GOOD NEWS - BAD NEWS (Don't Say You Weren't Warned)

Self | 1-22-04 | Sidebar Moderator

[A.J.Armitage]

(I do not flag AJ because I do not want to seem to be inviting more of the same.)

You know perfectly well that your rude, arrogant practice of insulting people while refusing to ping them causes flame wars to continue even more so.

[A.J.Armitage]

You seem to be implying that the parable teaches against excommunications in general. Surely you can't mean that, can you? The Bible also contains Titus 3:10.

[Barnacle]

Or the Apostles.I've always wondered who was the counter balance on the Bell.

Judas on the left and ...

"Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth *will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

Peter on the right?

[White Mountain]

Post #500: But don't just whine.

The poster has made many, many baseless claims about whining. It is his play on my screen name, and it is so often repeated that people probably think there is some basis to it.

There are so many little ways to get something in under the radar, to work a false accusation into nearly every post.

There is just no way anyone, outside the circle of exclusion this poster draws, can hope to have a proper discussion with such a poster, until the poster mends his ways.

[CARepubGal]

I really have to wonder if the goal of White Mountain is apparently to incite and inflame, not to discuss with the intention of helping folks outside the Mormon faith gain a better understanding of what the Mormon belief is and why. Instead of trying to dialog about issues and simply ignoring things that may irritate him, he prefers to incite and create flame wars from simple disagreements by posting to "All" and posting truly nasty statements about a poster (making it clear who he posts about without a courtesy ping) as we see even here on this reconciliatory thread.

I find that unfortunate and hope that he could act a little more kindly and perhaps follow the counsel of his prophets on playing nicely with those of us who do not share his beliefs. Perhaps then, the flame wars would cease. I would sure hope so as would most herein

[White Mountain]

Post #540: Speaking on behalf of the aggressive lobby, we would like the gentle ones to show a little backbone, and grow a thicker hide.

The poster's logic here is that the "aggressive lobby" gets to dish it out, but the gentle ones must be nice and take it without "whining".

That kind of logic doesn't fly with me.

[AlguyA]

'You seem to be implying that the parable teaches against excommunications in general. Surely you can't mean that, can you? The Bible also contains Titus 3:10.'

Actually, I implied no such thing. First, Scripture clearly indicates tares ARE NOT wheat. They just happen to hanging out in the same field, together, till the end of time. Without doubt, the Church teaches that those who support abortion, for example, by encouraging abortion have, in essence, already excommunicated themselves. Hence, they're tares. Just because they show up in Mass on Sunday doesn't perforce mean they are in communion with the Church.

Now, in certain instances, it may be necessary to avoid those who (usually because of their public status) would bring harm to the Body of Christ through a more public excommunication -just as is recommended in Titus 3:10.

Perhaps you could convince me otherwise if you would offer your own interpretation of the parable of the wheat and the tares.

[restornu]

DNA tests which show that native American Indians are descended from Chinese/Asiatic ancestors and not of semitic ones

Glad to read this there were also descends in Jerusalem of Chinese/Asiatic ancestors as well as Egyptian! Jerusalem was cosmopolitan!

[White Mountain]

Now come the false accusations that I start the flame wars. It's endless!

AJ's #541: You know perfectly well that your rude, arrogant practice of insulting people while refusing to ping them causes flame wars to continue even more so.

CalGal's #545: I really have to wonder if the goal of White Mountain is apparently to incite and inflame

I must compliment CalGal, however, on the very polite way in which she has been posting on this thread. Yet, she still works in the accusations: incite, inflame, nasty.

I think I have posted enough to show how they operate, and how I have so little hope that they will cooperate with the moderator's wishes until a fundamental life-changing conversion experience comes their way.

It really is sad.

[CARepubGal]

Sorry for attempting to engage the poster in 549 as if talking to an adult. He/she is on ignore from now on. :-(

[A.J.Armitage]

Now, in certain instances, it may be necessary to avoid those who (usually because of their public status) would bring harm to the Body of Christ through a more public excommunication -just as is recommended in Titus 3:10.

And that's what hasn't happened.

[AlguyA]

I'll check in tommorrow for your response. I really should get to bed. My 16 year-old son is due in early in the morning on a bus returning from the March for Life in D.C.

Nite all,

Pax Christi,

Alan.

[AlguyA]

(sigh) And just when I was going to bed.

What do you mean "it hasn't happened?"

And BTW, where's your interpretation of the parable of the 'wheat and the tares?'

[xJones]

People need to get the responses of our scholars and link to them as well, so people can compare and make up their minds. And then of course people need to behave, so the threads stay there.

Please do bring on the works of your scholars. And as in any seminar, a scholarly review follows, unless it's a one-sided polemic because it can't bear any inspection.

Threads stay there? Subtlety was never your strong suit but the abuse button is, so stick to that.

[A.J.Armitage]

If you can't muster the basic civility to address those you're attacking, that's inciting and inflaming.

[P-Marlowe]

Now come the false accusations that I start the flame wars. It's endless!

I think you are (possibly unconsciously) baiting the hook, WM. Your point about the manner in which the LDS doctrines are often ridiculed is well taken. I believe it is possible to discuss LDS doctrine, Calvinism, Arminianism, Catholicism and every other ism, with a modicrum of respect. That being said, it seems that your contribution to this thread could be objectively seen overall as an attempt to bait some of your past antagonists into flinging a little mud your way in order to prove your points to the sidebar moderator.

Your little stab about other people needing a "life changing experience" or Ca Gal working in "accusations, incite inflame and nasty" are comments which are obviously intended to inflame and bring about the worst in the reader.

When they respond in kind will you turn the other cheek or push the abuse button?

[restornu]

In my view, too many people don't reconsider

I too think the "edit" will be welcome tool!

You are right we have lost the civil art in how to communicate our thoughts with out offending or maybe start out trying to converse and than get caught up in the tit for tat!

I am also hoping for others who want to expand their thoughts will be able to do without some holding other ideas hostage because they disagree!

I enjoyed some of the concepts Alamo-Girl and like wanted to explore.

Many of us are in different places in our understanding and should some feel P O because they don't like or disagree the place that is being discussed, would it not be best for them to find a thead that they do find interesting, with out bring their judgement and contempt upon heads of others views!

[saradippity]

Well,I would defintely say yes to Peter.

[xJones]

Until I became the moderator of the Religion Forum I paid no attention to what was going on over here.

Poor mod. This is a tough time to get Religion. :)

[rwfromkansas]

I am sure some take offense at the word (I guess being in college means I basically am not offended by anything except extreme contortions of the F word), but I think we should shoot for as high a standard as possible for actually punishing harsh language, meaning it would only be be removed or result in a warning if a clear violation of forum rules, not just being a bit of a jerk with rough language. That may be your thinking, I don't know.