[greyfoxx39]

A relevant example considering the ebb and flow of this Religion Forum would be an "LDS/Catholic Caucus" to discuss Trinitarianism.

The LDS do not believe in the Trinity, the Catholics do - but both LDS and Catholic beliefs are subjected to intense challenges and ridicule on "open" town square format RF threads.

The LDS and Catholic posters may have a real interest in debating the doctrine of the Trinity without the interference of the "antis."

It is a valid caucus provided the article and replies do not contrast beliefs with the non-members, e.g. Protestants.

125 posted on Friday, July 23, 2010 7:47:40 AM by Religion Moderator

Trinitarian ping

Gee...that sounds very much like the "anti-Trinitarians" may indulge their disbelief of the Trinity under the caucus label with no allowance made for the "Pro-Trinitarians" to object.

In that case, the "antis" should be able to set up their OWN caucus to debate the "anti-Trinitarian" beliefs, do I have that right?

Actually, WE don't need that little "affirmative action" perk...but it sounds very familiar.

It will be interesting to see how It is a valid caucus provided the article and replies do not contrast beliefs with the non-members, e.g. Protestants. works.

[svcw]

How do you reply without contrast and/or comparisons? What is the point of a discussion otherwise?

[Cronos]

well, it’s tricky, but you can talk about the TRinity without saying “xyz believes in this and are bloody wrong”! but seriously, i think the non-Trinitarians need a place to decide whether they beleive Jesus is God or not, and the nature of the Godhead according to themselves.

[Quix]

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE

ALL FREEPERS

EN MASSE

SUPPORT THE RM AND THE CAUCUS DESIGNATIONS AS DEFINED AND AS MANAGED.

NO SYSTEM OF MAN WILL EVER BE PERFECT.

This Rel Forum managed under this RM is as close to humanly perfect as I think it’s realistic to expect.

ENOUGH OF THIS CARPING ALREADY YET! SHEESH.

And JimRob, imho, and observations has enormous respect for the RM—OBVIOUSLY CLEAR from his public statements about the RM. HE IS NOT LIKELY AT ALL to trouble the RM and I find pinging Jim on such things to be almost harrassment of an already plenty beleagured Jim as well as insulting to the RM.

Sheesh.

The caucus threads have helped bring a MUCH NEEDED level of sanity to the Rel Forum. We do NOT want to go backwards! Sheesh!

Enough already yet with the carping about the caucus threads and their criteria and management. Grow up. Get a life. Go to Sam’s Club and buy several cases of CLUES or PERSPECTIVE.

Sheesh. GRRRR

[Religion Moderator]

Gee...that sounds very much like the "anti-Trinitarians" may indulge their disbelief of the Trinity under the caucus label with no allowance made for the "Pro-Trinitarians" to object.

In the example, the LDS/Catholic Caucus would discuss Trinitarian belief - one side pro and one side con. Non-members would not allowed to disrupt the caucus simply because they share a belief whether for or against.

Instead, the non-members might post a similar article as "open" - or wait at least four hours and post the same article as "open."