civic
Well-known member
You have been online on other forums for quite a while. In you honest opinion how do you think we are doing ? Thanks !
Exposing Unacceptable Tactics
- Thread starter Mod2
- Start date
Wrangler
Well-known member
Thank you for the question. Honestly, I had not thought about it.
My preliminary thought is pretty good.
Let's face it. People who are online Christian forums are passionate about the subject. It's doubtful one could earnestly claim that although they post 10x/day, they are only casual on the subject matter. LOL Once we accept that iron sharpens iron, and we need to tolerate each other, a mature view is to be fairly tolerant of what the OP calls unacceptable tactics.
If I were given the title of Grand Inquisitor or Super Moderator, with all the powers that go along with it, what would I do with those who invoke such unacceptable tactics? What I do now. These are the very people who need to grow in Christ. And they are more likely to grow in fellowship with other Christians. Amen?
Having said that, @APAK made a comment that is worth mentioning. The unacceptable tactics do get old. And I believe one unacceptable tactic is always wanting the last word - especially with (or against) the person who started the thread. If you make a point a few times in a thread and it is not accepted, it probably won't be with more iterations. Our goal should be to bring glory to God, not self-aggrandizement.
Hope this helps!
Azriel
Well-known member
Sounds good to me, I'll give it a shot. Especially that last word part.Thank you for the question. Honestly, I had not thought about it.
My preliminary thought is pretty good.
Let's face it. People who are online Christian forums are passionate about the subject. It's doubtful one could earnestly claim that although they post 10x/day, they are only casual on the subject matter. LOL Once we accept that iron sharpens iron, and we need to tolerate each other, a mature view is to be fairly tolerant of what the OP calls unacceptable tactics.
If I were given the title of Grand Inquisitor or Super Moderator, with all the powers that go along with it, what would I do with those who invoke such unacceptable tactics? What I do now. These are the very people who need to grow in Christ. And they are more likely to grow in fellowship with other Christians. Amen?
Having said that, @APAK made a comment that is worth mentioning. The unacceptable tactics do get old. And I believe one unacceptable tactic is always wanting the last word - especially with (or against) the person who started the thread. If you make a point a few times in a thread and it is not accepted, it probably won't be with more iterations. Our goal should be to bring glory to God, not self-aggrandizement.
Hope this helps!
DavidTree
Well-known member
Always know that there will be discomfort when dealing with the variety of doctrines that exist.
People take personally the doctrines they believe so when a doctrine is challenged(is this a bad word?) the individual may take the challenge as an attack against them personally.
Discomfort at times = acceptable
False accusations/name calling/slander = unacceptable
Thus we have been given the commandment: "You shall not bear false witness".
DavidTree
Well-known member
Well it is 'trick or treat' time of the year!
And NO, i a not advocating for Halloween.
But i will accept a good clean laugh.
Azriel
Well-known member
Well said and welcome to the Forum. I'm sure you're going to have a lot more outstanding input.
Azriel
Well-known member
Laughing is good for you. It's in the Bible.
A joyful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones. Proverbs 17:22
DavidTree
Well-known member
Just noticed your reply - Thank You for the encouragement
Johann
Well-known member
Glad to hear you love the Scriptures.
Johann
Well-known member
I'm learning to be more forgiving and rather concede points.I've found that people who are consistently rude act like it's no big deal. That you're being overly sensitive. Or that you're so far out in the left field they have to be rude in order to get your attention. And the list goes on. But is it true?
Why Rudeness Hurts
Being exposed to rudeness can create a range of negative emotions, from outrage to distress.
Why Rudeness Hurts
Being exposed to someone who is rude can be unsettling, especially when it is completely unprovoked. New research shows how rudeness also affects your ability to think clearly.www.psychologytoday.com
Just today I was called a "demon" in my attitude and I must confess it hurts-
Shalom.
We are all a work in progress, God is not done with us yet.
civic
Well-known member
Being called a demon is unacceptable. I will search and find the thread
Johann
Well-known member
Leave it brother-it doesn't worry me.
civic
Well-known member
I couldn’t find it searching
It is completely unnacceptable that Bob carrabio and others falsely misrepresent the teachings of Roman Catholism.
Then he attacks his own false caricature, and goes from forum to forum wrecking dialogue, and with it wrecking the forum.
It is clearly acceptable to challenge teachings actually expressed.
Which is easy since unlike others catholicism presents it as a catechism.
indeed dialogue is beneficial.
It can help to discover why we disagree, often because of language
We are a lot closer than many realise , the difference is often in just of how words like “ faith” and “ saved” or “ tradition” are used.
Few would realise that One section of Lutheranism and the Holy See reached a joint declaration on “ faith alone” by use of a mutually acceptable definition of faith.
On this example carrabio knowingly , repeatedly and falsely restates his claim we believe in “ salvation by works” yet the catechism clearly states we are justified by grace through faith.
He seems to take pleasure from bearing false witness against others,
Is his life really so empty? He should care about his salvation , not ours.
Many of the attacks on catholicism come from false misrepresentation.
And anti catholic hate , then because one says it, another repeats it on ad infinitum. So the myths propagate.
Wilfully misrepresenting another groups beliefs in order to attack them is unnacceptable.
In carrabios case it is clear he has never studied Catholicism in any serious way or studied church history , yet he attacks both with false tropes.
Most Catholics cannot be bothered with this.
We don’t seek or need the approval of our Protestant brethren.
We don’t attack other groups we just defend our own belifs.
but defending myths endlessly repeated is pointless.
So my message is simple.
rein in those like carrabio who wilfully misrepresent others, or I’m off.
Then he attacks his own false caricature, and goes from forum to forum wrecking dialogue, and with it wrecking the forum.
It is clearly acceptable to challenge teachings actually expressed.
Which is easy since unlike others catholicism presents it as a catechism.
indeed dialogue is beneficial.
It can help to discover why we disagree, often because of language
We are a lot closer than many realise , the difference is often in just of how words like “ faith” and “ saved” or “ tradition” are used.
Few would realise that One section of Lutheranism and the Holy See reached a joint declaration on “ faith alone” by use of a mutually acceptable definition of faith.
On this example carrabio knowingly , repeatedly and falsely restates his claim we believe in “ salvation by works” yet the catechism clearly states we are justified by grace through faith.
He seems to take pleasure from bearing false witness against others,
Is his life really so empty? He should care about his salvation , not ours.
Many of the attacks on catholicism come from false misrepresentation.
And anti catholic hate , then because one says it, another repeats it on ad infinitum. So the myths propagate.
Wilfully misrepresenting another groups beliefs in order to attack them is unnacceptable.
In carrabios case it is clear he has never studied Catholicism in any serious way or studied church history , yet he attacks both with false tropes.
Most Catholics cannot be bothered with this.
We don’t seek or need the approval of our Protestant brethren.
We don’t attack other groups we just defend our own belifs.
but defending myths endlessly repeated is pointless.
So my message is simple.
rein in those like carrabio who wilfully misrepresent others, or I’m off.
Last edited:
Diserner
Well-known member
I wouldn't take it so hard.
There's a difficulty when it comes to representing the opposition rightly. While we should always try to do that, many times the opposition denies the logical conclusion to their own premises, and unless one parrots doublespeak and embraces a non sequitur, the cry of straw man and misrepresentation is a way for the opposition to protect themselves from actual criticism by entrenching their cognitive dissonance.
Now, I'm not saying you're doing that here.
But by crying wolf and threatening to run away, it really does make your position look weak, and you oversensitive, and I don't want that for you.
I consider Catholics and Pelagians both able to be saved by trusting Christ while in serious error. And I consider Mr. Carrabio a Pelagian, because he denies the sin nature. Now he may not accept my criticisms or logic, and he may complain that's not what he wants to be called, But my theology demands this definition for what he teaches, and I would have to lie about my own beliefs to conform to some forced party line and say otherwise.
This is like wokeism and language control, "if you don't call me by MY pronouns you are a hateful person."
And we should avoid that.
So the forum has an ignore feature, and that is a more mature response here.
Interact with people who are respectful or fair, and don't let mistreatment make your position look weaker by running away at opposition.
Peace and respect in Christ.
Frank Russell
Well-known member
The ignore feature is probably the best solution since the basis of the forum is promoting freedom of speech.
There will always be someone wrong on the internet.
There will always be someone wrong on the internet.
Free speech is not the only guiding principle.
The existence of this thread “ unacceptable tactics” presumes there are tactics that are unnaceptable, free speech or not.
As a one time forum owner of a forum with 20000 members , can say that for example that nothing ruins a forum more than “ ad hominem “ attacks, - attacking the person not the argument. Forums cannot allow it, free speech or not,
As Christian’s we alsohold ourselves to higher standards , Gods law. That you should not bear false witness Or call any man fool.
It is in that context. That I hold Carrabio to account.
However misguided you think arminians , calvinists or indeed Catholics are,
an attack on Calvinism for exampke should focus on demonstrable Calvinist beliefs.
If I attack calvinists by claiming they hold and so attacking Arminian beliefs the forum descends into chaos.
Since no section of the forum is relevant to subject matter.
On topic , and relevant posting matters to a forum working Properly.
The most misrepresented group in Christendom are Catholics.
There is a massive anticatholic movement, in a way which does not exist against any other group.
there is no rabid anti Pentecostal or anti Presbyterian movement
Anti catholicism has a language all its own . It is mostly a set of myths, passed on by one carrabio to the next, who refuse to study any of it but pass it on to the next generation of carrabio. It could be likenee to antisemitism , in its hostility and disgregard for truth,
Im up for a genuine discussion on our differences wgich are not as large as many believe , but they are seen as large because of the carrabios
In any event , I came to add a catholic voice since it was clear the forum did not have any And it was asking about us.
But I will not give oxygen to more anticatholic hate Or myths,
It is better in my opinion that these sections go silent, than give publicity to carrabios false view of Catholicism.
All I am asking is that any challenge to catholic belief, sticks to challenge of actual catholic belief as visible in the catechism . Not a carrabio distortion of it,
Its a fair request .
Last edited:
civic
Well-known member
Words ( pearls ) of wisdom.I've found that people who are consistently rude act like it's no big deal. That you're being overly sensitive. Or that you're so far out in the left field they have to be rude in order to get your attention. And the list goes on. But is it true?
Why Rudeness Hurts
Being exposed to rudeness can create a range of negative emotions, from outrage to distress.
Why Rudeness Hurts
Being exposed to someone who is rude can be unsettling, especially when it is completely unprovoked. New research shows how rudeness also affects your ability to think clearly.
Frank Russell
Well-known member
I requested that an area be created that only new testament be discussed. It wasn't long until people about the law began threads in it. I requested some moderation, the resolution was to move a thread to another area instead of enforcing the idea of the subforum. So I just put a couple people on ignore and problem solved.
In general this was the only solution because quite often it felt like people were lying to my face, but that was just their honest perspective on the matter. This is no different than what you experience in regards to catholic matters.
I have posted anti pentecostal and anti baptist things in the past, the reason why you don't see it as a big issue is people have chosen to not make an issue of it and post what they're about instead.
In consistency, enforcing a subforum ethic would be inconsistent with how the forum has been moderated overall. One thing that really incenses the almighty more than anything else is hypocrisy, so based on my experience of this forum: seeking special treatment tends to not get results and would damage the dynamic.
