God Warning Us Through Amos

[Ping-Pong]

Then, when you post it, post *only* the straight quote from the Bible and *no commentary* in the initial posting. Leave your own commentary for the “follow-up” reply that you do, right after the initial post. Then the thread *is* an “article” straight from the Bible, and then your own comments “follow it up” in the first reply that you make yourself...

Anyway, some more ideas...

I think that one's a winner! :)

[freedom9]

ping-pong,

These guys aren’t mods.

You can write whatever the hell you want as long as it isn’t too offensive.

If they don’t like the way you post or what you have to say, tough.

They don’t have to click on the thread or read it.

The religion forum is where people go to discuss religion and share viewpoints.

The material does not have to come from an article.

[gizmotoby]

To Joe Smoe
To be perfectly frank; Your comment about this being a vanity post is WAY off base. If you want to understand the definition of vanity: read Ecclesiastes!!

[ReformedBeckite]

You can write whatever the hell you want as long as it isn’t too offensive. If they don’t like the way you post or what you have to say, tough.

I will have to disagree with you on that, but I won't get into a discussion or argument with you on that, other then to say I've been lurking and posting on the Religious forum for a long time and have seen a lot of people get kick off of it for that type of attitude.

[ReformedBeckite]

I didn't know it but it looks like you don't have to list a source. I've only did a posting a few times on FreeRepublic and that was years ago. So I click on Post and low and behold you don't have to list a source. I don't know if they changed the rules or if they have always been that way, either way most freepers post a source, and I think that is a good rule of thumb. My apologies for the confusion.

[freedom9]

"One complaint about your method of posting. Most if not all posting from freepers of articles are from an article. It appears to me that your posting are from your thoughts which to me is in the classification of a vanity posting which in my opinion should not be allowed on this forum.

This is an open forum.

A forum to discuss individual thoughts and perspectives regarding religion.

Religion can be a very contentious subject due to opposing beliefs and offense is often given and taken.

I been viewing this forum for a long time too.

I was here when the need was realized to take religious bickering out and away from the main forum.

He has all the right he needs to state and relate his personal viewpoints.

You can complain about his method of posting and I can complain about your prissiness.

[Star Traveler]

You said — I didn’t know it but it looks like you don’t have to list a source.

—

Well, you’re right in that you don’t have to list a source link (technically) on the posting form, in order to get the posting form to work. But, when no source link is included — it’s usually means one of two things... (1) someone accidently forgot/skipped it and usually posts it a bit later, or (2) it’s a “vanity” which never does have a source link.

And then, if it’s a “vanity” one usually posts “VANITY” in the title line (usually at the end in brackets).

I just recently tried to get the “source link” from a poster of an “article” — and it took about a half-a-day to *finally* figure out and get the information from the poster that it was *not* an article but was a “vanity” instead. Some posters are simply and absolutely *clueless*...

In regards to this particular item (quoting Scriptures), we’re talking about different versions (i.e., different translations and copyrights) and the wording can be *off* on some versions — so *even quoting the Bible* (for an “article posting” that is...) — I would want to have a “source link” back to the version that was being used (and it’s easily available on the web for a whole range of translations).

For example here’s a particular passage, the right number of verses and the translation that it’s from...

http://bible.crosswalk.com/OnlineStudyBible/bible.cgi?word=Romans+1%3A16-31&section=0&version=nkj&new=1&oq=&NavBook=ro&NavGo=1&NavCurrentChapter=1

Or, if one doesn’t want a “long link” just use http://tinyurl.com/ and you can make it, the following, instead...

http://tinyurl.com/cemclx

All of this is done to make it easy for people to reference these things and look up what they want to see, quickly and without going through a lot of trouble. The readers don’t know what the poster did and where the info came from, so the poster should provide it all, easily, for the reader...

[ReformedBeckite]

I’m gonna to have to agree with you on the posting of scripture that the translation be mentioned. But won’t get to upset if they didn’t.

[Diego1618]

Maybe you should quote the source as "The Holy Scriptures of God??????"

After all......much of your posts are just that.....scripture!

[Ping-Pong]

Maybe you should quote the source as "The Holy Scriptures of God??????" After all......much of your posts are just that.....scripture!

I thought that when they first commented but once I got past the having to quote from someone's article before posting...after all God's Book is God's Book, I had to agree. I think listing the scriptures as being from the King James will help if others wish to discuss it. And, I don't mind adding "vanity." :) I just hope others will consider what is written and add their thoughts.

BTW...I read your final installment on the Sabbath issue. The only thing you forgot was to end it with....and that's all folks! It pretty much summed it up.