[closed] Major Changes to posting in this forum

[He is Risen 72]

"Possible hurt feelings"?

We're getting thrown off a forum with only a few days' notice because someone arbitrarily decided that we aren't the "correct" form of Christian, and we're also being told that unless we bear the "correct" logo we'll be punished and even banned.

I'm trying to remember the last few times people wound up being forced to wear the "correct" logos for their religious beliefs, and not one instance I can think of ended well.

Would those have been the “wrong” Christian women and children your people took care of at Mountain Meadows?

 

[Edial]

In v.58 Jesus claims to be I AM, similar to that of God himself.

Problem with Mormon teachings is that their explanation of God is that He once was a man just like you and I.

The problem with Mormonism is not even with Christ, but with their belief of God Himself which is beyond cultic.

It is as un-Christian as East is from the West.

 

[skylark1]

Would those have been the “wrong” Christian women and children your people took care of at Mountain Meadows?

That's a pretty low blow HiR. Should they bring up the inquisitions and ask us about them as though we would have approved of them, or as if we have anything to do with them?

 

[Edial]

"Possible hurt feelings"?

We're getting thrown off a forum with only a few days' notice because someone arbitrarily decided that we aren't the "correct" form of Christian, and we're also being told that unless we bear the "correct" logo we'll be punished and even banned.

I'm trying to remember the last few times people wound up being forced to wear the "correct" logos for their religious beliefs, and not one instance I can think of ended well.

No one is throwing you off the forums.
You are free to post the way you were. Recent threads would be moved to a new location.

 

[Ironhold]

I never said I am better than you are.

...except you did say that the minute you said I was the "wrong" form of Christian.

 

[Ironhold]

Would those have been the “wrong” Christian women and children your people took care of at Mountain Meadows?

Mountain Meadows was in retaliation for Haun's Mill.

You might want to bone up on your history before saying anything else offensive.

 

[Ironhold]

That's a pretty low blow HiR. Should they bring up the inquisitions and ask us about them as though we would have approved of them, or as if we have anything to do with them?

I was debating the merits of mentioning the Inquisition.

And the Crusades.

And the 100 Years War.

And the violence in Ireland.

And all of the other instances in which blood was shed because individuals were the "wrong" form of Christian.

 

[Ironhold]

No one is throwing you off the forums.
You are free to post the way you were. Recent threads would be moved to a new location.

So official CF policy is now "Anyone who does not believe as we do must wear markers denoting their belief system and be shoved off into a ghetto."

Think about that one half a second.

 

[Edial]

...except you did say that the minute you said I was the "wrong" form of Christian.

I did not say LDS are a wrong form of a Christian.
We are saying LDS, JW and Unitarian is not Christian.
You do understand that the term "Christian" is coined after the Bible and teachings in it.

Yet all this does not make me better than you are.

 

[skylark1]

"Possible hurt feelings"?

We're getting thrown off a forum with only a few days' notice because someone arbitrarily decided that we aren't the "correct" form of Christian, and we're also being told that unless we bear the "correct" logo we'll be punished and even banned.

I'm trying to remember the last few times people wound up being forced to wear the "correct" logos for their religious beliefs, and not one instance I can think of ended well.

One particular instance comes to mind.

You are correct, it did not end well at all.

A New Dawn wrote:

You don't know, any more than I know, because you can't see my heart and I can't see your heart. But you know I have claimed to be a Christian, so you accept me for one, and vice versa for me accepting you. I am not sure why you refuse to offer that same respect for someone else, whose only difference is that they have a different icon. You can't see my heart but accept me on my word, but reject someone else's word on the matter. This is my biggest concern. I don't know how else to express it. It's just a sad day for CF.​

I think this is what bothers me the most about this. Telling someone who claims to be a Christian that they are not. This in spite of them believing in Jesus as their Savior, Redeemer, and Lord. It is disrespectful of the person, and we do not know another's heart.

 

[Ran77]

Why? I went directly to the quotes of Joseph Smith.

This is unproductive. That is why I am no longer pursuing this argument with you, but I will try once to explain it.

The forum is acting on their/your interpretation of this matter rather than how the LDS interpret the quotes that have been posted.


Then from the other side:

I should have clarified (I thought it was understood), Christian belief is that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are of the same essence in the context of divinity.
We are not of that essence.

You offer your interpretation/understanding on this matter. This is in response to one of the LDS posting a comment on the direct quote you provided.


That is a double standard.

LDS understanding of their doctrine is rejected and the interpretation of our critics is accepted instead. The Forum and not the LDS who live the religion decides how these quotes are meant to be understood.

The Forum/Your understanding of Christian doctrine is enforced and the LDS interpretation of the topic is rejected. The Forum and not those who read the quotes (which is supposedly enough for the Forum when they deal with the LDS) decides how these quotes are meant to be understood.

In both cases the Forum imposes its understanding of their doctrine as the correct one, even though it is obviously biased against the LDS doctrines.


The situation where a double standard did not exist would be where the LDS are allowed to define how their doctrine is meant to be understood and the orthodox Christians would do the same for defining what they believe.


LDS and critics of the LDS have both weighed in on how what the Forum/You have presented as LDS interpretation of these quotes is not accurate. The fact that many of our strongest critics have spoken out against the action, I think, speaks very loudly that Forum/Your interpretation is not accurate. Personally, I'm happy with the action. I believe it will ultimately doom the endless posting of threads attacking the LDS.

However, this is clearly a double standard as I have just demonstrated.

 

[Edial]

So official CF policy is now "Anyone who does not believe as we do must wear markers denoting their belief system and be shoved off into a ghetto."

Think about that one half a second.

It is a Christian Forum.

Do you really believe if there was an LDS forum they would not have their own section and non-LDS be pointed to posting in another area?

Please let's not start exaggerating. it is not a Fascist Germany and you are not a persecuted group being huddled into the ghettos.

 

[Edial]

This is unproductive. That is why I am no longer pursuing this argument with you, but I will try once to explain it.

The forum is acting on their/your interpretation of this matter rather than how the LDS interpret the quotes that have been posted.


Then from the other side:



You offer your interpretation/understanding on this matter. This is in response to one of the LDS posting a comment on the direct quote you provided.


That is a double standard.

LDS understanding of their doctrine is rejected and the interpretation of our critics is accepted instead. The Forum and not the LDS who live the religion decides how these quotes are meant to be understood.

The Forum/Your understanding of Christian doctrine is enforced and the LDS interpretation of the topic is rejected. The Forum and not those who read the quotes (which is supposedly enough for the Forum when they deal with the LDS) decides how these quotes are meant to be understood.

In both cases the Forum imposes its understanding of their doctrine as the correct one, even though it is obviously biased against the LDS doctrines.


The situation where a double standard did not exist would be where the LDS are allowed to define how their doctrine is meant to be understood and the orthodox Christians would do the same for defining what they believe.


LDS and critics of the LDS have both weighed in on how what the Forum/You have presented as LDS interpretation of these quotes is not accurate. The fact that many of our strongest critics have spoken out against the action, I think, speaks very loudly that Forum/Your interpretation is not accurate. Personally, I'm happy with the action. I believe it will ultimately doom the endless posting of threads attacking the LDS.

However, this is clearly a double standard as I have just demonstrated.

show me an official link where it plainly states that Mormons believe in same God Christian church believes in - uncreated, eternal God who was and will always be God, the creator of everything.

Show me that Christ is the same in divinity with the Father (who is described as I just did)

Show me that from the LDS sites. Should be at your fingertips if this is so.

 

[Ran77]

I never said I am better than you are.

Well . . . you stated:

"There is no such thing as Mormon Christian because they believe in another Christ."


Unless you believe that non-Christians will be saved, the implication is there. Technically, you are correct, you haven't said those exact words.


:o

 

[Sophrosyne]

I'm curious as to those who believe Jesus was once Michael the archangel where would they stand in this forum?

 

[Ran77]

show me an official link where it plainly states that Mormons believe in same God Christian church believes in - uncreated, eternal God who was and will always be God, the creator of everything.

Show me that Christ is the same in divinity with the Father (who is described as I just did)

Show me that from the LDS sites. Should be at your fingertips if this is so.

Like I said in the post you are commenting on, "This is unproductive." You asked where the double standard was and I laid it out in a very clear fashion. When different criteria are used for two groups that is a double standard and that is definitely the case here. Your requests to have me show any of the above does not change the fact that a different set of criteria is used against the LDS than what you expect the LDS to accept from you.

That's not the way I go about it, but then again the site has determined that I am not a Christian.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I'm curious as to those who believe Jesus was once Michael the archangel where would they stand in this forum?

BTW.... I don't believe this myself.

 

[Edial]

Well . . . you stated:

"There is no such thing as Mormon Christian because they believe in another Christ."


Unless you believe that non-Christians will be saved, the implication is there. But technically, you are correct, you haven't actually said those exact words.


:o

Christian theology teaches we all are sinners, you and I.
Being a Christian does not mean one is better. It means one is a redeemed sinner. There is forgiveness of sins.

I am certain there are many Mormons who are better individuals than I am.

 

[Ironhold]

It is a Christian Forum.

Do you really believe if there was an LDS forum they would not have their own section and non-LDS be pointed to posting in another area?

I've been on LDS forums.

For example, the "LDS Fellowship" forum over on Beliefnet.com openly allows non-Mormons who wish to ask questions and hold discussions; we don't point people elsewhere unless they have a history of openly disruptive action (such as insults and false accusations).

 

[Ironhold]

Being a Christian does not mean one is better.

Then why do so many people act like it does?