Posted on 04/23/2006 8:01:06 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
Hello everyone. Pleased to meet you. I am your Religion Moderator.
I have been asked by several posters to let you know any special guidelines which apply to posting in the Religion Forum on Free Republic. Here goes…
First, you should know that all moderators have authority on the Religion Forum and we are individuals and therefore what is tolerable to one may not be tolerable to another. However, I have general responsibility for this particular forum and spend most of my time reading your posts and moderating the conversations. And I do hold Religion Forum posts to a higher standard.
The previous Religion Moderator is still with us and other moderators who have served as Religion Moderator may also appear on thread with this handle. In other words, you cannot be sure that I am the person who posted with the handle. However, most of the time, it will be me simply because I’m reading all of your posts.
A few guidelines:
Threads which are devotional or church-like in nature (such as daily mass readings) will be protected from challenges to doctrine, etc. Reported challenges will be pulled. The titles of the threads should be clearly designated so other posters and the moderators will know.
Threads which are not clearly designated are open to challenges, like a public square.
Posters should remember they are not “preaching to the choir” on open threads – and take care to be respectful, clear and concise in their arguments. Passers-by will value your demeanor as much – or more than – the actual substance of your post.
This is very important: meet the offensive challenge to your doctrine on the open thread, do not mash the abuse button. I will not remove a challenge simply because it is offensive to your beliefs. If you cannot defend your own confession, then you are better off avoiding the open threads and leaving the reply to someone else of your confession.
Always argue the issues – theology, philosophy, history, etc. – and never make it personal.
If I see the conversation turn personal, I will intervene by pulling posts and/or posting a warning. If the misbehavior continues, posters may find themselves having to log back in – or they may be given a time-out to cool down.
In the extreme, the threads may be banished to the smoky backroom, locked or pulled. And a hot-headed or defiant poster may be banned.
Banned posters who try to sneak back onto the forum using a different handle are nuked. Trolls are nuked.
I have no tolerance for potty language simply because it inflames other posters and results in unnecessary abuse reports that moderators then have to process. It is a waste of everyone’s time and doesn’t help the poster’s image either.
Whenever I see a profanity – or a reference or acronym for a profanity – I will remove the post. If your post was pulled and you remember using such a word, just rephrase and repost and everything will be fine.
As with all threads on the forum – hatred and any suggestion of racism or violence will be pulled. Posts which are just plain tacky may also be pulled.
Calling an author a liar is permitted – calling another poster a liar is not.
Attributing motive to an author is permitted – reading the mind of another poster is not.
Poking fun at a confession is permitted, but be careful when poking fun at another poster. If he doesn’t think it is funny, I won’t either.
Don’t worry, you’ll get the hang of it. It all boils down to being respectful – phrase your challenges as if you were the recipient, i.e. think Golden Rule.
I don't belong to a denomination. I belong to the church of Christ. Jesus prayed for unity among Christians, and denominations are directly in contrast to that unity.
You must be up setting someone
I see you have exers too!
http://ex-churchofchrist.com/
Welcome to the club!:)
Since you have said nothing about it, do you agree with me that the teaching of Joseph Smith about God is different from the teaching of the Bible?
You and I are coming from different places!
I know that I have the fullnest of the gosple to be saved, and other things that are said will in due time prove themselves!
We do not have the fulness of the word in the OT & NT for only a fraction of the manuscriptes are included!
There might be many reason maybe they did not have original copies etc.
Even at the time of Moses he had to give us a digest of in the first 5 books of a 5000 years history!
Between Malakhi and Matthew we have no record what went on in the absents!
So you being trouble because the LDS is talking about more word of the Lord does not trouble me!
If one has not really learn how to discern their interaction with the Holy Spirit than they really have no witness and are going on rationalization!
Many have never read the Book of Mormon with an open heart and mind, nor prayed on their knees to the Heavenly Father in the name of Jesus Christ to know if it is of the Lord!
Sorry I digress!
I am thank ful I did pray on my knees before I was going to throw the book out, that was 24 years ago...
In all due respect!
I have asked a simple question, and your failure to answer it speaks volumes. I hope and pray you will spend time studying the Word of God, not some man's additions to it.
What is the question that you are accusing me of you are not the only one I am conversing with and you seem to be stress!
If this the question I did answer it!
No!
Here is what I said a few posts back. Please respond to this.
Jesus was not an exalted man in the manner that Joseph Smith and the Mormon church teach that God is an exalted man. Jesus is, and always was, God. He took on the form of man, and was at the same time still God. The teachings of Joseph Smith teach that God was once a mortal man, with no divinity, before He became a god. These are totally different.
I answered you in #244 to the best of my human understanding!
1- I know that I have the fullnest of the gosple to be saved,
2-and other things that are said will in due time prove themselves!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1619967/posts?page=244#244
Galatians 1:8
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. (ESV)
You write that the priority of the religion clauses have no special significance, PH. The original one and two proposed amendments -- if indeed that was their intended order -- have no business in a Bill of Rights anyway. As you know, a bill of rights pertains to the rights of the people of the several states, not to the rights or interests of the federal government. The reason there was a Bill of Rights in the first place was because Virginia sought special additional assurances regarding the rights of the states and the people, or they threatened to not ratify the proposed federal constitution. George Mason and your own namesake make this crystal clear. Other states, having ratified, wanted such further assurances as well.
As the Preamble of the Bill of Rights states,
The Conventions of a number of States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction of abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution....The point is, the issues of congressional apportionment and pay raises were not the burning issues for the states; and they had no place on a BoR anyway, every last one of whose provisions speaks to the rights of the people. And the BoR that was adopted placed first the right of the people to freedom of religion, or liberty of conscience. Once that was secured, then a context for freedom of speech, and the rest of the protected rights of the people set forth in the Articles included as the BoR, could rationally follow.
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. (ESV)
***
oh please look in your own backyard!
You are have accusers in your own flown flock!
Thank you for your excellent, insightful post! I would like to add that the Declaration of Independence also underscores the importance of liberty to the framers.
Absolutely, Alamo-Girl. It is the foundation of everything else the Founding generation accomplished.
I guess we're all in agreement on that.
My best guess is, should push come to shove, we're all on the same page, Patrick dear. We just like to quibble a lot about details in the meanwhile.
Yeah, like the meaning of Amendments -1 and -2. (Just teasing, BB.)
S'Okay, dear Patrick. Feel free to tease me anytime. :^) I promise to tease you back. You're a really good friend, so I feel I might take that liberty.
Now that we are all in agreement on an open thread, should I mark the calendar? LOLOL!
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.