Nicene Creed and Promotion

[mnphysicist]

New Rule:

You will not promote any faith, belief, or religion other than Nicene Christianity. Promotion of Satanism or occultism is strictly prohibited. Promotion is defined as encouragement of the progress, growth, or acceptance of something including advertising and publicity.


Clarifying Interpretation of the Creed

[1] Promotion of non-apostolic beliefs will not be censored.

[2] Eschatological beliefs will not be censored. Christian Universalism will not be censored.

[3] Blatant and explicit promotion of Nestorianism will be censored. Denial of Mary as the mother of God, in and of itself, will not be considered a contradiction of the Creed.

[4] Affirmation of the Nicene Creed is explicitly not required. As concerns promotion, posts and threads are not expected to be in agreement with the use of the Nicene Creed itself, only the beliefs contained therein. Members may promote a "No Creed but Christ" position.

[5] Religious icons will not be touched, nor verified. Members may choose the icons they want, even if it is not representative of their beliefs.



Promotion of non-Nicene/non-Christian Beliefs

What promotion is:

Promotion is statements made to convert or encourage conversion to non-Nicene/non-Christian beliefs or religions. Proselytizing must always be from a Nicene Christian point of view.


What promotion isn't:

[1] Debating Nicene beliefs is not to be understood as promotion.

[2] Clarifying a misconception or falsehood, concerning non-Nicene beliefs, is not to be understood as promotion.

[3] Posts or threads intended to inform about non-Nicene beliefs is not to be understood as promotion.

[4] Offering a non-Nicene belief as a statement of fact is not to be understood as promotion. *

[5] Making positive statements about one's faith or beliefs is not to be understood as promotion. *



Promotion of Satanism and Occultism

Promotion of Satanism and Occultism is strictly prohibited. Promotion may be understood as any portrayal of Satanism or occultism as an acceptable belief system.



Context is Important

Determining promotion, is in large part dependent on the context of the thread, and the forum. Forums where debate of non-Nicene/non-Christian beliefs is common, will take a much more relaxed interpretation of promotion, than will forums such as Teens, or some Congregation forums.

* Speaking positively or making statements of fact about one's beliefs is fine, and is generally not considered promotion. However, based on the context of the thread and forum, ie. in a thread about a seeking member, or a struggling Christian, such could be removed as promotion.

 

[Tenebrae]

Thanks Ron


I would like to clarify, in the catergory of what promotion isnt

[2] Clarifying a misconception or falsehood, concerning non-Nicene beliefs, is not to be understood as promotion.

For example, say a christian says "satanists kill babies" will a satanist or christian with experience in satanism be allowed to correct that utter bunk statement. or other such utter bunk statements about non christian religons Asking than in light of the next section

Promotion of Satanism and Occultism is strictly prohibited. Promotion may be understood as any portrayal of Satanism or occultism as an acceptable belief system.

Apart from that, I think it looks great

 

[pete56]

Ron, why go to the trouble of publishing a rule that says one thing that promotion of all non-nicene faiths is prohibited, and then go on to explain that large parts of non-nicene belief is allowed to be promoted? This entire thread seems to me to be an exercise in contradiction!

 

[*Starlight*]

That looks quite reasonable. With the recent changes, I was afraid that it would be much too restrictive.

 

[BenAdam]

[5] Religious icons will not be touched, nor verified. Members may choose the icons they want, even if it is not representative of their beliefs.

Then why have them at all?

 

[drstevej]

[5] Religious icons will not be touched, nor verified. Members may choose the icons they want, even if it is not representative of their beliefs.

If this is the case what value are they. One can not be sure it is an honest statement of the person's position unless they already know the person's position. So no advantage there.

They can now be used for deception and stirring up trouble.. neither is good.

So what good are they under this approach?

just curious

 

[A New Dawn]

If this is the case what value are they. One can not be sure it is an honest statement of the person's position unless they already know the person's position. So no advantage there.

They can now be used for deception and stirring up trouble.. neither is good.

So what good are they under this approach?

just curious

I agree. Since many already misrepresent their faith with them, and it sets a bad precedent for a Christian discussion board, then they should just be gotten rid of.

 

[BenAdam]

I agree. Since many already misrepresent their faith with them, and it sets a bad precedent for a Christian discussion board, then they should just be gotten rid of.

Rather than being gotten rid of, they should be required. Understanding the basic viewpoint of someone can greatly aid in discussion, plus the icons are a good tool for mods.

 

[A New Dawn]

Rather than being gotten rid of, they should be required. Understanding the basic viewpoint of someone can greatly aid in discussion, plus the icons are a good tool for mods.

I understand all that, but what is the sense in having them if they are just toys that don't mean anything, but can cause great damage?

 

[BenAdam]

I understand all that, but what is the sense in having them if they are just toys that don't mean anything, but can cause great damage?

Well if they are to be just toys, it is better to be without them. Personally I would feel it is a lie to have a faith icon that doesn't represent one's beliefs.

 

[A New Dawn]

Well if they are to be just toys, it is better to be without them. Personally I would feel it is a lie to have a faith icon that doesn't represent one's beliefs.

Well, any Christian should, but that is a different thread.

 

[BenAdam]

Well, any Christian should, but that is a different thread.

 

[RedTulipMom]

I agree. Since many already misrepresent their faith with them, and it sets a bad precedent for a Christian discussion board, then they should just be gotten rid of.

many? how many? i would venture to guess about 1% of the people that post here at most. Should we just get rid of the icons because of a few dishonest people, i think not! There are great advantages here with the icon use for both mods and members and dumping them because a few can't behave would be silly.

 

[BenAdam]

many? how many? i would venture to guess about 1% of the people that post here at most. Should we just get rid of the icons because of a few dishonest people, i think not! There are great advantages here with the icon use for both mods and members and dumping them because a few can't behave would be silly.

The issue is though #5 in the OP. They are basically to have no value.

 

[A New Dawn]

many? how many? i would venture to guess about 1% of the people that post here at most. Should we just get rid of the icons because of a few dishonest people, i think not! There are great advantages here with the icon use for both mods and members and dumping them because a few can't behave would be silly.

Even if it is 1% of active posters (I think someone mentioned that there are about 3000 active posters), that is 300 people running around misrepresenting themselves and what they believe. Plus, I know that there are some with many socks with differing icons (one might actually be their correct icon, and several contain conflicting icons (one can't be Mormon and Catholic at the same time.))

(A hint, I don't think that the ones here for fellowship and relaxation would be the ones interested in claiming false icons, I think it would be the ones interested in debate or proselyting.)

 

[mnphysicist]

If someone is using an icon for purposes of flaming or trolling, their posts are the problem, and would be violations. The icon is not the problem, the post content is.

As far as the background, a staffer came up with this post, and it states it so well, I'll include it here.

This ruling is about promotion, not about enforcing a specific belief set. The rules of CF don't say that everyone must agree to the tenants of the Nicene Creed, only that non-Nicene creed beliefs may not be promoted.

It is trying to prevent mods from using the no-promotion rule to quash any discussion they don't like. CF is not a totalitarian regime where people can't even mention the beliefs they have that don't correspond to the creed. Rather, Lee's vision is that people don't go around trying to convince others of non-Nicene POV.

 

[A New Dawn]

If someone is using an icon for purposes of flaming or trolling, their posts are the problem, and would be violations. The icon is not the problem, the post content is.

As far as the background, a staffer came up with this post, and it states it so well, I'll include it here.

This ruling is about promotion, not about enforcing a specific belief set. The rules of CF don't say that everyone must agree to the tenants of the Nicene Creed, only that non-Nicene creed beliefs may not be promoted.

It is trying to prevent mods from using the no-promotion rule to quash any discussion they don't like. CF is not a totalitarian regime where people can't even mention the beliefs they have that don't correspond to the creed. Rather, Lee's vision is that people don't go around trying to convince others of non-Nicene POV.

Ron, are you talking about non-Nicene Creed religions, or non-Nicene beliefs? While the one (partially or totally) encompasses the other, they are not necessarily equal. Can you promote the beliefs while not promoting the religion? That is what has happened in some threads in GT when some have used an inappropriate icon.

Can you clarify this?

Thanks.

 

[Bombila]

Thanks, mnphysicist, for this careful defining of this ruling. Although I still don't find it an agreeable rule, your posted 'what is, what isn't' seems likely to prevent overt misuse and misapprehension of the rule in practice.

Purely for the satisfying of my curiousity, would you mind clarifying what is encompassed by 'occult'? I personally might define a lot of practices as occult that may not fit CF's parameters, for examples, the practice of exorcism, homeopathy, palm reading, channelling, and so on.

Dictionary.com's definition: (Obviously, we are not concerned with scientific or astronomical uses of the word.)
oc·cult

/əˈkʌlt, ˈɒk

ʌlt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[uh-kuhlt, ok-uhlt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective 1.of or pertaining to magic, astrology, or any system claiming use or knowledge of secret or supernatural powers or agencies. 2.beyond the range of ordinary knowledge or understanding; mysterious. 3.secret; disclosed or communicated only to the initiated. 4.hidden from view. 5.(in early science) a.not apparent on mere inspection but discoverable by experimentation. b.of a nature not understood, as physical qualities. c.dealing with such qualities; experimental: occult science. 6.Medicine/Medical. present in amounts too small to be visible: a chemical test to detect occult blood in the stool. –noun 7.the supernatural or supernatural agencies and affairs considered as a whole (usually prec. by the). 8.occult studies or sciences (usually prec. by the). –verb (used with object) 9.to block or shut off (an object) from view; hide. 10.Astronomy. to hide (a celestial body) by occultation. –verb (used without object) 11.to become hidden or shut off from view.
[Origin: 1520–30; < L occultus (ptp. of occulere to hide from view, cover up), equiv. to oc- oc- + -cul-, akin to cél&#257;re to conceal + -tus ptp. suffix

]

 

[pete56]

Ron

You didn't respond to my earlier post.

Why bring in a rule that states promotion of non-Nicene beliefs is not permitted and then proceed to qualify the rule with a set of guidelines that set out so many non-nicene beliefs (like universalism) that are permitted?

Either Non-nicene beliefs are not permitted to be promoted or they are!

Why introduce yet more confusion?

Pete

 

[Crazy Liz]

Ron

You didn't respond to my earlier post.

Why bring in a rule that states promotion of non-Nicene beliefs is not permitted and then proceed to qualify the rule with a set of guidelines that set out so many non-nicene beliefs (like universalism) that are permitted?

Either Non-nicene beliefs are not permitted to be promoted or they are!

Why introduce yet more confusion?

Pete

Can you show that universalism is non-Nicene?

Which clause of the Nicene Creed does universalism contradict?