Foru.ms - a new beginning and a fresh start (3)

[yodafett]

Hey yoda, do you remember where that thread was that stated he didn't have time for two forums?

Not handy, no. i'll try do dig it up if you'd like, though?

Edit: In point 3 in this thread, he talks about how difficult it would be, but not that it's impossible.
http://foru.ms/t5956429-forums-faq-to-recent-changes.html

 

[Nadiine]

Not handy, no. i'll try do dig it up if you'd like, though?

Edit: In point 3 in this thread, he talks about how difficult it would be, but not that it's impossible.
http://foru.ms/t5956429-forums-faq-to-recent-changes.html

I don't think it's feasible to have 2 forums running - one site IS handful enough to run... esp. a religious debate forum! (nevermind that the man just might want a LIFE outside his computer desk!) lol

I don't expect Erwin to have to run 2. If he doesn't want to make the proper decisions to run one, I don't see how the 2nd is going to be defined or run any better!

HE'S DODGING THE ISSUE OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A CHRISTIAN... that would still carry over into 2nd "Christian" site and the SAME fights would ensue as the fights that have already gone on.

He's refusing to define a Christian - if he doesn't know or is too compromising to properly address it, adding a 2nd site isn't the answer either!
PLUS IT'S MORE WORK for the same outcome.
Pointless IMHO.

 

[yodafett]

I don't think it's feasible to have 2 forums running - one site IS handful enough to run... esp. a religious debate forum! (nevermind that the man just might want a LIFE outside his computer desk!) lol

I don't expect Erwin to have to run 2. If he doesn't want to make the proper decisions to run one, I don't see how the 2nd is going to be defined or run any better!

HE'S DODGING THE ISSUE OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A CHRISTIAN... that would still carry over into 2nd "Christian" site and the SAME fights would ensue as the fights that have already gone on.

He's refusing to define a Christian - if he doesn't know or is too compromising to properly address it, adding a 2nd site isn't the answer either!
PLUS IT'S MORE WORK for the same outcome.
Pointless IMHO.

At this point, no one is saying he should. That was in response to trying to rationalize why he'd buy the second domain name ahead of time and if he had a different use for it initially.

 

[The Bellman]

I'm not getting into a fight with you over this. The Bible's writers make their own claims as to the author; believe them or believe yourself that you somehow know more than them on who God said He was when they walked with Him personally & eyewitnessed His works.
I don't have faith enough in MYSELF to create my truths and reject their comprehensive testimonies about God and His requirements.

But you do have faith enough in yourself. Faith enough in yourself to believe that you - an imperfect, error-prone human - correctly interpret the scriptures. In the end it always comes down to faith in ourselves, because it's us who have to interpret everything. And that interpretation could be wrong.

 

[*Starlight*]

He's refusing to define a Christian

And he's totally right about doing it.

 

[SunMessenger]

I don't think it's feasible to have 2 forums running - one site IS handful enough to run... esp. a religious debate forum! (nevermind that the man just might want a LIFE outside his computer desk!) lol

I don't expect Erwin to have to run 2. If he doesn't want to make the proper decisions to run one, I don't see how the 2nd is going to be defined or run any better!

HE'S DODGING THE ISSUE OF WHAT CONSTITUTES A CHRISTIAN... that would still carry over into 2nd "Christian" site and the SAME fights would ensue as the fights that have already gone on.

He's refusing to define a Christian - if he doesn't know or is too compromising to properly address it, adding a 2nd site isn't the answer either!
PLUS IT'S MORE WORK for the same outcome.
Pointless IMHO.

You know I am having a very hard time with this "define a Christian" discussion. A Christian is simply one who loves and follows, to the best of their human ability, the teachings of Jesus Christ ! Think about who followed in the beginning . The first followers were from all walks of life. From tax collectors to a prostitute. There is no need to restrict anyone from calling themselves Christian by imposing a narrow guideline. Each of us needs to work hard everyday to adhere to our Christian foundations and beliefs. Why restrict someone new with a narrow definition of what should not be narrow at all?

I am praying...

Sun

 

[The Bellman]

Do you acknowledge that these events can influence others to distrust him, and while not PROVING it, they are evidence that he didn't just simply change his mind?

Erwin's post on 7/27/07 starting his poll.
http://foru.ms/t5787680-at-crossroads-cfs-vision-poll-vote-only-here.html


Erwin's bid on the foru.ms domain, put in the day before the poll started, 07/26/07.
http://www.afternic.com/bidhist.php?id=13805887

Erwin saying on 08/19/07 that he never thought about changing the name until after seeing the results of the poll.
[URL="http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=37891292&postcount=194[/quote"]http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=37891292&postcount=194[/quote[/URL]]
http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=37980453&postcount=911

No, I'm sorry, I don't. They're certainly compatible with his being untrustworthy - even deceitful - but that doesn't make them evidence for that.

Several people have brought up the apparent anomoly of Erwin's bidding for the forum name before he contemplated changing the name of the forum, seeming to indicate that he was, in fact, contemplating changing the name of the forum before the date he has admitted doing so. This would indicate duplicity on his part.

However, it is quite possible that he bid on the forum name before he contemplated changing the name of this forum to that name. He may have been planning to use it in another forum; he may have been bidding on behalf of someone else; he may have been bidding on it as an investment. People do do that - bid on and buy domain names that they believe they can later sell at a profit.

Look at it this (hypothetical) way - Erwin was living in a house and put in a bid on another house, buying it as an investment. He never planned to live in it. But after his bid was successful, for one reason or another, he decided he would live in it. So he moved to the new house, retaining the old one. No duplicity. Just a change of mind - something we all do from time to time.

I'm not saying this is true. I'm not saying that Erwin is as trustworthy as they come - I don't know the man anywhere near well enough to say that. What I am saying is that all the talk of him being a liar, of being untrustworthy, is not warranted. Criticism of his walk with Christ and/or his commitment to Jesus and/or Christianity is completely unwarranted and extremely insulting.

Charity, people. Before you condemn someone as an untrustworthy liar, be sure, beyond any shadow of a doubt. And I don't believe we can be remotely sure that Erwin is any of these things.

 

[SunMessenger]

Charity, people. Before you condemn someone as an untrustworthy liar, be sure, beyond any shadow of a doubt. And I don't believe we can be remotely sure that Erwin is any of these things.

Amen to charity. Now this is well said.

I agree...

Sun

 

[yodafett]

... What I am saying is that all the talk of him being a liar, of being untrustworthy, is not warranted. Criticism of his walk with Christ and/or his commitment to Jesus and/or Christianity is completely unwarranted and extremely insulting.

Charity, people. Before you condemn someone as an untrustworthy liar, be sure, beyond any shadow of a doubt. And I don't believe we can be remotely sure that Erwin is any of these things.

I agree that criticizing his walk and his faith are out of line and unwarranted. Unless Erwin responds to the questions that have been posted, you're right, we won't be sure he is or isn't doing any of them.

All I'm saying is that it appears odd, and until/unless he provides a response (I also accept that Erwin is NOT answerable to anyone on here, least of all me), that in light of the changes, and the lack of communication involved in them, that it appears to be more in line with dishonesty. I never said I'm sure or that it's proof, just that I see it as evidence to that.

 

[SunMessenger]

I agree that criticizing his walk and his faith are out of line and unwarranted. Unless Erwin responds to the questions that have been posted, you're right, we won't be sure he is or isn't doing any of them.

All I'm saying is that it appears odd, and until/unless he provides a response (I also accept that Erwin is NOT answerable to anyone on here, least of all me), that in light of the changes, and the lack of communication involved in them, that it appears to be more in line with dishonesty. I never said I'm sure or that it's proof, just that I see it as evidence to that.

How can he with people not just questioning his words but his faith as well ? I would not answer either under those conditions. If we would stop torturing him with these negative labels maybe he would be more vocal. We have no right to judge anyone if we are truly Christian.

 

[Macrina]

Can people please stop using ALL CAPS in their posts? It's rude. A breach of common netiquette that is considered 'shouting' online. If you were face to face with all of us, would you disgrace yourself with such a complete lack of control as you have exhibited here, or would you try to keep calm and get your point across without stamping your foot and waving your arms around in the air?

While it may seem as though you're being drowned in all the other voices here, if you take the time to be polite and measured in your comments, you will likely get a better response. I realise that posts are getting buried in here, but such is the nature of a fast-moving thread. No need to shout; if you do, people will likely not read your posts, or if they do, will view it with some skepticism and irritation.

No matter whether or not you have a point - and some of you do - your shouting makes you out to be immature and overly emotional. Yes, many people feel betrayed by Erwin. But, as my mother always tells me, trust in God, not in humans. Humans are fallible - even webmasters!

Is not one of the fruits of the Spirit patience? How about long-suffering? Gentleness? Please try to exercise all three on this thread, or we won't achieve anything but heartache on all sides.

Blessings ALL (no matter which 'side' you take),
infaile

 

[CaDan]

Does anyone else find the idea of Protestants rejecting the idea of curius regio, eius religio sort of interesting?

 

[Nadiine]

Christianity is defined by believing in God.

WHERE DO YOU GET THAT DEFINITION??? Actually you're way off on that.
THEISM is believing in God, CHRISTIANITY IS BELIEVING (abiding by)THE CENTRAL TENETS OF THE BIBLE - BY THE INCEPTORS OF THAT RELIGION who taught who that God was and His requirements.

The bible ALSO teaches (as its own authority) that mere BELIEF isn't salvation and doesn't make one a Christian.
It's more than general belief.

It's not defined by believing the bible.

It's not? Then what are you believing, and from whom, and what's it based on if not scripture??

If you reject the writings of God (from God thru man), then aren't you denying what HE said and what He requires?
Matthew 26:56
"But all this has taken place to fulfill the Scriptures of the prophets." Then all the disciples left Him and fled.

Mark 12:10
"Have you not even read this Scripture:' THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED,THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER stone;

Mark 12:24
Jesus said to them, "Is this not the reason you are mistaken, that you do not understand the Scriptures or the power of God?

Luke 24:27
Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.

Luke 24:32
They said to one another, "Were not our hearts burning within us while He (Jesus) was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?"

Luke 24:45
Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures,

John 5:39
[ Witness of the Scripture ] " You search the Scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; it is these (scriptures)that testify about Me;

Acts 1:16
"Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus.

Acts 8:35
Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him.

Romans 15:4
For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope.

1 Corinthians 15:3
For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,

1 Timothy 4:13
Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching.

2 Timothy 3:16
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;

**PETER WAS A DIRECT DISCIPLE OF JESUS AND LEARNED FROM JESUS**
2 Peter 1:20
But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,

**PETER SUPPORTS PAUL'S EPISTLES - HE DIRECTLY LEARNED AND FOLLOWED CHRIST, THEN SUPPORTS PAUL'S WRITINGS AS TRUTH FROM GOD!

2 Pet. 3:15
...as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;

You can cancel out and erase any scripture or all scriptures to your hearts desire.
I've posted why I adhere to them, WHICH DEFINES CHRISTIANITY becuz they are the inceptors of the religion itself.
Unless YOU know more about God than they do..??

If so, should I come to YOU for my truth about God? I don't have the faith or audacity to believe anything other than what the scriptures tell me from eyewitnesses of God firsthand.

Jesus says this:
Mt. 7:
21 "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

22 "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' 23 "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.' (sin).

 

[SunMessenger]

Does anyone else find the idea of Protestants rejecting the idea of curius regio, eius religio sort of interesting?

What is it Dan ? Not everyone has time to look up every word. God gifted you with vocabulary and I thank Him for that but please you are driving me crazy...


Sun

 

[Erwin]

Not posting this with maliciousness, just wanting to get to teh bottom of what's really going on, and why.

Erwin's post on 7/27/07 starting his poll.
http://foru.ms/t5787680-at-crossroads-cfs-vision-poll-vote-only-here.html

Fact.

Erwin's bid on the foru.ms domain, put in the day before the poll started, 07/26/07.
http://www.afternic.com/bidhist.php?id=13805887

Fact.

Erwin saying on 08/19/07 that he never thought about changing the name until seeing the results of the poll.
http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=37891292&postcount=194

Fact. However, please note that the poll being referred to in this post is a DIFFERENT AND MUCH EARLIER POLL to the poll I started. That poll was started by drstevej. In fact, I was receiving PMs from members asking me to change the site name days before that poll by drstevej was posted.

Just wanting to make things clear as people are getting the polls mixed up.

I explained my reasoning already here in detail - please read it:
http://foru.ms/t5956429-forums-faq-to-recent-changes.html

 

[eldermike]

I do believe Theology leads one to salvation. The bible says you believe by hearing the truth.

My 2 cents:
Theology is important. Jesus, Paul, James, John and Peter taught and defended a single narrow Theology. It's hated by many and loved by a few. Christianity is not easy, it's not safe, it's not loved by the world, that will never be so.
CF has never been a church, it's never had a clear narrow defined Theological basis.

The option to choose a single narrow Theological basis, a single clearly defined mission and statement of faith, for the purpose of uniting leadership has always existed. How could it not be considered?

Sure, it's right to allow more interaction between faiths and non-Christian/Christian, not less. To that end, changes should have been in leadership. How? Make is a narrow road to the top. Our problem seems to be the attempted use of what was CF as a metric for fixing it. That will not work. IMHO.

 

[yodafett]

Fact.

Fact.

Fact. However, please note that the poll being referred to in this post is a DIFFERENT AND MUCH EARLIER POLL to the poll I started. That poll was started by drstevej. In fact, I was receiving PMs from members asking me to change the site name days before that poll by drstevej was posted.

Just wanting to make things clear as people are getting the polls mixed up.

I explained my reasoning already here in detail - please read it:
http://foru.ms/t5956429-forums-faq-to-recent-changes.html

Erwin, Thank you for taking the time to reply to those points. I truly do appreciate it, and I'm sure other's do as well. I did read the FAQ you posted, but I didn't see anything that stated it was drsteve's poll. I apologize for misunderstanding, and thank you for correcting that mis-information. I won't bring that up again.

 

[invisible trousers]

Show me the exact verses where Jesus said belief in the document we now know as the bible is required in order to be a christian.

None of those verses you've listed are evidence of your claim, they're just random verses with the word scripture in them that have been completely removed from any context.

Christianity is defined by believing in God.

WHERE DO YOU GET THAT DEFINITION??? Actually you're way off on that.
THEISM is believing in God, CHRISTIANITY IS BELIEVING (abiding by)THE CENTRAL TENETS OF THE BIBLE - BY THE INCEPTORS OF THAT RELIGION who taught who that God was and His requirements.

Christianity, not bibleanity.

 

[snoochface]

Fact.

Fact.

Fact. However, please note that the poll being referred to in this post is a DIFFERENT AND MUCH EARLIER POLL to the poll I started. That poll was started by drstevej. In fact, I was receiving PMs from members asking me to change the site name days before that poll by drstevej was posted.

Just wanting to make things clear as people are getting the polls mixed up.

I explained my reasoning already here in detail - please read it:
http://foru.ms/t5956429-forums-faq-to-recent-changes.html

Yes, you explained there, and you said you would continue to add to it and answer questions in this thread (before this last split). But one set of questions, mine included, have been copied and pasted about 7 times, and you're not answering them.

 

[CaDan]

What is it Dan ? Not everyone has time to look up every word. God gifted you with vocabulary and I thank Him for that but please you are driving me crazy...


Sun

It's one of the principles behind the Peace of Westphalia, which was a series of treaties that ended the Thirty Years War, which broke out as part of the Reformation. It means, in Latin, "Whose region, his religion."