| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 01/26/2004 9:33:25 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator, reason:
This thread is now locked. It has served its purpose. thank you all for your participation and patience. |
Posted on 01/22/2004 6:34:29 PM PST by Sidebar Moderator
The bad news is that I am the newly designated moderator of Free Republic's Religion Forum. The good news is that I am the newly designated moderator of Free Republic's Religion Forum.
First, let's discuss why this is bad news.
I have no doubt that everyone who participates in this forum is aware of the general posting guidelines of Free Republic; they've been in effect as long as Free Republic has been in existence. Just for clarity, here they are again: "NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts."
Having spent the better part of a week reading as much as I was able to get to on the Religion Forum, which includes virtually every currently posted thread, I can say that I've seen no profanity (should be a given on a forum devoted to religion), and only one or two posts which could be construed to contain violence. On that score I commend you all.
Unfortunately, however, personal attacks are rampant. Protestants attack Catholics, and vice versa. Within these two major Christian families, Calvinists attack Arminians, and tit-for-tat. Traditional Catholics attack New Age Catholics, and back it comes. Self-professed Christians of all flavors post gratuitous insults and jibes directed toward Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses frequently. Threads are posted for the obvious and sole purpose of flaming "the opposition", whoever that might be in any particular instance. I could go on and on with further examples, but from many of your posted comments it is clear that all of you are aware of these facts, and seemingly, accept them as the order of things.
It is not the order of things, and it will no longer be tolerated.
Sadly, a forum devoted to perhaps the highest endeavor of the human mind and soul, that of the religious expression of faith, has become an embarrassment to Free Republic. All too often the discourse appearing in the Religion Forum resembles that found in those threads devoted to the War on Drugs, less the profanity, of course. Consequently, the question whether the Religion Forum will remain much longer as a feature of Free Republic, at least in its present format, is very much up in the air. How that question is answered depends entirely on the response each and every one of you make to this announcement in the next few weeks.
Therefore, from this time forward, the Free Republic rule of " NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.", will be more strictly enforced. Furthermore, you are all reminded that this is a religion forum; that is, all practitioners of any recognized religion, provided they also follow the rules, are welcome. However, since a large majority of posters to this forum are self-professing Christians, of one flavor or another, some additional rules will be imposed. You should all be quite familiar with them, even though some of you seem to pay them no heed at present.
These rules are:
"The second is this, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself'." [Mark 12:31 (RSV)]
"But I say to you that hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you." [Luke 6:27 (RSV)]
"A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another." [John 13:34 (RSV)]
"If you love me, you will keep my commandments." [John 14:15 (RSV)]
Or, if the commandments of our Lord Jesus are insufficient (paraphrasing Paul) speak the truth in love.
For now, enough of the harsh words. There really is good news.
First and foremost, all that has passed prior to today is forgiven. However, my forgiveness, unlike that of God, is continuing but not unlimited. After all, I'm a sinner, too. Transgressions of the rules will be met with three warnings, followed by three progressively lengthy suspensions, after which unrepentant posters will be, shall we say, cast into the outer darkness. Totally outrageous violations, of course, remain subject to the ultimate penalty immediately, as always.
However, I am also aware that love, in the Biblical sense, is not the Hollywood kind of love we hear about all around us these days. Spirited debate is a hallmark of Free Republic, and is welcome. Sometimes the truth (at least as we understand it, through a glass darkly) sounds rather harsh, but even harsh truth can be couched in terms that allow the Christian love of the speaker to come through.
Further, no matter how you read the tenor of this announcement, I am not a martinet. I can be persuaded to change my mind by reasoned discourse. On the other hand, sinful nature that I have, I do not suffer fools gladly. Directing complaints to me over some action I have taken is fine; doing so with insulting language will not achieve the results you desire, and in fact, will probably result in something far worse. And, as always, I am not the ultimate authority regarding any decision I make; anything I do can be appealed to one higher court - Jim Robinson, by whose direction I am here as moderator.
There are some things I will not do. I will not arbitrate theological disputes. I will not resolve questions of church polity. Nor will I render judgment on interpretations of Scripture. Those are all issues for legitimate debate, and I do not propose to take part as just another poster on this forum. Naturally, I have my own opinions on all these issues, but my opinions are my own and I will keep them to myself.
You should also know, I suppose, that I was selected as the moderator of the Religion Forum because no one else wanted to wade into the mess that this forum has become. All too often when abuse reports come into the moderators from the Religion Forum it is discovered that there are no clean hands in the dispute under complaint. More often than not removing the post complained about generates another abuse report asking "why was I punished when he said thus-and-so first". In many cases, removing all of the offending posts makes the thread unreadable. So, whatever you think of me now, or come to think of me in the next few weeks, I'm your last chance. After me comes the abyss.
And do yourself a favor; before you respond to this announcement remember the immortal advice of Jim Croce:
I'm not Jim, but I've got his ear.
One final word. I am not here 24/7. I actually have a life away from Free Republic; consequently your questions/complaints/comments may not be answered immediately. Be patient, they will be answered eventually. In the end, my goal is (our goal should be) that there will come the day when my presence here is unnoticed. That should be attainable if we all act like the Christian brothers and sisters we claim to be.
May God bless you all.
Actually I did understand the post just fine...One of the attractions of FR is that it has been "free" , now we are concerned with embarrassing the Republicans and conservatives . I wonder if Jesus would get a warning when he rebuked the Pharisees ?
We just need to remember nothing happens outside Gods will..so it this forum grows or is shut down we can praise God either way for being sovereign in all things..
Jesus tells us that there are those that were not given eyes to see...so He is often missed in the midst of what looks like a storm
Is that the same as the smoky back room :>))
Believers, through the Holy Spirit, also have spiritual discernment, which allows them to fulfill the following direct command of scripture:
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but TEST THE SPIRITS to see whether they are from God, because many FALSE PROPHETS have gone out into the world.
By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God;
and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world." (1John 4:1-3, emphasis mine)
If we did not have the capacity of spiritual discernment, God would never have commanded us to test the spirits (a reference to the spirit within those proclaiming a message, in the context of 1John: False prophets) or to defend the faith.
Speaking as someone who mostly lurks rather than posts in the Religion forum, I think I may be missing the point here as well. Respectfully, might I ask a few questions for the purpose of clarification of the new rules?
Those who refuse to learn how to discuss God and theology without the use of ad hominums, insults, name-calling and other unpleasant tactics won't be around long.
Can we assume to limit such only to other members actually posting, or does the restriction apply in general? For example:
The former president of the Southern Baptist Convention called Mohammed a "demon-possessed pedophile" (or some such language; I cannot recall the precise phrase). Would a posting that used that language be forbidden under the new rules, since Muslims would obviously find it offensive? Is historical anecdote (for example, the fact that Mohammed actually did have a 6 year-old wife) defense against such usage, or is such historical context irrelevant?
Similarly, it could be suggested that news article mentioning pedophile priests might be offensive to those who are members of those sects. Does that mean that such articles are now forbidden? If not, what about use of such biblically "extreme" words as "sodomite" relating to the recent Episcopal heresy? For that matter, is "heresy" too strong of a word? You mentioned (in the original post), for example, the attacks against "new-age Catholics" (or words to that effect). Do the new rules preclude those who might have traditional views of Catholic doctrine (i.e., a devout belief in the sanctity of life) from using the word "heretic" against those who tolerate or embrace such things as abortion, yet who still claim to be Catholic? If so, does the limitation only apply against actual members of FR, or does such restrictions against "name-calling" include a general prohibition (so that such language could not be applied to anyone at all, even the subject of some posted article)?
Finally, what about the posting of scripture? There are any number of bible verses which might be considered offensive or insulting (and even categorized as "hate speech" in some places). Can we always assume that posting scripture is acceptable, or should such text be avoided? And does such acceptability apply to non-canon texts or to the scripture of other religions (for example, posting from the Quran for no other purpose than to reveal the nature of the religion through such verses as "kill the infidel wherever you find him", etc.)?
In the effort of clarification I could probably ask quite a few more questions of a similar form, but I think the answers to the above would sufficiently elucidate the intent of what the new rules are intending to accomplish. My initial suspicion was that it was simply an attempt to stop the Arminian-Calvinist clashes and the Catholic bashing, but the response to post 60 (banning a tag line) led me to believe that the intent is to do something of much greater scope. If you can clarify what the actual objective is and what scope it covers, I would be appreciative.
Here's a hypothetical I think is pertinent.
Some people consider Wiccan to be a religion; even the U.S. Army makes allowance for it. What if a Wiccan fervently insists their religion is Christian?
What is the permissible response on Free Republic from an orthodox Christian, i.e. a Presbyterian, a Lutheran, a Roman Catholic?
Because it's understandable that most traditional/orthodox Christians would be appalled by that error and naturally want to refute it. I'd expect a Jew to challenge me if I said I was "a Jew who believed in the Trinity and Christ's resurrection."
Most democrats and Republicans do not fear for their mortal soul if ignorant musings are offered about politics in their presence.
But "Defending the Faith" has been a rallying cry to the death for the past 2,000 - 5,000 years. All jokes aside, it's no small matter to people of faith.
So? If a Wiccan says they're a Christian on this public forum, where lurkers and children and shut-ins and DU get all their information, is it okay to rebut that claim?
Partisanship, after all, is not a bad thing. William Wallace never actually yelled "Freedom!" as he lay dying.
He shouted "Scotland!"
I don't think a degree in theology is required for the mod to do his/her job.
All (s)he needs to do this job is the ability to recognize the difference between, "Jesus is the eternal Son" and "Jesus is the Eternal Son....You (Expletive Deleted) Piece of (Expletive Deleted)"
No racist, violent, or abusive posts. I could make a case for those being the same posting guidelines that Jesus would come out with.
Beyond that you hear a lot of opportunity for freedom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.