New Statement of Purpose

[A New Dawn]

Been looking in on the thread and this just stuck out to me. I casually look in from time to time in the UT forum because I learn some things even if I don't post. I had always assumed by the very nature of having an 'UT' forum that "a platform to promote unorthodox teachings according to the format of the Nicene Creed (CF) has outlined" was a given just by wandering in UT in the first place. Not saying that things that are unorthodox to mainstream Christianity should be given carte blanche as acceptable, but I think those that hold these beliefs should be given a place to discuss the without fear of being told they're wrong at every turn.

This debate forum is no different from any of the debate forums. It's purpose is to provide a place for these types of theologies to be discussed, whether pro or con. If you wander onto the other debate forums, you'll find the same thing. The only difference is that this forum is for unorthodox theology and the other Theology forums are for discussion of topics that are covered by the Nicean Creed.

 

[Soulgazer]

You might want to check your facts. Constantine did not preside over the Nicaean council. Constantine conducted the opening ceremonies thereafter his bishop spoke for him. Some misguided folks want to accuse Constantine of forcing the Trinity on the church. First Constantine favored the Arians, if anything he would have forced that view on the council. Second, why would 318 bishops, all of whom had survived severe persecution simply for being Christians, why would they allow anyone to force anything on the church they did not think was scriptural? The three bishops who refused to sign the accords were stripped of their positions and exiled.

Looks like there were only three who had in intestinal fortitude not to compromise their position with Rome. Who were they? What was their faith? Why would they refuse to compromise?

 

[A New Dawn]

Looks like there were only three who had in intestinal fortitude not to compromise their position with Rome. Who were they? What was their faith? Why would they refuse to compromise?

Please can we keep to the topic and keep attitude out of it?

 

[gord44]

Looks like there were only three who had in intestinal fortitude not to compromise their position with Rome. Who were they? What was their faith? Why would they refuse to compromise?

Exactly! Following the crowd usually doesn't lead to truth.

 

[Soulgazer]

Please can we keep to the topic and keep attitude out of it?

Those were serious questions. Since you have claimed Nicene groupie superiority to other Christians IN YOUR STATEMENT WHICH WE ARE DISCUSSING,( Christian Forums holds your beliefs to be Unorthodox and in error. ) you shoud be knowledgable and eager to answer them.

It is PRECISELY your condecending attitude that I find objectionable. If this were a Walmart, or Bank Forum, I could care less. However you CLAIM to be christian, and can't see how this is objectionable to other Christians?

 

[A New Dawn]

Those were serious questions. Since you have claimed Nicene groupie superiority to other Christians IN YOUR STATEMENT WHICH WE ARE DISCUSSING,( Christian Forums holds your beliefs to be Unorthodox and in error. ) you shoud be knowledgable and eager to answer them.

You seem to be forgetting the hundreds or thousands of Christians that were fed to the lions for their faith. You are suggesting that all of the sudden their faith wasn't important to them anymore and all (but three) just decided to denounce it to save their lives? I mean, your post holds nothing but disdain.

 

[Soulgazer]

You seem to be forgetting the hundreds or thousands of Christians that were fed to the lions for their faith. You are suggesting that all of the sudden their faith wasn't important to them anymore and all (but three) just decided to denounce it to save their lives? I mean, your post holds nothing but disdain.

This isn't about me or your superstitions. It's about your demeaning statement and arrogant attitude that pervades it. Stay on topic. I and I'm sure many others would like a resolution. I hold nothing but disdain for bigotry and ignorance, but that does not mean I love you less as a person. I have a lot of catholic friends who still believe there is a logical explanation for how horse bones came to be buried in Peters grave---but neither of us treat the others as second class citizens. Really, if you want to believe in unicorns and pixie dust, I DON"T CARE. Just don't treat me as second class because I don't believe it. If you don't want Unorthodox people here, just say so, and we will go away. Or we are willing to stay and share what we believe as long as you understand we hold your beliefs to be superstitious error.
You've never liked me as a person and that is cool too. I am not staying anyway. becuase you may as well change the forum title from "Unorthodox Christian" to "Morman bashing society".

You can delete this post if you think it too personal, but know I am seeking sometype of resolution.

 

[A New Dawn]

This isn't about me or your superstitions. It's about your demeaning statement and arrogant attitude that pervades it. Stay on topic. I and I'm sure many others would like a resolution. I hold nothing but disdain for bigotry and ignorance, but that does not mean I love you less as a person. I have a lot of catholic friends who still believe there is a logical explanation for how horse bones came to be buried in Peters grave---but neither of us treat the others as second class citizens. Really, if you want to believe in unicorns and pixie dust, I DON"T CARE. Just don't treat me as second class because I don't believe it. If you don't want Unorthodox people here, just say so, and we will go away. Or we are willing to stay and share what we believe as long as you understand we hold your beliefs to be superstitious error.

We are not treating anyone as a second class citizen. The rules are equal for everyone. You confuse your beliefs with yourself, personally. They are not the same. You can believe and discuss whatever you want, but we will not allow others to flame or harass you (nor you, them).

And I am tired of the personal flames against me for no reason at all. I stated that all rules are in effect. Future flaming of anyone will be deleted.

 

[Hillsage]

The only difference is that this forum is for unorthodox theology and the other Theology forums are for discussion of topics that are covered by the Nicean Creed.

In case I'm missing it, this seems to be where I am unsure. Are you saying that belief in the Nicean Creed is not mandatory for those coming here to the UT forum?

 

[Soulgazer]

We are not treating anyone as a second class citizen. The rules are equal for everyone. You confuse your beliefs with yourself, personally. They are not the same. You can believe and discuss whatever you want, but we will not allow others to flame or harass you (nor you, them).

And I am tired of the personal flames against me for no reason at all. I stated that all rules are in effect. Future flaming of anyone will be deleted.

If a person in the Catholic forum posts a catholic sermon, will it be allowed to remain? I once posted a Gnostic Sermon in the unorthodox forum and it was removed as being against the rules. ARE THE RULES EQUAL NOW?

 

[A New Dawn]

In case I'm missing it, this seems to be where I am unsure. Are you saying that belief in the Nicean Creed is not mandatory for those coming here to the UT forum?

Yes. That is the whole purpose for the Unorthodox Theology forum. It is for discussions that are contrary to the Nicene Creed.

 

[A New Dawn]

If a person in the Catholic forum posts a catholic sermon, will it be allowed to remain? I once posted a Gnostic Sermon in the unorthodox forum and it was removed as being against the rules. ARE THE RULES EQUAL NOW?

It depends on the topic of the sermon and the reason for posting it. Promotion is not allowed but discussion is.

 

[Albion]

A new statement of purpose for Unorthodox Theology has been posted and stuck to the top of the forum. Here is the text of the statement.



If you have any questions, you may ask them here.

May we please have the explanation for including Freemasonry among the unorthodox theologies when it alone among the movements, etc. listed is not a religion, or one of the varieties of any world religion, and asserts no beliefs that are in opposition to any of the articles of the Nicene Creed?

 

[Metal Minister]

May we please have the explanation for including Freemasonry among the unorthodox theologies when it alone among the movements, etc. listed is not a religion, or one of the varieties of any world religion, and asserts no beliefs that are in opposition to any of the articles of the Nicene Creed?

I have heard (but I'm not speaking as part of staff here) that it has deep connections with certain religious organizations. I have also heard that its rites are taken from religious aspects. Besides that, where else would you put something like freemasonry on this forum?

 

[Albion]

I have heard (but I'm not speaking as part of staff here) that it has deep connections with certain religious organizations. I have also heard that its rites are taken from religious aspects. Besides that, where else would you put something like freemasonry on this forum?

Everyone has "heard" something or other. I would hope that that is not the standard for classifying discussions on CF.

Where else would you put the Boy Scouts, Kiwanis, Knights of Columbus, or the Jaycees? None is consigned to "Unorthodox Theology." Obviously, it requires a determination that the organization is both theological and unorthodox but that wouldn't be accurate.

I appreciate your interest, but it's the answer from the Moderators that I need to have because they made the decision.

 

[fatboys]

We are not treating anyone as a second class citizen. The rules are equal for everyone. You confuse your beliefs with yourself, personally. They are not the same. You can believe and discuss whatever you want, but we will not allow others to flame or harass you (nor you, them).

And I am tired of the personal flames against me for no reason at all. I stated that all rules are in effect. Future flaming of anyone will be deleted.

Look I am a big boy and I wear big boy pants. You say that the rules are equal for everyone one. I say bologna. Time and time again there are posters here who elitist. So smug and arrogant that they say mean and hurtful things about the things I hold sacred. It makes no difference whether or not the questions they ask are meant to be answered, all they want to do is flame and promote hate. And now these changes just put the nail in the coffin and limit those of us who are unorthodox with less. It is like you don't want us here at all. So these rules only apply to those who believe in the Nicene Creeds. I just don't know if I want to be a part of this forum any more. There are some here I really care about but I don't know.

 

[skylark1]

Tishra1 posted on May 17, 2010:

The UT sub-forums were inaccurately being seen as both safe havens for specific groups (which was never the intent when creating them), and as a place to focus on said groups and address them at point blank range (also not something we envision here for CF.) This in turn made the areas more like turfs to be protected at all costs, which is also not a fair burden to put upon any group in here. By unifying the area we hope to remove these unfortunate outcomes and not put any one unorthodox group under the microscope of debate alone, but allow discussion and debate to exist in a more general way from now on.

​

http://www.christianforums.com/t7467647/

Is it still true that that the Unorthodox Forum is not envisoned to be a place to focus on said groups and address them at point blank range, or has the vision or purpose of the forum changed with this new statement of purpose?

Is the purpose of this forum still for discussion and debate?

 

[Soulgazer]

It depends on the topic of the sermon and the reason for posting it. Promotion is not allowed but discussion is.

So promotion of Catholicism is not allowed also? Otherwise it is unequal. Serious question. Every word that I write can be interpretted as promotion of my faith. How exactly does this work?

 

[Raimi Stranger]

the bible 'defines' a 'Christian' differently than CF, so how can CF get away with denying the bible and yet claim to be Christian Forums ? :-

2 Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

all who follow Jesus then repent and stop sinning as Jesus commands Love, no more sin against God, themselves , fellow man... Jesus followers are saints, not sinners any more ... Jesus did not sin and requires all who follow him to stop sinning and Love instead... this is the division he spoke of of 'sheep' from 'goats'. saints from sinners, as judgement is made on whether one still sins or follows Jesus way of Love...

so how is all this scripture just set asoide by the many who simply call themselves 'Christian' without doing the Love that Jesus commands and requires of all saints who follow him? ... few find the way [Matt 7:14], the many are destroyed in this earth -Matt 7:13

matters not as countless many are saved by the kingdom come in the new earth set up by Jesus with the few saints of this earth as its priests and rulers... all detailed by Jesus in scripture, but ignored by most who say they are 'Christians'... but how can they be if they neither follow Jesus nor listen to what he says will be ... is it enough to simply say one is 'Christian' and continue as a sinner? ... clearly Jesus says all will accept him one day, but not in THIS life, not in THIS earth... and it is a religion labelled Christianity which crucified saints and fed them to lions in Rome, which later inaugurated killing saints in the Inquisition.... so why not use the bible definition of a 'Christian' and forget about what men say which is partly lies and self deceit, noting that religion is DIVIDED and God is not... surely God will be seen to be correct and men mistaken about who follows Jesus, so why not listen to His words now ???

 

[americanvet]

● Universalism
● Open Theism - unorthodox religious interpretation
● Full Preterism - unorthodox religious interpretation
● Trinitarianism- unorthodox religious interpretation
● Annihilationism- unorthodox religious interpretation
● Masonry - fraternal society. Which promotes zero theology, style of worship, or any other religious teaches orthodox or unorthodox.
● discussions related to unorthodox Christian religions - unorthodox religious interpretation

I suggest if Masonry is left in this section (which I hope it is not) that a explination saying that it does not claim to nor present itself as a religion and that furthermore no Grand Lodge in the world represents it as anything other than a fraternity. Additionally its members (to include a few on this site) are steadfast that is it not a religion nor presents itself as such.

I would like to suggest that the discussion of Masonry be moved to the society area under philosophy as that seems to be the best place for it on the site.