Should the SDA Forum Be Split?

[honorthesabbath]

Woob, will you post this same comment in the "Separate forums?" thread in the Tradtional section?

I really cannot argue with this logic. However, this puts a lot of added responsibility on our mods....and our mod situation isn't good right now. Nothing against our current mods, but they aren't around much since the changes.

In matters of law a prosecutor can promise someone a lot of "bargains" but if a federal retroactive law pops up, the promise is null and void.

Erwin mentioned no more warnings. So are we sure this is something we can even do?

Erwin is federal law here.

LOL--thats funny because federal law was never to supercede the soverignty of the several states.

If I recall-I think the ONLY function of the federal government is to "protect our borders and defend against enemies both foreign and domestic'!!

In other words--Erwin should be defending each denominations right to self government.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Because splitting would be shameful for us all. Heaven will not be split and flamers will not be there.

For a church that believes in character transformation through God's work in us we are missing the mark. We need personal change, not a forum split.

I couldn't agree more, because the current situation is shameful too.

I still don't regret my suggestion that we split though, because until someone just SAID it, there wasn't any talk of stronger rules.

Threatening to take away the punching bags worked. HA! (A joke)

Cracking down on flamers is an excellent idea. I can't and won't argue with that logic.

I PMd Letalis. I'll let everyone know what the response is.

 

[TrustAndObey]

LOL--thats funny because federal law was never to supercede the soverignty of the several states.

If I recall-I think the ONLY function of the federal government is to "protect our borders and defend against enemies both foreign and domestic'!!

In other words--Erwin should be defending each denominations right to self government.

And he is. I guess what Woob said makes total sense. We can't be expected to self-govern ourselves if we can't make the rules we WANT in here.

I think Erwin will agree, but I want to make sure first.

 

[happywiththelord]

I guess i will throw my 2 cents in.

I think we should most definatly split! I voted for that! Like I said before in another thread, "Whats the definition of insanity?...trying the same thing over and over again and expecting differnt results!"

How many times are we gonna hash around this concept and yet nothing is truly ever fixed? I have been on CF for 2 years and its the same thing over and over again. All the polls and all the talk hasn't fixed a thing. It is as simple as beliefs clashing and that won't ever fix itself. Its like having the Jews and the Musleums sharing a forum. There beliefs are different and it's just not gonna work! Regardless of all the well intentioned good talk and idealistic, "we have got to be better people talk". Face the facts, its never going to work between the tradtionals and the progressives. Call it what it is. Dont sugar coat it. Put a stop to the madness once and for all and split the two.

 

[TrustAndObey]

I guess i will throw my 2 cents in.

I think we should most definatly split! I voted for that! Like I said before in another thread, "Whats the definition of insanity?...trying the same thing over and over again and expecting differnt results!"

How many times are we gonna hash around this concept and yet nothing is truly ever fixed? I have been on CF for 2 years and its the same thing over and over again. All the polls and all the talk hasn't fixed a thing. It is as simple as beliefs clashing and that won't ever fix itself. Its like having the Jews and the Musleums sharing a forum. There beliefs are different and it's just not gonna work! Regardless of all the well intentioned good talk and idealistic, "we have got to be better people talk". Face the facts, its never going to work between the tradtionals and the progressives. Call it what it is. Dont sugar coat it. Put a stop to the madness once and for all and split the two.

I'm prepared to go either way. A warning system isn't going to work unless we have someone that volunteers for the position of mod that knows well in advance what they're up for (at least in the beginning). I just don't know anyone that has that kind of time.

And even if you take a post away, the words still had the potential to hurt someone.

People are really passionate about this, as Happy just demonstrated, and I do feel like she, and anyone else has a right to be heard.

 

[woobadooba]

I guess i will throw my 2 cents in.

I think we should most definatly split! I voted for that! Like I said before in another thread, "Whats the definition of insanity?...trying the same thing over and over again and expecting differnt results!"

How many times are we gonna hash around this concept and yet nothing is truly ever fixed? I have been on CF for 2 years and its the same thing over and over again. All the polls and all the talk hasn't fixed a thing. It is as simple as beliefs clashing and that won't ever fix itself. Its like having the Jews and the Musleums sharing a forum. There beliefs are different and it's just not gonna work! Regardless of all the well intentioned good talk and idealistic, "we have got to be better people talk". Face the facts, its never going to work between the tradtionals and the progressives. Call it what it is. Dont sugar coat it. Put a stop to the madness once and for all and split the two.

I realize that it is too late for you to change your vote, but maybe I can help you to see that we are heading in the right direction.

You see, before the changes took place CF had their way of doing things. Of course, we know that that didn't work, because if it did a change would not have taken place.

Now we have an opportunity to make up our own rules. And by establishing an SDA warning system we can eliminate most of the tension that we are seeing in here. I do believe this will work, as it will encourage people to be more thoughtful, and not allow for any tolerance of behavior that does not properly represent the character of Christ.

Like I had said before, people will either get sick of being banned, and will change their ways, or they just simply won't be allowed to have access to this forum anymore (in the long term--a ban of a month or even a year ), except for to read what is being posted in it. This is a good solution. It will work.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Here's where I'm at with this...

If we could all agree to enforce these stricter rules right away, before we start on anymore wiki conversations, then I'd be okay with it. If it's something to do later on down the road....no way, I'll vote for a split immediately.

These rules need to be in place FOR the wiki discussions or people are going to huff off and we'll be right back where we started.

That all depends on Erwin's approval and selecting mods now I guess too?

 

[NightEternal]

Tall and Ice, I understand what you are both saying and I respect your noble motivations. What you propose sounds wonderful, but I just don't see it playing out in reality. I don't think separation is shameful at all, just a practical necessity. You don't think the church in North America has been divided for years now? Go to a conservative church in southern Tennessee and then go to a progressive church in southern California, or the Loma Linda area. I think you will see that having them separate only makes sense, as taking a member of either church, placing them in the opposite environment and expecting them to be able to relate to each other on any level theologically, worship-style wise, philosophically or in lifestyle issues would almost be asking for the impossible.

I agree personal attacks are wrong and it should not be allowed. How we will work that out remains to be seen, but I favor the temporary forum ban idea. I have always tried to respect the concept of going after theology and ideas only and not the person, even if I was not always sucessful. However, now it seems this is becoming off-limits as well:

Well JM--the only other alternative is to ban the instigators who constantly bager and harrass the TSDA's with their constant attacks of our doctrines.

If the Traditionals are dead set against discussing the issues and doctrinal debate, maintaining a forum format where this will take place anywhere seems pointless and hopeless. Woob wants to formulate a list of heresies that are off-limits. Well, I consider the sinful nature of Christ to be heresy. I consider sinless perfection theology to be heresy. I consider making our salvation dependent upon sanctification to be heresy. Will I support censorship and not allowing these beliefs to be discussed on the boards as Woob suggests? Not at all. Do I want the right to be able to challenge those beliefs in the forums? You better believe it.

Therefore, a separate forum is my vote. Sorry. It's the only sensible solution to me. I have nothing to say to people who think I am a devil or that I am not a true Adventist (or, in Woob's case, not even a Christian.) I'm sick of being demonized. I have been an active member in the SDA church for almost 20 years, and I will be damned if I am going to let people pronounce me an apostate Adventist after only dialoging with me for a few months.

Pardon my strong language, but this is righteous indignation speaking. Now certain people can run back to thier Tradtional sub-hideyhole and gossip about how I swore.

However, like I said, if the majority votes against separation, I will go along with it and work towards the original plan.

And Woob, the reason I deleted my apology post was because I was tired of people like you continually throwing it back in my face and using it against me when you really didn't even understand what I was apologizing for in the first place.

I vote total separation.

 

[woobadooba]

Here's where I'm at with this...

If we could all agree to enforce these stricter rules right away, before we start on anymore wiki conversations, then I'd be okay with it. If it's something to do later on down the road....no way, I'll vote for a split immediately.

These rules need to be in place FOR the wiki discussions or people are going to huff off and we'll be right back where we started.

That all depends on Erwin's approval and selecting mods now I guess too?

Indeed we do need to implement these rules ASAP. I don't think there will be a problem here.

 

[djconklin]

have stricter rules to prevent personal attacks.

With the mods being informed about the snide remarks and subtle put-downs that some have used that should also be banned.

 

[TrustAndObey]

If I remember correctly, sarcasm was against the rules at some point, but I don't think that's the case anymore.

 

[djconklin]

LOL--thats funny because federal law was never to supercede the soverignty of the several states.

As I recall my history it seems to me that had a war about that very thing. The "states rights" side lost.

The slave owners, realizing that their slaves had a closer connection with God asked them to pray that South would win. Their slaves told them that they prayed that the Lord's will be done. The owners cried "No, not that!" because they knew they were in the wrong and they were being punished. But, like the Jews of old there are still people who haven't learned the lesson. Lincoln must be spinning in his grave to know that his party is pushing "states rights." BTW, that concept was tried after the Revolution--it didn't work, that's why we have the Constitution we have today.

 

[happywiththelord]

Everyone seems to be missing the point. If we were split, this wouldnt be an issue. there would be no snide remarks or stuff like that. we would be with like believers.

 

[djconklin]

If I remember correctly, sarcasm was against the rules at some point, but I don't think that's the case anymore.

It should be; suggest it as one of the rules.

 

[djconklin]

Everyone seems to be missing the point. If we were split, this wouldnt be an issue. there would be no snide remarks or stuff like that. we would be with like believers.

We were split before--it didn't work because they come over to attack.

 

[woobadooba]

With the mods being informed about the snide remarks and subtle put-downs that some have used that should also be banned.

This will stop too. We need to put our heads together and make the rules as definitive as possible, so that there will be no room for doubt as to what constitutes a violation. The old rules were not definitive enough (at least not for the SDA forum), and so they didn't work.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Everyone seems to be missing the point. If we were split, this wouldnt be an issue. there would be no snide remarks or stuff like that. we would be with like believers.

This is exactly why I haven't voted yet. I totally see your point Happy, I really do.

I just keep getting the feeling that even if we vote for the stricter rules, it isn't anything that would happen any time soon, and we'd need the mods here a lot to enforce them constantly.

I just don't see that happening.

 

[TrustAndObey]

We were split before--it didn't work because they come over to attack.

We weren't really split though, not like the way I think totally separate forums would address.

 

[djconklin]

I consider the sinful nature of Christ to be heresy.

It is. It's basic Christianity.

The question is why should I have to scroll past posts and threads* where heresies like theistic evolution are brought up?

*They sneak it in threads that aren't even discussing it.

I consider sinless perfection theology to be heresy. I consider making our salvation dependent upon sanctification to be heresy.

They aren't; they are very biblical: we are saved by faith--it's a heresy to deny it.

 

[TrustAndObey]

Night is already promising not to agree with Woob in any wiki discussions, and I'm sure Woob feels the same way about Night.

I'm voting for a split.