Creation of Additional Major Categories

[Letalis]

Hi,

Several days ago, there was a major forum rearrangement, which included the creation of "congregation-type" forums for unorthodox groups.

This was a rather controversial addition, and several members expressed their concern. After it was discussed, we decided to remove the section entirely and create two new major categories.

This proposal was made a year or so ago, but never acted on:

1. Welcome to CF Section
No change

2. Orthodox Christian Section
No change

3. Fellowship section
No change

4. Unorthodox Groups
Move UTD into this place with the following forums:
UTD Apologetics
LDS
JW
Unitarians

5. People of the Book Section
A new section to encourage dialogue between the People of the Book - Christians, Jews and Muslims, so there will be 3 forums:
Dialogue between the Faiths
Judaism
Islam

6. Open to All Members Section
No change

I've modified the proposal a bit to keep up with the recent changes we've made here at CF.

The two new sections, Unorthodox Groups and People of the Book, will be geared toward facilitating discussion between the various religions. These will not be congregation-type or safe-havens; they will be debate forums.

If you have any suggestions or proposals, please post them here.

Blessings,
Letalis

 

[Apex]

I see hardly any difference between that and the old CF. An unorthodox section remains, and it still does not allow fellowship for the groups thrown into it.
I do not support it.

 

[dragoniatiegre]

I second the dissenting vote. It would be nice to allow a fellowship forum for each major denomination, so that there's a place where members can post without having to get into an debate about everything said.

The propsed change actually changes nothing. It still segregates, and forces those who aren't Niccean Christians to have to debate about everything they say. The same benefits allowed one member on this site should be extended to all-that is how I interpreted Erwin's changes.

 

[Letalis]

You can start fellowship threads if you want, but these sections will be aimed towards debate. There will not be any safe-havens or congregations for non-Christian or unorthodox groups.

 

[dragoniatiegre]

You can start fellowship threads if you want, but these sections will be aimed towards debate. There will not be any safe-havens or congregations for non-Christian or unorthodox groups.

Why not? Why must we be subjected to having every word we say the subject of a debate? If we create a fellowship thread, there's no stopping anyone from starting a debate about what's in the thread. And here I thought Erwin was supporting a form of equality. If all sections are now open to all members, then why can't we post in the fellowship section?

 

[drstevej]

There will not be any safe-havens or congregations for non-Christian or unorthodox groups.

Cool. Glad to see this Although I am baffled as to how this squares with Erwin's announced reforms of 7-7-7. Was this his decision? Is it subject to WIKI?

 

[drstevej]

Why not? Why must we be subjected to having every word we say the subject of a debate? If we create a fellowship thread, there's no stopping anyone from starting a debate about what's in the thread. And here I thought Erwin was supporting a form of equality. If all sections are now open to all members, then why can't we post in the fellowship section?

There is an LT one here:

Sticky: Ye Olde Ice Cream Parlour

Seemed to be a nice Parlor.

And there was a Chill Out thread in UTD. Where did it go?

 

[Letalis]

Cool. Glad to see this Although I am baffled as to how this squares with Erwin's announced reforms of 7-7-7. Was this his decision? Is it subject to WIKI?

This was his decision to make. It's not subject to Wiki.

 

[Tonks]

There is an LT one here:

Sticky: Ye Olde Ice Cream Parlour

Seemed to be a nice Parlor.

And there was a Chill Out thread in UTD. Where did it go?

The stickies have mysteriously wandered all over the site. I'll see if I can find it and send it back and / or merge with the existing one in Non-Nicene...or something.

 

[Apex]

You can start fellowship threads if you want, but these sections will be aimed towards debate. There will not be any safe-havens or congregations for non-Christian or unorthodox groups.

This is exactly the same as the old CF.

 

[Letalis]

This is exactly the same as the old CF.

Erwin's reforms never included the creation of congregation forums for unorthodox and non-Christian groups.

 

[dragoniatiegre]

Erwin's reforms never included the creation of congregation forums for unorthodox and non-Christian groups.

e. No more restriction of forums for non-Christians .... Some forums may still have gender or age restrictions, but the whole side, as should be any Christian site, will now be totally [OPEN].

f. No more restriction of faith icons - who are we to tell you who you are or what you believe in? In fact, no other restrictions - if you want to call yourself married, go ahead. It is between you and God, not you and CF.

g. Related to the above, if you believe you are a Christian, you are. No more reliance on our own definition of what we think is a Christian. In the end, who are we to judge.

While no mention is made here about a congretational forum, forcing those who don't adhere to the Nicean Creed to only be able to "fellowship" in a debate forum contradicts Erwin's vision. It forces members in those forums, who wish to fellowship, to constantly defend their beliefs; this basically means that we are subjected only to debate, a subtle way of saying we aren't Christian, by making us have to constantly read debates about our faith, and how they aren't "right".

If CF is to be open to all members, then all members should be given the same rights. Otherwise, there is no change.

 

[A New Dawn]

There is an LT one here:

Sticky: Ye Olde Ice Cream Parlour

Seemed to be a nice Parlor.

And there was a Chill Out thread in UTD. Where did it go?

Someone got rid of the Chill Out thread long ago, but the Restaurant at the End of the Universe is in the LDS forum.

 

[Letalis]

While no mention is made here about a congretational forum, forcing those who don't adhere to the Nicean Creed to only be able to "fellowship" in a debate forum contradicts Erwin's vision.

CF isn't going to judge your walk. We aren't going to tell you that you're not Christian, and that's not what this forum rearrangement is aimed at doing.

However, CF isn't going to take a stance of neutrality. The site still is aimed at promoting orthodox Christianity.

 

[drstevej]

Someone got rid of the Chill Out thread long ago, but the Restaurant at the End of the Universe is in the LDS forum.

Guess I missed it. I'll have to drop by for some grilled curelom.

 

[Brennin]

I like the current arrangement of theology fora, and I am opposed to creating a congregation forum for the LDS. There are plenty of other places they can go for that.

 

[Apex]

CF isn't going to judge your walk. We aren't going to tell you that you're not Christian, and that's not what this forum rearrangement is aimed at doing.

However, CF isn't going to take a stance of neutrality. The site still is aimed at promoting orthodox Christianity.

In the first part of your post you state that you aren't going to tell us were not Christian, which says CF is going to remain neutral on the question. But then you say CF will not be neutral and promote orthodox-christianity? You are contradicting yourself here.

Please show me where the "openness" of the reforms are supposed to lie with this proposal?

 

[dragoniatiegre]

CF isn't going to judge your walk. We aren't going to tell you that you're not Christian, and that's not what this forum rearrangement is aimed at doing.

However, CF isn't going to take a stance of neutrality. The site still is aimed at promoting orthodox Christianity.

If the site isn't going to contradict our calling ourselves Christian, then why won't we be allowed to have a congregational forum, as do other Christians?

 

[Letalis]

In the first part of your post you state that you aren't going to tell us were not Christian, which says CF is going to remain neutral on the question. But then you say CF will not be neutral and promote orthodox-christianity? You are contradicting yourself here.

There's no contradiction.

CF isn't going to say that you are not Christian. That is between you and God.

However, we're not going to say that unorthodoxy is the same and equal to orthodoxy.

 

[Apex]

There's no contradiction.

CF isn't going to say that you are not Christian. That is between you and God.

However, we're not going to say that unorthodoxy is the same and equal to orthodoxy.

lol, so now your just trying to keep the old CF but try and change a few words. Instead of being called "unorthodox-christians" we are now "Christians who are unorthodox".