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

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.

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.

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.

"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)]

Or, if the commandments of our Lord Jesus are insufficient (paraphrasing Paul) speak the truth in love.

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:

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.

A bit of documentation from your leaders...

Statements by Mormon Leaders about Christian churches (made by many of the LDS Prophet-Presidents):

Joseph Smith stated that God told him: "they [other churches] were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt" (from Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith-History 1:19).
Joseph Smith continues: "for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible" (from Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith-History 1:12). "What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.270).
Questions put to Joseph Smith: "'Do you believe the Bible?' [Smith:]'If we do, we are the only people under heaven that does, for there are none of the religious sects of the day that do'. When asked 'Will everybody be damned, but Mormons'? [Smith replied] 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 119).
Brigham Young stated this repeatedly: "When the light came to me I saw that all the so-called Christian world was grovelling in darkness" (Journal of Discourses 5:73); "The Christian world, so-called, are heathens as to the knowledge of the salvation of God" (Journal of Discourses 8:171); "With a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called Christian world" (Journal of Discourses 8:199); "And who is there that acknowledges [God's] hand? ...You may wander east, west, north, and south, and you cannot find it in any church or government on the earth, except the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p.24); "Should you ask why we differ from other Christians, as they are called, it is simply because they are not Christians as the New Testament defines Christianity" (Journal of Discourses 10:230).
Orson Pratt proclaimed: "Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the 'whore of Babylon' whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt as to receive a holy ordinance of the Gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent" (The Seer, p. 255).
Pratt also said: "This great apostasy commenced about the close of the first century of the Christian era, and it has been waxing worse and worse from then until now" (Journal of Discourses, vol.18, p.44) and: "But as there has been no Christian Church on the earth for a great many centuries past, until the present century, the people have lost sight of the pattern that God has given according to which the Christian Church should be established, and they have denominated a great variety of people Christian Churches, because they profess to be ...But there has been a long apostasy, during which the nations have been cursed with apostate churches in great abundance" (Journal of Discourses, 18:172).
President John Taylor stated: "Christianity...is a perfect pack of nonsense...the devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p.167); "Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom." (Journal of Discourses, 10:127).
James Talmage said: "A self-suggesting interpretation of history indicates that there has been a great departure from the way of salvation as laid down by the Savior, a universal apostasy from the Church of Christ". (A Study of the Articles of Faith, p.182).
President Joseph Fielding Smith said: "Doctrines were corrupted, authority lost, and a false order of religion took the place of the gospel of Jesus Christ, just as it had been the case in former dispensations, and the people were left in spiritual darkness." (Doctrines of Salvation, p.266). "For hundreds of years the world was wrapped in a veil of spiritual darkness, until there was not one fundamental truth belonging to the place of salvation ...Joseph Smith declared that in the year 1820 the Lord revealed to him that all the 'Christian' churches were in error, teaching for commandments the doctrines of men" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 3, p.282).
More recent statements by apostle Bruce McConkie are also very clear: "Apostasy was universal...And this darkness still prevails except among those who have come to a knowledge of the restored gospel" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol 3, p.265); "Thus the signs of the times include the prevailing apostate darkness in the sects of Christendom and in the religious world in general" (The Millennial Messiah, p.403); "a perverted Christianity holds sway among the so-called Christians of apostate Christendom" (Mormon Doctrine, p.132); "virtually all the millions of apostate Christendom have abased themselves before the mythical throne of a mythical Christ whom they vainly suppose to be a spirit essence who is incorporeal uncreated, immaterial and three-in-one with the Father and Holy Spirit" (Mormon Doctrine, p.269); "Gnosticism is one of the great pagan philosophies which antedated Christ and the Christian Era and which was later commingled with pure Christianity to form the apostate religion that has prevailed in the world since the early days of that era." (Mormon Doctrine, p.316).
President George Q. Cannon said: "After the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, there were only two churches upon the earth. They were known respectively as the Church of the Lamb of God and Babylon. The various organizations which are called churches throughout Christendom, though differing in their creeds and organizations, have one common origin. They all belong to Babylon" (Gospel Truth, p.324).
President Wilford Woodruff stated: "the Gospel of modern Christendom shuts up the Lord, and stops all communication with Him. I want nothing to do with such a Gospel, I would rather prefer the Gospel of the dark ages, so called" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p.196).

So, just to clarify your post #846 one last time. I made four observations from your post #846, and here is how you've corrected my understanding....

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?

Your #916: I take that as a "yes."

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.

~~James~~ Peter...

Funny, but it doesn't really work for linguistic reasons. Let me rephrase:

Nothing regarding the Council of Jerusalem runs counter to Peter's primacy.

Peter spoke first (Acts 15:7) and only Peter invokes God on the specific matter (Acts 15:10a). As a result the doctrinal dispute is silenced (Acts 15:12a).

When James speaks, it is to acknowledge what Peter has said (Acts 15:14a) and that Peter has special knowledge from God. (Acts 15:14b) Is James going to disagree with Peter? Not on a bet.

Note also James use of Scripture in Acts 15:15-17. Some have tried to use this as a proof text for sola Scriptura. But James has actually quoted two authorities here: Peter and Scripture. And it is Peter that is given primacy of place. Peter is not right because he agrees with Scripture, but a particular Scripture applies because it agrees with what Peter has said ("with this the words of the prophets agree").

James pronouncement in Acts 15:19 is first to agree with Peter's of Acts 15:10-11. (Did James have any other choice? As we can see from Acts 15:14b, of course not.) And then James suggests a pastoral implementation of Peter's doctrinal statement.

Peter, as head, makes a doctrinal determination. James, as regional administrator, puts forward a pastoral implementation suggestion.

Your #924: 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.

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?

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.