[closed] Major Changes to posting in this forum

[A New Dawn]

I don't see it that way as it wasn't yesterday they moved the LDS and JWs to Unorthodox theology then it wasn't any short time either when they changed the name to Unorthodox Doctrinal Discussion and the rules further. It seems to me this has been slowly progressing.

Actually, as the admin that was in charge of those changes, I can assure you that they were in no way related to this maneuver. Unorthodox Theology (where the LDS and JW have always posted) has been moved to various places at various times in the history of CF, and in all of that time, through all of those moves, CF never took the stance of disallowing the LDS and JW to call themselves Christian. Furthermore, CF never allowed anyone to name call. If someone self-identified as a Christian, one was not allowed to call them a non-Christian. This move is new for CF.

 

[A New Dawn]

Dawn, you should not be calling Orthodox Christianity a Christian Club. You should know better than that.

The demarcation line is not Trinity, but the Deity of Christ.
It is Who Christ claims to be what matters for salvation.
If one believes in Jesus other who he claims to be one is still in their sins, John 8 (forgot the verse, posted here few times).
This is the difference. Identity of Christ in the light of eternal and unchangeable God of the OT.

Orthodox Christianity is not a Christian club, the CO section of CF is the Christian club. The reason I say this is because when one creates restrictions that Christ never uttered, it becomes a club. IMO.

 

[A New Dawn]

No you don't; didn't you just say you don't care what the Early Christian Father had to say?
Also, I think you need to clarify yourself... You only confirm what YOU believe the scriptures say... That's nice, however, it's nothing more than circular logic.

Hi,
And with this kind of abusive or semi-abusive speech you want to join the Nicene types who have prohibitions against not being this way.
Again. I thank the staff.
...Kate., .... .

When did you join staff?

 

[A New Dawn]

Just stopping by to say that this forum will be moved to the Theology Category sometime today. Appreciate everyone's input in this thread, however, the decision is final. We do want to emphasize that we have decided that specific religious groups do not qualify to be considered Christians according to the Nicene creed and CF Statement of Faith. We are not making judgement calls about the salvation of individual people who are members of these denominations. We are making a judgement call about the theology of the denominations themselves. If someone is a mormon and has chosen that faith icon, and yet they believe in the deity of Christ and all that the Nicene creed states, they are still associating themselves with the beliefs of the Mormon church and therefore may not post in the Christian only forums.

Just out of curiosity, when did all the advisors change their mind on this issue? A year ago, when I was on staff, though everyone did agree that the LDS did not belong in the CO forums, they did all agree that to move them out of UTD would be a disaster for the site, with one exception. I find it curious that all the advisors have made an about face in this short period of time.

 

[Edial]

LDS unequivocally recognize the deity of Christ! We emphatically assert that Christ "is who He claims to be"! There can be no rational reconciliation of your explanation with LDS beliefs.

Yes, you claim Christ is God.
However "God" of LDS was once a man like you and I and then became a God.
CF statement defines God differently.

Hence, what Christ of LDS claims to be is not eternal, unchangeable God.

 

[mmksparbud]

I have been following this and trying to figure out what I think about it---it's a toss up.
I've been on the side of being called Non-Christian and a member of a cult. We've been called that for years, and even by some on this forum who said our believes were not Christian. As far as we're concerned, we are Christian. I always thought any denomination that believed in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and our Savior was a Christian. Isn't that what it meant right from the start before any Nicene Creed? Even the disciples had a problem with believers who did not believe everything they taught and they reprimanded, and they made distinctions. It's kinda of hard sometimes to figure out just where the line is drawn on what they called "any other gospel".

Bottom lime---This forum has the right to make the rules. I still can't decide if your right or wrong--doesn't matter. I have learned a lot about them since I came on this forum and there is no way that I can believe as they do--but they do believe in Jesus Christ.

I'm starting to feel like the father on "Fiddler on the roof"---"..on the other hand..."

 

[TasteForTruth]

Yes, you claim Christ is God.
However "God" of LDS was once a man like you and I and then became a God.
CF statement defines God differently.

Hence, what Christ of LDS claims to be is not eternal, unchangeable God.

Yes, what "Christ of LDS claims to be" IS eternal, unchangeable God. You speak as though we believe that Christ will someday cease being eternal. You speak as though we believe that Christ will someday not be God. As though he will somehow "change." These are not compatible with our belief. They appear to be fabrications of your own imagination. And I therefore believe that it is shortsighted to dismiss our Christianity on these bases.

 

[Moodshadow]

Yes, what "Christ of LDS claims to be" IS eternal, unchangeable God. You speak as though we believe that Christ will someday cease being eternal. You speak as though we believe that Christ will someday not be God. As though he will somehow "change." These are not compatible with our belief. They appear to be fabrications of your own imagination. And I therefore believe that it is shortsighted to dismiss our Christianity on these bases.

It's the past that presents the theological problem: in order for Christ to have progressed to His godhood, as Mormonism teaches, would that not mean that you believe that at one time in His existence He must not have yet been divine - and therefore changed? And where did anyone here say or even imply - or "speak as though," to use your words - anyone believes that Christ will someday not be God? I believe that you feel you are a Christian, with all your heart; but you are worshiping the god(s) of Joseph Smith's creation, and they are not the same ONE eternal God of the Holy Bible.

 

[TasteForTruth]

I have been following this and trying to figure out what I think about it---it's a toss up.
I've been on the side of being called Non-Christian and a member of a cult. We've been called that for years, and even by some on this forum who said our believes were not Christian. As far as we're concerned, we are Christian. I always thought any denomination that believed in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and our Savior was a Christian. Isn't that what it meant right from the start before any Nicene Creed? Even the disciples had a problem with believers who did not believe everything they taught and they reprimanded, and they made distinctions. It's kinda of hard sometimes to figure out just where the line is drawn on what they called "any other gospel".

Bottom lime---This forum has the right to make the rules. I still can't decide if your right or wrong--doesn't matter. I have learned a lot about them since I came on this forum and there is no way that I can believe as they do--but they do believe in Jesus Christ.

I'm starting to feel like the father on "Fiddler on the roof"---"..on the other hand..."

CF Admin is defining what "a Christian" is, that is sure. And they have to. They can't avoid it. No one should find fault with their doing so. How they are defining "Christian" is the issue, and it seems to me (and to others) that their definition strong-arms out of the boat people who other orthodox Christians identify as fellow-Christians, regardless of how those who are strong-armed see themselves (although this should not necessarily be irrelevant).

I'd like to know, in all seriousness, what is on "the other hand" here? Seriously. The line being drawn in the sand here just seems too forced and fabricated. It would be a lot safer to kick LDS out on the question of the substantial nature of the Trinitarian God, but then it would be TF (Trinitarian Forums) instead of CF.

 

[TillICollapse]

Until now, the selection of icons and the labeling of who could be called an orthodox Christian had to do with who could post where. Some sections of f the board were set apart for discussion of theology or denominational issues specific to mainstream Christianity, and those people who held different beliefs were not allowed to post there. And people were allowed to self-identify what they considered themselves to be.

The issue is that now they are not allowing those who hold to some unorthodox beliefs to self-identify as Christian.

Ah. One question in a sec ...

Actually, as the admin that was in charge of those changes, I can assure you that they were in no way related to this maneuver. Unorthodox Theology (where the LDS and JW have always posted) has been moved to various places at various times in the history of CF, and in all of that time, through all of those moves, CF never took the stance of disallowing the LDS and JW to call themselves Christian. Furthermore, CF never allowed anyone to name call. If someone self-identified as a Christian, one was not allowed to call them a non-Christian. This move is new for CF.

To the bolded part.

This is the essence of my original question in this thread. However I'll rephrase my original questions:

What is hoping to be accomplished by regulating who can call themselves Christian or not even now ? Is it merely an attempt to distinguish that CF doesn't view Christianity as being a club ?

As I previously said, I get that certain groups want to be able to speak amongst themselves uninterrupted, but there are already various sections of the forum for that. What I still don't see, is the need to limit who can even call themselves "Christian". Even the "it's not a club" aspect, doesn't seem to fully address it.

Let's say someone has an interest in Jesus, and actually believes He is worth following and trying to know and understand. And such a person even believes that Christ Himself is calling to them, pulling on them, and they are obeying His call. They don't know what to think about Sola Scriptura, Nicene Creeds, etc ... they just believe that Jesus is the one doing something to them, and they are responding. They may even realize He is the Savior of mankind, though they may not even fully understand what it means. Is this what the people of CF would recognize as a person who is not allowed to self identify as a "Christian" ?

 

[TasteForTruth]

It's the past that presents the theological problem: in order for Christ to have progressed to His godhood, as Mormonism teaches, would that not mean that you believe that at one time in His existence He must not have yet been divine - and therefore changed? And where did anyone here say or even imply - or "speak as though," to use your words - anyone believes that Christ will someday not be God? I believe that you feel you are a Christian, with all your heart; but you are worshiping the god(s) of Joseph Smith's creation, and they are not the same ONE eternal God of the Holy Bible.

Christ is God. Christ is eternal. Our doctrine of pre-mortality does not change this. Our Christ is the Christ of the Bible, just as is the Christ you claim. We are talking about the same Christ. When He comes again, neither you nor I, nor any other LDS, nor any other orthodox Christian will look to the other and say, "Well, my Savior showed up... too bad yours didn't." We will all rejoice together. The division being foisted upon us here, while within the right of the owners of the site, cannot endure the very teachings of the Bible we all invoke. It just wouldn't. There are lines in the sand, to be sure. This isn't one of them. That is my position, and appears to be the position of at least some orthodox Christians here. If CF doesn't reverse or modify this decision, I think they'll have made a sad mistake. In my opinion, they ought to stop coveting their own authority and ask all of us posters to help them find a solution. That is, unless they feel that CF is a veritable extension of God's kingdom on the earth—explicitly raised up and operated under the divine will of God.

 

[Edial]

Orthodox Christianity is not a Christian club, the CO section of CF is the Christian club. The reason I say this is because when one creates restrictions that Christ never uttered, it becomes a club. IMO.

I gave you the very verses Christ Himself uttered about His identity in the context of the uncreated and unchanged God the Father of the Bible.

LDS teaches "God" who evolved into God from man - which is not God of the Bible.

If you would be saying outside of this thread that CO is a Christian Club you would be in violation of CF rules.

 

[Ran77]

Actually, as the admin that was in charge of those changes, I can assure you that they were in no way related to this maneuver. Unorthodox Theology (where the LDS and JW have always posted) has been moved to various places at various times in the history of CF, and in all of that time, through all of those moves, CF never took the stance of disallowing the LDS and JW to call themselves Christian. Furthermore, CF never allowed anyone to name call. If someone self-identified as a Christian, one was not allowed to call them a non-Christian. This move is new for CF.

I hadn't thought about it this way. This really boils down to allowing name-calling. Granted, against the LDS and JW only and limited to calling them anything related to a cult, non-Christians, and deceivers. I think that really puts the situation into perspective.

Good observation on your part.

 

[Ran77]

Just out of curiosity, when did all the advisors change their mind on this issue? A year ago, when I was on staff, though everyone did agree that the LDS did not belong in the CO forums, they did all agree that to move them out of UTD would be a disaster for the site, with one exception. I find it curious that all the advisors have made an about face in this short period of time.

How would it be disastrous for the site?


?

 

[Ran77]

Yes, you claim Christ is God.
However "God" of LDS was once a man like you and I and then became a God.
CF statement defines God differently.

Hence, what Christ of LDS claims to be is not eternal, unchangeable God.

No, that is not LDS doctrine. That is what you have chosen to attribute to us. LDS doctrine states that the Word was in the beginning and the Word was God. The LDS believe that Christ was God before He came to Earth and gained a body. You can call us cultists, non-Christians, and deceivers all you want, but I take exception to you misrepresenting our beliefs.


:o

 

[Ran77]

Hi everyone,
I have been reading and looking for a place to jump in here.

My comments are mine as Ed has done a good job communicating what the site wide plans are.

I wanted to share something about me. My life.

Let me say, I see this issue from several facets or views.

My son has had more than a dozen Mormon friends growing up and was more than a classmate to them and their families. I am well aware of their strong faith, strong family life and strong convictions thru him.

Even though our families' lives never crossed paths like other families of faith in our neighborhood, I could tell they lived good lives and I trusted my son to their care when he was hanging out in their homes with his friends.

When his friends were at our house I would consider these boys my boys I have never been anything but happy he had such good wholesome friends.

When his friends had issues with their parents like all boys do growing up, I supported the families rules, gave a listen ear to their sons and I was very supportive of both.

I never had to tell these boys or their families that I felt there was something wrong with their leaders or religion's teachings. These differences between us never came up.

When I think of you all, I think of my son's friends and families. When I see your names here now, I see their faces.

Thank you for this post.

 

[A New Dawn]

How would it be disastrous for the site?


?

Back when I started (we both registered the same day), there was lots of flaming going on here in UTD, a lot of it involved calling the unorthodox "non-Christian" even though there was a rule against that. Around the time I went on staff, things changed, . That rule was enforced, and while there was still a lot of animosity between the LDS/JW and the mainstream Christians, they were no longer allowed to call the LDS/JW "non-Christian". Changing that rule has been discussed over the years, but we all acknowledged that the return to the massive name-calling (flaming) was enough of an issue that we left it in place. I felt the need for it because of the heart issue, but if the flaming issue was a strong-enough motive, it didn't matter (at the time) that the others didn't feel that way.

 

[Ran77]

Back when I started (we both registered the same day), there was lots of flaming going on here in UTD, a lot of it involved calling the unorthodox "non-Christian" even though there was a rule against that. Around the time I went on staff, things changed, . That rule was enforced, and while there was still a lot of animosity between the LDS/JW and the mainstream Christians, they were no longer allowed to call the LDS/JW "non-Christian". Changing that rule has been discussed over the years, but we all acknowledged that the return to the massive name-calling (flaming) was enough of an issue that we left it in place. I felt the need for it because of the heart issue, but if the flaming issue was a strong-enough motive, it didn't matter (at the time) that the others didn't feel that way.

I see. As much as I have already seen some of the moderators starting in with the name calling on this thread, it appears that you were correct. Thank you for responding.

 

[Edial]

Actually, as the admin that was in charge of those changes, I can assure you that they were in no way related to this maneuver. Unorthodox Theology (where the LDS and JW have always posted) has been moved to various places at various times in the history of CF, and in all of that time, through all of those moves, CF never took the stance of disallowing the LDS and JW to call themselves Christian. Furthermore, CF never allowed anyone to name call. If someone self-identified as a Christian, one was not allowed to call them a non-Christian. This move is new for CF.

The purpose of defining Mormon theology as non-Christian is not to call names, but to state facts.

LDS and JW may call themselves anything they want.
However, it would no longer be a violation to call the denomination non-Christian.

 

[Edial]

No, that is not LDS doctrine. That is what you have chosen to attribute to us. LDS doctrine states that the Word was in the beginning and the Word was God. The LDS believe that Christ was God before He came to Earth and gained a body. You can call us cultists, non-Christians, and deceivers all you want, but I take exception to you misrepresenting our beliefs.


:o

The Gods

Book of Abraham 4:1

1 And then the Lord said: Let us go down. And they went down at the beginning, and they, that is the Gods, organized and formed the heavens and the earth.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/4?lang=eng