Foru.ms - a new beginning and a fresh start (2)

[Nadiine]

Were you talking about policies which distinguish people who attack jesus from those that do not, this might wash. Were you distinguishing between expressions of disagreement (often called "attacks") and some more viscious level of attack, then perhaps this would make sense. Were you not responding to a "who" was not allowed in Jesus company rather than a question about what sorts of behavior he avoided, this too might make sense.

But no, it is very clear that you were talking about atheists. You can split hairs all you want at this point, but the fact of the matter is you haven't been making these distinctions up to this point. Even your current attempt at a careful distinction encompasses anyone who would argue against Jesus (or "trap" him and his believers, presumably with arguments). You couldn't even be bothered to ask if we actually do support the name change before claiming that we were salivating over the matter.

Don't paint with a broad brush and then ask me to trace it with a fine tipped pen.

I gave generalities ONLY to a general verse he used.

IT IS READING MORE INTO WHAT I SAID to distinguish specific individuals.
End of story - it looks to me like people here are seeking to find a way to turn this into a hate fest or something.

He used a verse to make a point, I used a verse to clarify a point - end of issue.

 

[Asinner]

Hello Asinner


I meant your attempt to distinguish between calling me a sinner and calling something inside me a sinner. Mind you, my response is pretty well determined by the present context. I do have to admit it was a creative twist in an otherwise mundane battle. Thank you for the fresh air.

No, no . . .

The wolves will come from within, meaning from within the fold of our flock (Christianity).

I guess this means I am not as creative as you thought.

Love,
Christina

 

[stumpjumper]

I think his post in it's entirety deserves to be posted.

Indeed.

Sorry. I got busy and ended up being a poor messenger

 

[Brimshack]

Okay, Joshua, I can see that the reference has precedent in scripture. This leaves several problems:

1) If the implication is that the text in question applies to all True Christians TM against the rest of us, then this is by definition taking the passages out of context. Those words were spoken by specific persons to specific persons over the specific terms of the time. It may be a fundamental doctrine of Christianity as you see it that scripture is the absolute word of God applicable in all times and all places (this is roughly what you believe, no?), but that doctrine is little other than an excuse to ignore the historical context in which the words were originally laid down.

2) If it is true that people against True Christianity can be called wolves, then it could aseasily apply to you as any of the rest of us. You have your disputes with other Christians. If only the true believer is right and those who oppose him are wolves, then you too are a candidate, as is every single person on this board. So, any reference to the need to avoid wolves presupposes knowledge not in the collective possession of the site.

3) And this is the decisive one. Calling someone a wolf is demeaning. That is inherently inappropriate, and thgis does not change simply because one believes in a God that has apparently authorized authors to make such claims in the past. It doesn't change if God told you directly to confront a particulat poster on this message board at exactly 2pm on a Sunday and call him or her by the scientific term for a specific species of wolf known only to a certain location. Use of the term is meant specifically to degrade those with whom you and others disagree and that is a malicious deed. The practical significance of that deed does not change because you believe it to have precedent.

 

[Fireinfolding]

"Grievous wolves" simply do not SPARE the flock right?

To be honest (in my own experience only) I find less of that in unbelievers then I do in the camps of "believers" who PROFESS to ~know God~ but in their deeds deny Him.

My experience could be very contrary to someone elses though.

 

[Brimshack]

I gave generalities ONLY to a general verse he used.

IT IS READING MORE INTO WHAT I SAID to distinguish specific individuals.
End of story - it looks to me like people here are seeking to find a way to turn this into a hate fest or something.

He used a verse to make a point, I used a verse to clarify a point - end of issue.

I didn't say that you singled out anyone. Yes, you maligned a group rather than any specific individual. I happen to be in the group you maligned, and oblect to the malice.

And NO, you didn't clarify ANYTHING.

 

[Brimshack]

No, no . . .

The wolves will come from within, meaning from within the fold of our flock (Christianity).

I guess this means I am not as creative as you thought.

Love,
Christina

No, it means you are MORE creative than I thought. It would appear that I misread you. I do apologize.

 

[Nadiine]

I didn't say that you singled out anyone. Yes, you maligned a group rather than any specific individual. I happen to be in the group you maligned, and oblect to the malice.

And NO, you didn't clarify ANYTHING.

Then don't accept it - if you want to take offense, fine.
I did clarify about Atheists - I said my uncle is one and that he doesn't attack me or my Christian family or other Christians who have visited him when he was ill.!

If that isn't clarifying that I wasn't speaking about "ATHEISTS" as an entire group, then I don't know what would suit you.

Again, if you don't recieve it, so be it. I did clarify and I"m not going to turn into the scapegoat over what I did not do - grouping up against me with argument after argument doesn't make it TRUE...

I view this more as people trying to zone in on a target and it's not working for anyone and I don't accept any blame trying to be construed. (by WHOEVER).

 

[CoachR64]

Let's put aside all political correctness... this is pure crap. I came to this site because I wanted to find a Christian forum. I searched and lurked on several forums. I didn't search for social networking sites, I wanted a Christian forum. I chose this one, and now the name is being ripped away.

I like this to people wanting to use the term XMas so it doesn't offend non-Christians, or folks referring to Christians as Xtians. All you are doing is taking Christ out of the equations. This change is stupid and is nothing more than giving in for the sake of not offending people.

This change is cowardly and weak. Erwin is selling out. Bottom line. And I am not saying he is selling out for financial gain, but he is definately selling out Christ.

I didn't disagree with the previous changes, of opening up the forums for all so we could fellowship and teach non-believers. So they could ask questions and learn. But why does the name have to go away? This name change is cowardly and unneeded. As Christians, we are called to fight and stand firm. Giving away our name so others don't get upset is not Christ-like in any way, shape, or form.

Erwin, you are a coward and a sell-out.

Coach

 

[Asinner]

It would appear that I misread you. I do apologize.

You have no reason to apologize. I should have been clearer.

Love,
Christina

 

[stumpjumper]

And here's a very common error that so many people miss when they claim "Jesus sat with sinners".

IT SAYS HE SAT WITH SINNERS, NOT WOLVES AND NOT FALSE TEACHERS who work against Him to subjugate the truth, or who were HOSTILE towards Him.

And this applies to excluding people from certain forums how?

Jesus' message was to move on when things aren't working, sure, but not that we should exclude, before the fact, certain groups of people from fellowship, dining, or star gazing based upon a certain criteria (apparently theological in nature).

Hey, I'm in sales, and I know all about "opportunity cost" but that doesn't mean I necessarily agree with racial or religious profiling

 

[Asinner]

Let's put aside all political correctness... this is pure crap. I came to this site because I wanted to find a Christian forum. I searched and lurked on several forums. I didn't search for social networking sites, I wanted a Christian forum. I chose this one, and now the name is being ripped away.

I like this to people wanting to use the term XMas so it doesn't offend non-Christians, or folks referring to Christians as Xtians. All you are doing is taking Christ out of the equations. This change is stupid and is nothing more than giving in for the sake of not offending people.

This change is cowardly and weak. Erwin is selling out. Bottom line. And I am not saying he is selling out for financial gain, but he is definately selling out Christ.

I didn't disagree with the previous changes, of opening up the forums for all so we could fellowship and teach non-believers. So they could ask questions and learn. But why does the name have to go away? This name change is cowardly and unneeded. As Christians, we are called to fight and stand firm. Giving away our name so others don't get upset is not Christ-like in any way, shape, or form.

Erwin, you are a coward and a sell-out.

Coach

Blessings Coach,

Neither a name nor a symbol testifies to Christ the way our Love does.

Love,
Christina

 

[Brimshack]

Then don't accept it - if you want to take offense, fine.
I did clarify about Atheists - I said my uncle is one and that he doesn't attack me or my Christian family or other Christians who have visited him when he was ill.!

If that isn't clarifying that I wasn't speaking about "ATHEISTS" as an entire group, then I don't know what would suit you.

Again, if you don't recieve it, so be it. I did clarify and I"m not going to turn into the scapegoat over what I did not do - grouping up against me with argument after argument doesn't make it TRUE...

I view this more as people trying to zone in on a target and it's not working for anyone and I don't accept any blame trying to be construed. (by WHOEVER).

I am very pleased to know that you love your Atheist uncle. It doesn't have much to do with the problem at hand. But I haven't blamed you for anything. I have held you accountable for your own words, no more no less.

Now, if you want to talk about scapefoating, then I suggest you read your own posts about how Atheists are salivating over the latest change or perhaps the one where you support a claim deliberately misrepresenting an atheist as supporting the change simply because he noted he was subscribing to the thread. You've done a fair amount of reckless scapegoating in this thread; don't complain about it when you are held accountable for your own statements,

 

[stumpjumper]

The wolves will come from within, meaning from within the fold of our flock (Christianity).

Not it.

*Whew*

That was a relief.

 

[JoshuaM]

jesus message though was never to make something less about Him!

i came here for fellowship, worship, prayer, and bible studies, and those without people telling me I am wrong to accept the Bible and disregard anything against it, and flaming me for standing up for the Lord.. and these people being professing Christians mostly!

If I wanted social networking, I would just post in groups on myspace!

 

[stumpjumper]

Nadine

Who are the wolves and false teachers?

Are they easily identifiable and/or are they part of a set group?

 

[hopperace]

Photographic relief:

 

[Asinner]

Not it.

*Whew*

That was a relief.

I am now definitely suspicious.

 

[Nadiine]

I am very pleased to know that you love your Atheist uncle. It doesn't have much to do with the problem at hand. But I haven't blamed you for anything. I have held you accountable for your own words, no more no less.

Now, if you want to talk about scapefoating, then I suggest you read your own posts about how Atheists are salivating over the latest change or perhaps the one where you support a claim deliberately misrepresenting an atheist as supporting the change simply because he noted he was subscribing to the thread. You've done a fair amount of reckless scapegoating in this thread; don't complain about it when you are held accountable for your own statements,

K, hold me accountable for my own words!
HERE'S MY ORIGINAL POST TO CLARIFY SINNER/ VS. WOLF & FALSE TEACHER:

And here's a very common error that so many people miss when they claim "Jesus sat with sinners".

IT SAYS HE SAT WITH SINNERS, NOT WOLVES AND NOT FALSE TEACHERS who work against Him to subjugate the truth, or who were HOSTILE towards Him.

Reread the NT, and notice that anytime the people turned against Christ OR the disciples, they left. They were to shake the dust when rejected and leave them - not continue sitting there to get harrassed and challenged. (as these forums promote when we keep defending the faith to the same people who attack it).

Before you use scripture, make sure it's used properly. Jesus worked with and "sat" with people that were neutral and listened to Him, not openly opposing Him in anger.
He left the crowds that turned against Him & refused His teachings once given and He rebuked pharisees & scribes who tried to trap Him in verbal debates (hostile towards Him & His message)....

SINNERS AND WOLVES/FALSE TEACHERS ARE NOT THE SAME THING as per New Testament teachings, and each example of when the people turned against the Mesage they brought, THEY LEFT. NOT SAT WITH THEM TO CONTINUALLY BE ATTACKED.

Mat 7:6Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

Mar 6:11 "Any place that does not receive you or listen to you, as you go out from there, shake the dust off the soles of your feet for a testimony against them."

Lots more verses tell us who to avoid as well, not continue with so we get berated and show "LOVE" by getting ganged up on in debate.
http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=37909241&postcount=129

Maybe you can point out to me where I specified ANY group???

This was my original post and my original intent. I stand by it's NEUTRAL and general wording

 

[CoachR64]

Asinner,

That is not the point. Not even close to it.

For some, Christian may be just another term to describe a religious follower of Jesus. For me and many others, it is so much more.

For me, "Christian" is my new name that Christ gave me when He chose me to follow him. Taking that away is offensive. It means I am a passionate follower of Christ.

If Erwin wants a social networking site, then he needs to turn this one over to someone who truly wants to follow and represent Christ.

Coach