Posted on 06/22/2012 8:48:35 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
It is within the bounds of open Religion Forum town square style debate for a Freeper to express his hatred of a belief. But such posts are never allowed on RF threads labeled prayer devotional caucus or ecumenical.
It is never within the bounds on the Religion Forum for a Freeper to express his hatred of people who hold a particular belief when any Freeper is part of the belief group.
For example:
It is ok to express hatred towards CatholicISM on open Religion Forum threads. It is never ok to express hatred towards Catholics because some Freepers are Catholic.
It is ok to express hatred towards ProtestantISM on open Religion Forum threads. It is never ok to express hatred towards Protestants because some Freepers are Protestant.
It is ok to express hatred towards SatanISM and Satanists both because no Freeper is Satanist.
Some political posters are now venturing onto the Religion Forum probably because Romneys beliefs are at issue in this election.
If you do not wish to see RF posts, do NOT use the "everything" option on the Free Republic browse option list. Instead, browse by "News/Activism." When you log back in, the browse will reset to "everything" - so be sure to set it back to "News/Activism."
Finally, whereas posters may argue vigorously for and against beliefs on open Religion Forum threads it is never tolerable to use ad hominems in religious debate because they invariably lead to flame wars when the subject is ones deeply held religious beliefs.
For something to be "making it personal" it must be speaking to another Freeper, personally.
"Protestants are heretics" is not making it personal. "You are a heretic" is making it personal. "Catholics worship Mary" is not making it personal. "You worship Mary" is making it personal. "Mormons worship many gods" is not making it personal. "You worship many gods" is making it personal.
However, when a poster paints with a brush that accuses an entire religion of criminal behavior - his post will be pulled as flame bait. For example, posts that say "Protestants kill babies" or "Catholics molest children" or "Mormons kill non-Mormons" will be pulled. However, if the post is specific about a non-Freeper, I will not pull it. For example "Rev. Doe says abortion and infanticide are not sin" or "Father Doe was convicted for molesting those kids" or "Mormons killed non-Mormons at Mountain Meadows" would not be pulled.
Statements formed as questions are rarely "making it personal."
"Are you a heretic" is not making it personal. "You are a heretic" is making it personal.
Forms of "making it personal" include mind reading, attributing motive, accusing another Freeper of telling a lie (because it attributes motive, the intent to deceive) - making the thread "about" individual Freeper(s), following a Freeper from thread to thread and badgering a Freeper over-and-again with the same question.
When in doubt, avoid the use of the pronoun "you" and Freeper's names - or put yourself in the other guy's shoes.
Despite all these efforts to eliminate ad hominems, there is nothing I can do to keep you from "taking it personally."
If you keep getting your feelings hurt because other posters ridicule or disapprove or hate what you hold dear, then you are too thin-skinned to be involved in open RF debate. You should IGNORE open RF threads altogether and instead post to RF threads labeled prayer devotional caucus or ecumenical.
BipolarBob - ping to post 199 where you were being discussed without the courtesy of a courtesy ping.
BB’s comment was that it isn’t important to be 100% correct in one’s doctrine. He said that in posts 148 & 206.
You can be 100% correct in doctrine and theology and have a heart of stone and be disobedient to what God wants of you.
There ARE some basics that need to be correct. Teaching a Jesus who is not the one of the Bible, is one of them. Not any old Jesus can save, it MUST be the one of the Bible. And salvation is by faith in the finished work of Christ on the cross, but much of the doctrinal stuff is not as important as living the life God wants you to and loving God with your whole heart and mind and soul and strength, and loving your neighbor as yourself.
There is a difference between saying that doctrine doesn’t matter and saying that being 100% correct on your doctrine doesn’t really matter.
The difference between righteous anger and rabid anger.
So THAT's why we don't get along!
I hardly ever hear that the LAW almost REQUIRED some of those described to pass them by.
Not if you're a MORMON and you MURDER someone.
Then only YOUR blood being shed will get you into heaven.
(That's why UTAH has a FIRING SQUAD for an execution of a murderer.)
But you did.
Go with GOD?
But still; anger...
Not sure who you mean by “we”, but I try to stay away from the personal no matter my private thoughts.
WE are the folks who tend to discuss politics and/or religion.
Thank you. You are the only one who “gets it”. Whether that is intentional on their part or not, I do not know.
One wonders if your own goofy insistence that doctrine is not important is for real.
For, after all, God so loved the world that He sent His son, Jesus, that whomsoever believes in Him might not perish but instead have eternal life - but if doctrine was so unimportant that it really doesn’t matter what doctrines are preached to us and what doctrines we live by, then we could just believe in Gaia or Baal and God’s love and Jesus sacrifice would still cover us.
Your orignal point was drivel, and yet you have doubled down on it.
God invites us to believe in His truth - and the content of that DOES matter, which is why He gives us His Word and a Church to preserve and pass on that Word.
For many, it is more comfortable to pretend doctrine does not matter, because then they are free to ignore doctrines that are inconvenient or difficult. It is sinister to encourage such an attitude by downplaying doctrine as you have done.
Your point is totally different than the point orignally made by BB.
BB stated (as pointed out by others already) that doctrine does not matter.
I have rightly noted BB’s gross error.
You have charitably reimagined BB’s point by re-writing it so that it has little in common with his original point.
That is kind of you, but BB is a big boy and should FReep for himself. He could easily retract his error and note that he oversimplified things. Dumbing Jesus down does not bring anyone salvation.
And I expect BB can tune in without me adding his name to the address box.
MM,
Didn’t anyone ever tell that it is discourteous to highlight what you find to be the discourtesy of another? (I am right now being discourteous to you)
If someone forgets to ping somebody, then ping them and leave it at that. You don’t need to get knickertwisted and pant and hiss about how terrible it was that somebody forgot to include someone else. You can mothball the high dudgeon.
Thanks.
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.