I guess you might consider defining what you consider Christian discussion when opposing false teachings and teachers.....Jesus had a few words that didn't sit well with the false teachers either.
http://freerepublic.com/~religionmoderator/
Antagonism though not encouraged, should be expectedPosters may argue for or against beliefs, deities, religious authorities, etc. They may tear down other’s beliefs. They may ridicule. “Open” RF debate is often contentious.
It requires thick skin. A poster must be able to make his points while standing his ground, suffering adverse remarks about his beliefs - or letting them roll off his back.
Members of religions which are as much culture as belief sometimes take religious debate personally. If you keep getting your feelings hurt because other posters ridicule or disapprove or hate what you hold dear, then you are too thin-skinned to be involved in “open” RF debate. You should IGNORE “open” RF threads altogether and instead post to RF threads labeled “prayer” “devotional” “caucus” or “ecumenical.”
At the same time, I find it revealing that the most "Christian" part of this site is what it is; "by their fruits ye shall know them." If the hallmark of Christian discussion really were tossing attacks, accusations, and sarcastic one-liners at one another, I'd rather just stay a heathen and post on a forum where at least the moderators allow swearing.
I guess you might consider defining what you consider Christian discussion when opposing false teachings and teachers.....Jesus had a few words that didn't sit well with the false teachers either.
I just replied to a poster who uses sarcastic one-liners to avoid the issues and he was quite proud of his method of evading the hard questions.
Pretty popular tactic when indefensible questions are asked of some.