into two forums, one for "religious people only" and one for "the religious and the "non religious" to explore each other", how would you feel about that ?

anybody?

love,

tuck

 

[tucker58]

Guys my point is that folks of different religions should have a place to explore each other. And that those that are non religious should have a place where those that are religious can explore the non religious if they wish too.

There is a lot of philosophical controversy between today's world religions. And there is a lot of philosophical controversy between religion and non religion in today's world. Mixing these two things up, because they are two different controversies, may just complicate the problem relative to dialog. Is all.

Anybody?

love,

tuck

PS: moving this topic is ok, I do not mind. I just wanted to involve the non religious because this is where they hang out, and that they as registered and supporting members should be involved .

 

[SithDoughnut]

This forum isn't public property, so the owners can do as they wish. Seeing as there is already forums dedicated to Evangelism and Witnessing, I'm not sure what the purpose of it would be, but it's up to them.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

My initial response would be befuddlement, as I did not know that such a forum existed in the first place.

As for two forums, the response woud be what are their practical objectives of the outreach domain, and could those objectives be better served by adding a division along religious lines.

 

[SithDoughnut]

My initial response would be befuddlement, as I did not know that such a forum existed in the first place.

You haven't seen this?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

You haven't seen this?

Might have seen it, but forgotten all about it.

 

[tucker58]

Folks claiming that God is an "imaginary friend" should not be considered productive in a multi religion discussion reality, unless those that are religious wish to explore the non religious. With the understanding that religion exploring the non religious is a productive reality.

Anybody ?

tuck

 

[tucker58]

Might have seen it, but forgotten all about it.

love,

tuck

 

[tucker58]

This forum isn't public property, so the owners can do as they wish. Seeing as there is already forums dedicated to Evangelism and Witnessing, I'm not sure what the purpose of it would be, but it's up to them.

! But at the same time as a registered member, who is a declared steward of this message board, you are welcome to have an opinion.

tuck

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

Folks claiming that God is an "imaginary friend" should not be considered productive in a multi religion discussion reality, unless those that are religious wish to explore the non religious. With the understanding that religion exploring the non religious is a productive reality.

Anybody ?

tuck

Alright I'll bite.

Why would it not be? It seems to be just as reasonable a conclusion as any other. It fits the data provided and thus should be treated as a valid view of reality for the purpose of discussion.
Unless you are only interested in discussing with those that already agree with you on the basic points. Its rather like having a 9/11 discussion to find out what really happend but you want to exclude anybody that says it was not a inside job. You would rather talk with people that all think it was a inside job and argue about the details of how many pounds of c4 where used. While still calling it a search for the reality of the situation dispite dismissing out of hand a entire line of thought without even looking into it.
Granted that certainly does save you the trouble of proving it was a inside job to begin with. But thats not exactly reasonable if your objective is to find out the reality now is it?

 

[tucker58]

Alright I'll bite.

Why would it not be? It seems to be just as reasonable a conclusion as any other. It fits the data provided and thus should be treated as a valid view of reality for the purpose of discussion.
Unless you are only interested in discussing with those that already agree with you on the basic points. Its rather like having a 9/11 discussion to find out what really happend but you want to exclude anybody that says it was not a inside job. You would rather talk with people that all think it was a inside job and argue about the details of how many pounds of c4 where used. While still calling it a search for the reality of the situation dispite dismissing out of hand a entire line of thought without even looking into it.
Granted that certainly does save you the trouble of proving it was a inside job to begin with. But thats not exactly reasonable if your objective is to find out the reality now is it?

Ok son why would someone come on a Christian message board and call themselves "Doomslayer"? And purchase blessings to be here?

Son, what is your motivation as a presented sort of an "ugly" personality (at least negative)? and you also represent anti religion.



your turn

tuck

 

[tucker58]

Alright I'll bite.

Why would it not be? It seems to be just as reasonable a conclusion as any other. It fits the data provided and thus should be treated as a valid view of reality for the purpose of discussion.
Unless you are only interested in discussing with those that already agree with you on the basic points. Its rather like having a 9/11 discussion to find out what really happend but you want to exclude anybody that says it was not a inside job. You would rather talk with people that all think it was a inside job and argue about the details of how many pounds of c4 where used. While still calling it a search for the reality of the situation dispite dismissing out of hand a entire line of thought without even looking into it.
Granted that certainly does save you the trouble of proving it was a inside job to begin with. But thats not exactly reasonable if your objective is to find out the reality now is it?

Hey son you are on line

"My objective is to find out the reality as it is now." And yes I am having fun !

tuck, totally out of whack as a Christian, if this message board management ever actually allowed me to be a moderator of this forum, there would be rioting in the streets, which is why I will never be allowed to moderate this forum ! We all know each other !

tuck, again! (smile)

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

Ok son why would someone come on a Christian message board and call themselves "Doomslayer"? And purchase blessings to be here?

I would not be able to tell you. After all it is not my name and I do not purchase blessings.

Assuming you missspelled my name however it is meant to be "Exiled Doomsayer" modeled after a trading card from 'magic:the gathering' That I like.

Son, what is your motivation as a presented sort of an "ugly" personality (at least negative)? and you also represent anti religion.



your turn

tuck

I disagree that it is 'ugly' or anti-theist you will have to explain what you mean.

 

[Exiledoomsayer]

Hey son you are on line

Was mildly distracted. Still am in fact.

"My objective is to find out the reality as it is now." And yes I am having fun !

Then why would you dismiss out of hand a entire path of possibly reality if your goal is to reach reality as it is. That seems contradictory to me unless your true goal is to reach reality was you want it to be.

tuck, totally out of whack as a Christian, if this message board management ever actually allowed me to be a moderator of this forum, there would be rioting in the streets, which is why I will never be allowed to moderate this forum ! We all know each other !

tuck, again! (smile)

I am not sure what your saying here. If your saying that as a moderator you would ban everybody of a different opinion then yourself there are a few christian forums that would welcome a moderator such as that.

I do not feel like you adressed my post though other then to misquote my name and confirm that you seek reality.

 

[SithDoughnut]

! But at the same time as a registered member, who is a declared steward of this message board, you are welcome to have an opinion.

tuck

Of course. I'm not necessarily welcome to actually express it, but I can have one. This is no my forum. There is no freedom of speech here. There's no reason why there should be, as absolute freedom of expression would contradict the aims of the forum.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Maybe CF could come to an agreement with a secular forum, and there could be a secular outreach subforum at CF, and Christian outreacth at a secular board.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Guys, if "The Christian World Outreach" forum was divided into two forums, one for "religious people only" and one for "the religious and the "non religious" to explore each other", how would you feel about that ?

I'm against the idea. It's fine the way it is.


eudaimonia,

Mark