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.
Statements by Mormon Leaders about Christian churches (made by many of the LDS Prophet-Presidents):
|
And... the Bible does lead to error?
You've misunderstood my argument, and for that I apologize. It is not about people leaving, but about people misunderstanding.
Your clarification doesn't help your argument. Surely you must hold that Luther misunderstood, right? Well then.
The first observation was that you listed three groups (moderators, "all of us", and "those who post this way"). You have corrected me, saying the second group is inclusive of the third. I have no problem with this.
The second observation was that you spoke as if you had authority to represent the "moderator" group and the "all of us" group. You corrected me by saying I posted "Nonsense", that you can "quote the moderators like anyone else". Thus, I conclude you are not speaking as a man who wields any authority to speak for any of the groups, but only for yourself.
The third observation went unanswered. I asked if the (sub)group "those who post this way" was made up of those whom you have previously refused to post directly to - until our new Sidebar Moderator advised you to do so. That group would include myself and drstevej, among others. You did not address this observation of mine. I would like to know if my assumption is correct, especially since it concerns me directly - and if not, please state as such, especially in light of the final observation.
The fourth and final observation was that you were directly accusing this third (sub)group, "those who post this way", of being incapable of obeying the Sidebar Moderator's new rules for the forum, without their first repenting of past behavior (in my earlier post, I said "becoming Mormons".) You did not answer this question, either.
Now, your prior calls for "repentance" have always been made in the context of being pro-Mormon, praying about the Book of Mormon to receive a testimony of it's truthfulness, and becoming an obedient Mormon.
I read in this post of yours, made earlier on this very thread, that you accuse 19th and 21st century "anti-Mormons" of using "poisoned bait", of being "demagogues", of being filled with "prejudice", and of holding "anti-LDS bashfests", that you would even lecture the Sidebar Moderator himself - telling him that if he does not heed your words, Free Republic itself will turn into an instrument of persecution against the LDS Church.. And I thus assume that any future calls from you for "repentance" are actually further demands you would make, on the posters and the moderators, to silence any critical examinations of the claims of the LDS church as well.
Hence, my observation regarding this call to repentance, that you are making a direct accusation that if "those who post this way" do not repent, i.e. become Mormons or pro-Mormon, that the "same things will flow" and the Mod's New Testament-based rules will not be followed by that group, because they did not become Mormons or pro-Mormon.
But I could be wrong. Again, these are only my observations, based upon your recent posts. And you chose to avoid confirming or denying those conclusions in your last post to me. Shall I assume then, that I am right about your intended meaning, White Mountain?
And these experiences, you neglected to mention, involve getting marks toward banning. Which is why I'd much rather just be told up front.
The it be noted that White Mountain again insists that free speech he happens to dislike is persecution.
I wouldn't. Witnessing, planting seeds for others to harvest, is one thing, but anything beyond that is like trying to help a new member of a congregation get acclimated exclusively by phone. You have to be there in person.
>> Question: Do you believe your leaders or not? If you do, are you not guilty of the very thing you accuse others? [excluding from Christianity and salvation]
To Calvinists, those they presume to exclude are in their opinion not saved and going to burn in hell forever without being able to do anything about it unless it happens that God decided before the foundation of the world to regenerate them at some point. (Help me wordsmith that if it isn't close enough.)
We don't look at it that way. All who repent and turn to Christ in faith will find mercy. Those whom God decides did not have a first chance in this life to hear the Gospel will have a first chance in the Spirit World (as it was for antediluvians in 1 Peter 3:17-20, see also 1 Peter 4:6).
I just posted on another thread where we are being criticized by some of our Jewish friends regarding pre-1995 baptisms for the dead (baptisms by proxy for and in behalf of those who have passed on, effective only if they accept it) of Jewish Holocaust victims who have no LDS descendants.
You can criticize baptism for the dead (see 1 Corinthians 15:29), but you can't at the same time say we are not inclusive.
"The Word of God does not suffice as a regula fidei (rule of faith)... [an] authority is also needed to decide on questions of doctrine"
- Friedrich Paulsen, esteemed Protestant historian, quoted from his History of German Education, 4:485
When you make a post advocating the extermination of an entire Christian denomination, trust me, I'll presume you really mean it.
Regarding #905
"Should you ever make a post" would be clearer.
No one expects such a post from you, I am sure.
think about what you've just said here -
"should you ever" - allows that I might advocate extermination
You really really ought to rephrase that
# 1 It is again inflammatory
#2 It continues after I indicated I was done with you
This is a misunderstanding I am glad to know about.
I have talked about repentance, praying about things, and obedience to the laws and ordinances of Christ's Gospel, but not tying them together, as you have, to mean that repentance would only be possible if you became a faithful Latter-Day Saint.
Repentance, to many Protestants, seems to be dropping "incorrect" doctrines and adopting "correct" ones. For example, I have often been told here to repent of my "Mormonism".
But repentance is forsaking unChristlike behavior, turning to Christ, and learning Christlike behavior from Him, studying the Scriptures and living accordingly, doing what He says.
So when a poster has not been practicing Sidebar Moderator's New Testament rules (which are the Lord's rules), but then puts them into practice and posts accordingly, with mutual respect and treating others as he would be treated, that is repentance.
When endeavoring to improve our daily walk, we often work on our faults one at a time. We improve in one area, then work on another. That is repentance, getting better and better at doing what Jesus would have us do, one day at a time.
The Holy Spirit helps us do this, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little, giving us more light as we live the light we have, growing brighter until the perfect day.
If that is now cleared up, where does that leave us?
I thought I saw a way to make it better and thought I should try to do so without reopening anything. Since that didn't seem to help, reword it in your own mind in a way that makes it better without reopening anything.
What the Bible teaches. You say the Bible teaches Petrine primacy (and somehow or other implies its continuation in the Papacy), Luther denied Papal authority. So if you're right, he misunderstood the truth. After taking holy orders and teaching Catholic theology, no less.
thats a cop out - be responsible for your own words - your own word smith sloppiness has offended - either intentionally or not and you tell me to fix it
priceless
See the paragraph before and the one after the one you quoted, and indeed the case I make in the entire post.
Should I have gone on longer to describe adequately the difference between free speech I happen to dislike and persecution?
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.