S/o mass exodus

[Chris in VA]

I'm sorry, I'm confused. Did I offend?

 

My point was that if I want advice from people with my worldview I ask Christians.

 

I would consider changing the above (asking advice ONLY from CHristians).

 

I had a big problem and actually reached out to several posters who hold different world views than I do --well, let me rephrase that, because worldview doesn't just mean "religion"--they hold different opinions than I do.

 

And I got loving, kind, wise advice from them. I needed to see the problem thru other eyes. I do not think only Christians have wisdom. I am wise enough to sift, to know what is against scripture, which would be my litmus, I think--but these women had real life experience, reasoned views, and help for me.

 

I do, generally, ask Christians for advice, but in this instance, asking someone who shares other values with me (love of their children, for one) was very beneficial.

 

YMMV, of course.

[Scrub Jay]

But I don't think of Christians as my special group on the boards. If I have a question that I want examined from a particular worldview I state that.

 

But not all Christians have the same world view.  My mother is a lifelong Christian.  And both in MA and CA, where she now lives, she has married gay couples as a justice of the peace.  Her world view is clearly different than someone who doesn't agree with gay marriage (never mind actually participating in the actual wedding).

 

[brehon]

Your post was beautiful, but I will answer your question.

 

People who identify as Christian have some common threads. I'm a baptist and if a catholic answered my question about YEC, spanking, church attire, etc. it would be appropriate. If I had a question relating solely to baptists I'd put that in the title.

 

Thank you. I'm a bit cross-eyed because I've been reviewing charts all day in between running my own calls; so, my next thought may not make as much sense on the screen as it does in my head - a condition I'm finding happens to me all to often these days...

 

I agree that Christians do have common threads. I guess my question to you is if I'm Catholic and I answer a question you may have about a given issue, but my answer comes my POV which is the polar opposite of your POV how is that any different than a non-Christian answering the question. Of course, if you ask me "Why do you have a Tenebrae service?", I'll answer from the RC perspective and it wouldn't be very helpful or considerate if someone posted something along the lines of "Tenebrae?? That's soooo 15th century? WTH?" However, if you ask on a thread "What is your opinion of women wearing slacks to church?", my answer may not jibe with your understanding of scripture or modest dress or whatever. So, if I answer "Woman, be comfortable. Ain't no one got time for pinched heels or tight panty hose while trying to concentrate on the service", would that be better than someone else answering from a different, perhaps non-Christian perspective if it lined up better with your perspective or understanding of scripture?

 

I'm not sure if I'm muddying the waters or not; so, please forgive me if I've misunderstood you or merely blathered on for a bit. As I said I'm a bit punch drunk and don't even have the excuse of alcohol. I do agree that if you put "Question for Baptists" in the title, it would be considerate for the non-Baptists to either refrain from offering opinions or at the very least ask questions prior to offering opinions. :)

[Slache]

Sure. But the other side of the coin there is excluding non-Christians is like saying "You ain't qualified to care about me, so bugger off."

 

You might think that sometimes, or all the time, and be happy with it. But on the other hand, you might now be thinking, "Woah, I didn't mean it that way!" and choose to use your exclusionary powers a bit more sparingly. Hugs is hugs if you're in a rubbish mood.

 

That's not a situation I would use it in though. A sin issue would be a good example. I've seen people come on here with sin they're dealing with in their life and people come in with "Why should you feel guilty? You don't know God thinks that." If I came in with a sin issue that would not be the response I would be looking for so I would like to have a thread with a more narrow audience.

[*Lulu*]

But not all Christians have the same world view. My mother is a lifelong Christian. And both in MA and CA, where she now lives, she has married gay couples as a justice of the peace. Her world view is clearly different than someone who doesn't agree with gay marriage (never mind actually participating in the actual wedding).

 

Exactly.

 

My grandmother and I are both Christians and members of the same denomination.

 

She will not allow Pokemon in her house because of evil spirits and believes yoga is unchristian.

 

I attend a church where yoga classes are taught several times a week, have paid for private yoga instruction in my home, and believe Pokemon is evil only because I am so.damn.sick.of hearing about it.

[Slache]

Thank you. I'm a bit cross-eyed because I've been reviewing charts all day in between running my own calls; so, my next thought may not make as much sense on the screen as it does in my head - a condition I'm finding happens to me all to often these days...

 

I agree that Christians do have common threads. I guess my question to you is if I'm Catholic and I answer a question you may have about a given issue, but my answer comes my POV which is the polar opposite of your POV how is that any different than a non-Christian answering the question. Of course, if you ask me "Why do you have a Tenebrae service?", I'll answer from the RC perspective and it wouldn't be very helpful or considerate if someone posted something along the lines of "Tenebrae?? That's soooo 15th century? WTH?" However, if you ask on a thread "What is your opinion of women wearing slacks to church?", my answer may not jibe with your understanding of scripture or modest dress or whatever. So, if I answer "Woman, be comfortable. Ain't no one got time for pinched heels or tight panty hose while trying to concentrate on the service", would that be better than someone else answering from a different, perhaps non-Christian perspective if it lined up better with your perspective or understanding of scripture?

 

I'm not sure if I'm muddying the waters or not; so, please forgive me if I've misunderstood you or merely blathered on for a bit. As I said I'm a bit punch drunk and don't even have the excuse of alcohol. I do agree that if you put "Question for Baptists" in the title, it would be considerate for the non-Baptists to either refrain from offering opinions or at the very least ask questions prior to offering opinions. :)

But most things that I would seek advice about you and I would see eye to eye on. For everything else I would say baptists only please.

[unsinkable]

So, Slache cannot start a Christians Only thread because ........

 

Fill in all the reasons, and then wonder why people want to know if there is another Christian board.

 

I don't think I've ever started a This-Religion-Only thread, and I'm not sure if I participated in any but I can see WHY someone might want to.

[Scrub Jay]

So, Slache cannot start a Christians Only thread because ........

 

Fill in all the reasons, and then wonder why people want to know if there is another Christian board.

 

I don't think I've ever started a This-Religion-Only thread, and I'm not sure if I participated in any but I can see WHY someone might want to.

 

I may have missed a post - who said Slache could not start a Christians-only thread?

 

[unsinkable]

I may have missed a post - who said Slache could not start a Christians-only thread?

 

Nearly everyone who is replying to her about Christians only threads is implying it.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I may have missed a post - who said Slache could not start a Christians-only thread?

 

 

Nobody.

 

I'm the only one who came even close: I said I don't care for that sort of thing, no matter who the "only," but that was just my opinion. I have no power here to make rules or set policy. Slache can start 500 "Christians (her kind) only" threads every afternoon for all of me.

[Rosie_0801]

That's not a situation I would use it in though. A sin issue would be a good example. I've seen people come on here with sin they're dealing with in their life and people come in with "Why should you feel guilty? You don't know God thinks that." If I came in with a sin issue that would not be the response I would be looking for so I would like to have a thread with a more narrow audience.

 

So there's an example where you are perfectly happy projecting "you ain't qualified to care about me, so bugger off." Jolly good. *shrug*

[Joanne]

So, Slache cannot start a Christians Only thread because ........

 

Fill in all the reasons, and then wonder why people want to know if there is another Christian board.

 

I don't think I've ever started a This-Religion-Only thread, and I'm not sure if I participated in any but I can see WHY someone might want to.

 

 

Anecdotal and related aside. I go back to "Vegsource" days. I remember the "Religious Board." Threads would build, and inevitably, a poster would say "But isn't this a Christian board?" To which the answer was "No. It is a *religious* board." It was people who assumed "Religious" meant Christian.

 

This was when homeschooling was more populated by conservative Christians. Or, I suppose more accurately, there was less diversity than today.

[Jan in SC]

So, Slache cannot start a Christians Only thread because ........

 

Fill in all the reasons, and then wonder why people want to know if there is another Christian board.

 

I don't think I've ever started a This-Religion-Only thread, and I'm not sure if I participated in any but I can see WHY someone might want to.

Of course she can.

[Slache]

So, Slache cannot start a Christians Only thread because ........

 

Fill in all the reasons, and then wonder why people want to know if there is another Christian board.

 

I don't think I've ever started a This-Religion-Only thread, and I'm not sure if I participated in any but I can see WHY someone might want to.

Your inbox is full! Oh well.

 

I just wanted to say that you have shown me a lot of support lately and I really, really appreciate it. Thank you.

Now I really need to close my computer and play with my children.  :)

 

Rachel.

[unsinkable]

Nobody.

 

I'm the only one who came even close: I said I don't care for that sort of thing, no matter who the "only," but that was just my opinion. I have no power here to make rules or set policy. Slache can start 500 "Christians (her kind) only" threads every afternoon for all of me.

The snarky (her kind) isn't necessary.

[unsinkable]

Anecdotal and related aside. I go back to "Vegsource" days. I remember the "Religious Board." Threads would build, and inevitably, a poster would say "But isn't this a Christian board?" To which the answer was "No. It is a *religious* board." It was people who assumed "Religious" meant Christian.

 

This was when homeschooling was more populated by conservative Christians. Or, I suppose more accurately, there was less diversity than today.

Well, you've certainly started multiple threads where you specifically stated exactly the type of input you wanted.

 

And nobody bitched at you about it.

 

I think everyone on here deserves the same treatment.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

The snarky (her kind) isn't necessary.

 

It wasn't snarky. That is such a juvenile word for something that was said with intention.

 

When I'm playing or being childish or frivolous I'll use devices like jokes and smilies. If I'm not doing that, and it's a serious topic, I probably mean what I say.

 

I specified "her kind" because even within this thread she has reiterated that she doesn't even want to hear from other Christian denominations on some issues.

[unsinkable]

Your inbox is full! Oh well.

 

I just wanted to say that you have shown me a lot of support lately and I really, really appreciate it. Thank you.

Now I really need to close my computer and play with my children. :)

 

Rachel.

You're welcome. I am a electronic message hoarder. I'll try to clear out some messages.

 

One time when I was sick, a dear friend messaged me to try some toast with grape jelly. It was so sweet...it is hard to delete grape jelly messages.

[Joanne]

Nearly everyone who is replying to her about Christians only threads is implying it.

 

We are having a community discussion. We are expressing, as the members of that community, our opinion. It's important to note that it is not only "non Christians" saying that "Christian only" would not appeal to them.

 

She CAN start a Christian only thread. But posters are explaining the ambiguous nature of it.

 

And, again, clearly Christian threads such as "He is Risen" have never, IMObservation, been disrespected.

 

I don't think Ramadan threads have been disrespected.

 

Or Samhain wishes.

[Joanne]

Well, you've certainly started multiple threads where you specifically stated exactly the type of input you wanted.

 

And nobody bitched at you about it.

 

I think everyone on here deserves the same treatment.

 

 

I have, for a very long time, posted about ideas and concepts. Not people personally.

 

I would like the same respect, please.

[Slache]

You're welcome. I am a electronic message hoarder. I'll try to clear out someone messages.

 

One time when I was sick, a dear friend told messages me to try some toast with grape jelly. It was so sweet...it is hard to delete grape jelly messages.

That's cute.

 

I just realized that I left and abandoned you. Don't waste your time on my behalf, it's not worth it. Ok... neglected children... bye.

[marbel]

So there's an example where you are perfectly happy projecting "you ain't qualified to care about me, so bugger off." Jolly good. *shrug*

I don't think she's talking about people caring. I think she's talking about questions that require a certain knowledge base to answer. If I need help understanding something in the Westminster Confession of Faith, it's not going to help me if people who don't know anything about it try to answer. Or, worse, tell me that it's irrelevant because it was written by a bunch of fussy old white guys a long time ago.

 

It would be like me responding to a thread asking about calculus resources even though I know nothing about calculus. Or, worse, saying that calculus is unnecessary anyway, so don't worry about it.

 

Nothing to do with caring, but rather being able to answer the question.

[unsinkable]

I have, for a very long time, posted about ideas and concepts. Not people personally.

 

I would like the same respect, please.

Have you or have you not started multiple threads in which you've stated the input you wanted?

 

Are you offended bc I think OTHERS besides you should be able to do that without getting nitpicked to death (that's hyperbole for the next person who comes along and says...maybe I missed something, but no one got nitpicked to death).

[Joanne]

Have you or have you not started multiple threads in which you've stated the input you wanted?

 

Are you offended bc I think OTHERS besides you should be able to do that without getting nitpicked to death (that's hyperbole for the next person who comes along and says...maybe I missed something, but no one got nitpicked to death).

 

 

Please stop making this personal.

[Rosie_0801]

I don't think she's talking about people caring. I think she's talking about questions that require a certain knowledge base to answer. If I need help understanding something in the Westminster Confession of Faith, it's not going to help me if people who don't know anything about it try to answer. Or, worse, tell me that it's irrelevant because it was written by a bunch of fussy old white guys a long time ago.

 

It would be like me responding to a thread asking about calculus resources even though I know nothing about calculus. Or, worse, saying that calculus is unnecessary anyway, so don't worry about it.

 

Nothing to do with caring, but rather being able to answer the question.

 

Yeah, maybe. But she is giving the impression that there are times she doesn't want even a huggy smilie from the likes of us. "I don't mind if you care about me, but I don't want to hear about it." This is her prerogative and eventually we'll catch on and remember not to. Or we won't because there are thousands of people here and our memories aren't *that* great.

 

I trust that people can ignore me when they want to, :) but sometimes I write a kick arse post and it helps.

[unsinkable]

Please stop making this personal.

What is personal about it?

 

You've done this with me before. Am I not allowed to refer to your posts?

[PinkyandtheBrains.]

The snarky (her kind) isn't necessary.

 

I didn't see that as snark, the fact is that it's a specific group of Christians that are qualified in the category identified. I, as a Christian, do not qualify. I am one of those Christians who would be the wrong flavor.

[AmandaVT]

I haven't read through all of the replies yet, but I enjoy using forums in general. I belong to a few - food/diet related, sports, parenting and here. They're a tool to me - I can learn information and engage in interesting conversations. I try to conduct myself the same in face to face settings as I do through the computer. Frequently, I read through comments online and it's clear that people get much braver when they're able to hide behind their screens. Not here so much, I'm thinking mostly about comments on articles online. If I wouldn't say it to your face as an acquaintance or someone I just met, I try not to say it online. 

 

As far as safe spaces go - I don't believe any place online is a safe place. This board isn't even a closed board - everything is public. I belong to a couple of secret facebook groups, and  I post knowing that everything I write even in a "secret" place, isn't secret online. I just assume that anything I do, ever, is fairly easily hackable. I'm not paranoid, I do a lot online - I just mind my behavior and try not to write anything that I wouldn't be comfortable being broadcasted to everyone in my contact list. 

[Audrey]

Well, you've certainly started multiple threads where you specifically stated exactly the type of input you wanted.

 

And nobody bitched at you about it.

 

I think everyone on here deserves the same treatment.

 

 

Sit down for a second.

 

Because I'm going to agree with you.

 

I don't have a problem with asking for specific input -- even very specific, very exclusionist input -- when it's worded clearly and with at least some attempt at being respectful.  

 

I do have a problem with people posting "CC" and thinking that means "only Christians can post here" because that's not what it was ever meant to be.  I think it's fine to sometimes have a need to hear a certain viewpoint and if you are upfront about it, that's okay. I think it's unrealistic to expect sycophancy on threads you start, though.  It's a fact of the internet that once you put it out there, you no longer own the right to dictate what others have to say about it.

[*Lulu*]

I don't think she's talking about people caring. I think she's talking about questions that require a certain knowledge base to answer. If I need help understanding something in the Westminster Confession of Faith, it's not going to help me if people who don't know anything about it try to answer. Or, worse, tell me that it's irrelevant because it was written by a bunch of fussy old white guys a long time ago.

 

It would be like me responding to a thread asking about calculus resources even though I know nothing about calculus. Or, worse, saying that calculus is unnecessary anyway, so don't worry about it.

 

Nothing to do with caring, but rather being able to answer the question.

And I can see this.

 

What I guess I find hard to wrap my mind around is the idea that when people put stipulations on a thread the only ones who have it ignored are Christians.

 

I just haven't seen it.

 

What I see happening is a thread about a topic veers into something that some poster or set of posters has a opinion of a spiritual nature about. They post said opinion. Others post that they do not think it a spiritual issue or that they do but have formed an entirely different opinion about it. Then one or more groups of thought dig in and eventually someone feels attacked or belittled.

 

Do people sometimes ignore a poster's request? Yes. I just don't think it is rampant or limited to threads started by conservative Christians.

[Audrey]

Yeah, maybe. But she is giving the impression that there are times she doesn't want even a huggy smilie from the likes of us. "I don't mind if you care about me, but I don't want to hear about it." This is her prerogative and eventually we'll catch on and remember not to. Or we won't because there are thousands of people here and our memories aren't *that* great.

 

I trust that people can ignore me when they want to, :) but sometimes I write a kick arse post and it helps.

 

 

On the other hand... I like to know where people stand -- what they REALLY think.  That's very important to me, but I realise that's not everyone's cuppa.  That's okay, too.

[Murphy101]

I decided to run an experiment to see if there is actually anyone in my echo chamber :)

 

~

 

The problem is if all the people seeking 'greater safety' leave, you get an echo chamber by default, don't you ?

 

And it pretty much says that the remaining people are unsafe...

Yes, it does. If those same people claim they want to be inclusionary and have diverse conversation but continually ignore being called out for not making others welcome - then I don't have much sympathy for them being left in the echo chamber they created.

 

They don't owe me anything. They can be as rude and antognistic and ridiculing as they want to be. Price of freedom. But then when they end up with an echo chamber, well that's the price of freedom too. I don't have to let someone treat me like that. I don't have to engage them.

 

For example, you recently excused your comments by saying, no, you weren't being that way to a person, but to an idea. But people are made up of ideas. If you call someone's idea stupid or unworthy of respect, the average person is going to take that as you think they are stupid and unworthy of respect. Same as when a person is told their idea is smart. You can hold to that attitude and opinion and continue posting. But no, it is not inclusive and it is ridiculing. You don't have to care about that. I just think it's unreasonable to be surprised if you end up with an echo chamber result from it bc often the result of telling someone they or their ideas are stupid and unworthy of respect is they tend to feel that way about your ideas too. It isn't very productive to creating or maintaining the diverse discussion you claim to want.

[Scrub Jay]

Nearly everyone who is replying to her about Christians only threads is implying it.

 

So no one said it.  You're just assuming that's what people mean.

 

So pointing out how a Christian world view isn't just one type of world view is the same as saying don't post a thread like that?

 

[unsinkable]

Sit down for a second.

 

Because I'm going to agree with you.

 

I don't have a problem with asking for specific input -- even very specific, very exclusionist input -- when it's worded clearly and with at least some attempt at being respectful.

 

I do have a problem with people posting "CC" and thinking that means "only Christians can post here" because that's not what it was ever meant to be. I think it's fine to sometimes have a need to hear a certain viewpoint and if you are upfront about it, that's okay. I think it's unrealistic to expect sycophancy on threads you start, though. It's a fact of the internet that once you put it out there, you no longer own the right to dictate what others have to say about it.

And I agree about CC...I think it is possible that people misunderstand or are unaware of its use and origins.

[fraidycat]

Awww, maaaan! I ran out of likes.

 

And, am fascinated with the direction in which conversations steer. It has always fascinated me. I was that kid sitting at the adult table just listening and trying to follow the trails.

 

In my mind when I was exploring the safe place thoughts, I was thinking about my mom and grandmas. About who they may have approached with problems and concerns and thinking it probably wasn't in town hall meetings. I was exploring expectations and how they shape our perceptions and realities.

 

The subsequent conversation is giving me some insight, but in an unexpected manner. It is, nonetheless, fascinating.

 

On a side note, I thought social groups were for the "my people" threads where like-mindedness is an asset or wanted. But, I guess that's based on MY expectations and perceptions. Obviously, it's not universal. Interesting stuff.

 

Also, can I get a cookie? I think this is the longest thread I've ever started - by a very large margin! ;)

[unsinkable]

So no one said it. You're just assuming that's what people mean.

 

So pointing out how a Christian world view isn't just one type of world view is the same as saying don't post a thread like that?

 

That's not what this is about.

[Scrub Jay]

That's not what this is about.

 

No but I was replying to what you said.  There hasn't been one post on this thread telling Slache to not start Christian-only threads.  I think it is important to point that out when someone says otherwise.

 

[unsinkable]

No but I was replying to what you said. There hasn't been one post on this thread telling Slache to not start Christian-only threads. I think it is important to point that out when someone says otherwise.

 

I said it was implied. You disagree.

 

So be it.

[hornblower]

Oh I hope there isn't an exodus! I like so many of you. I come here because this is one of the best places to sound things out with smart, caring people. It's large enough that it seems no matter how obscure your question or situation, someone has btdt or has a cousin who did and can chime in with some useful tips or advice. And I find it a very caring, supportive place.

 

I don't think I would be half the homeschooling mama without these boards. I think when we focus in the somewhat negative aspects of the board, we're usually talking about the chat section... But this board is so much more! I've read so much good advice on how to teach,curriculum, scheduling etc - it's an amazing resource.

 

I like the debates. :) I think some topics are impossible to discuss without a thick skin. I think more people should use the ignore feature more liberally. I think sometimes when we're stressed we just want to kvetch and sometimes our online buddies get the brunt of our crankiness with the world...

 

I find the prayer request threads tear jerkingly poignant - which I guess is odd as an atheist but I just think it exemplifies so much of what's good about people, and how much magic there is in people caring for each other.

 

I don't think I'd presume to comment on a CC thread but I do read them sometimes because I'm hopelessly curious...

[umsami]

Really late to the party....

 

but first off, I have (guilty) responded to some CC threads.  (I actually thought that meant Classical Conversations...LOL...so I've ignored most)....mainly because I was a Christian for 20-something years of my life and attended seminary.  I don't think I've debated anything from a theological standpoint.  But I guess I'll more actively stay out now.  For me, JAWM works better usually.

 

So...back to the OP's questions:

 

What role(s) do internet discussion forums play in your life?  I first starting participating in the early 90s (cue old modem sounds) on IRC and old CompuServe boards.  So, for the past 25 or so years, yes internet discussion boards have played a part in my life.  It's allowed me to make friends from around the world, and be exposed to other views/ideas.   Since I became a SAHM, I'd say it played more of an important role.

Have these forums (and the people) replaced in full, or in part, a real live human(s) in your life? Or changed the relationship(s) in some way? If so, is this positive or negative in your opinion?

I'd say, to some degree, it's replaced a lot of the face-to-face interaction I used to get at work.  Unfortunately, of the Mommy groups I've attended, 99% of the discussion has been on potty training or other aspects of baby care, and I actually think I can have more intellectually stimulating conversations here.

 

I have a few IRL friend and family members who are on the opposite side of the political spectrum, and I think having what in general, are civil conversations regarding topics that perhaps it's not so easy to discuss IRL has made me have more empathy for them and their views.  

 

[brehon]

So, Slache cannot start a Christians Only thread because ........

 

Fill in all the reasons, and then wonder why people want to know if there is another Christian board.

 

I don't think I've ever started a This-Religion-Only thread, and I'm not sure if I participated in any but I can see WHY someone might want to.

 

Slache can start all the Christians Only threads she wants as can anyone else. No one has said she couldn't. I certainly didn't even imply she couldn't. I'm very interested in how a soliciting opinions from only Christians on a given topic works given the liturgical and theological differences even between Protestant denominations, let alone various Protestants and RC & EO.

 

I'm certainly not upset and I wouldn't be upset if she didn't want my opinion as a not-her-flavor-of-Christian Christian. Color me curious, that's all.

[Joker]

Yes, it does. If those same people claim they want to be inclusionary and have diverse conversation but continually ignore being called out for not making others welcome - then I don't have much sympathy for them being left in the echo chamber they created.

 

They don't owe me anything. They can be as rude and antognistic and ridiculing as they want to be. Price of freedom. But then when they end up with an echo chamber, well that's the price of freedom too. I don't have to let someone treat me like that. I don't have to engage them.

 

For example, you recently excused your comments by saying, no, you weren't being that way to a person, but to an idea. But people are made up of ideas. If you call someone's idea stupid or unworthy of respect, the average person is going to take that as you think they are stupid and unworthy of respect. Same as when a person is told their idea is smart. You can hold to that attitude and opinion and continue posting. But no, it is not inclusive and it is ridiculing. You don't have to care about that. I just think it's unreasonable to be surprised if you end up with an echo chamber result from it bc often the result of telling someone they or their ideas are stupid and unworthy of respect is they tend to feel that way about your ideas too. It isn't very productive to creating or maintaining the diverse discussion you claim to want.

 

Isn't this what many Christians do when discussing issues? Especially homosexuality. I'm trying to figure out how it is different.

 

ETA: FTR, I am a Christian but I'm just really confused by this part of your post considering I've seen the same kind of explanation used here but regarding different issues.

 

[texasmama]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes. There was that time when I popped into a Christian thread to offer hugs and the OP got almost teary that I cared. It wasn't until then that she realised it wasn't a Christian thread at all, but a "be nice to me because I'm feeling utterly, woefully miserable" thread.

 

 

 

 

Personally, I think all Christians need a Pagan friend. They're almost unshockable. It's handy to have unshockable friends. You bunch have an untapped source of support here. :p

 

I really love me some Pagans.  I agree that everyone should have a Pagan in their Pocket.  Maybe more than one.

 

(P.S.  I'm a pretty unshockable Christian.)

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I know, but if you search for Christian only posts they're filed with non Christians.

 

Link them.

[tm919]

I don't think she's talking about people caring. I think she's talking about questions that require a certain knowledge base to answer. If I need help understanding something in the Westminster Confession of Faith, it's not going to help me if people who don't know anything about it try to answer. Or, worse, tell me that it's irrelevant because it was written by a bunch of fussy old white guys a long time ago.

 

It would be like me responding to a thread asking about calculus resources even though I know nothing about calculus. Or, worse, saying that calculus is unnecessary anyway, so don't worry about it.

 

Nothing to do with caring, but rather being able to answer the question.

This is an interesting way to look at it, and really made me think. I'm not sure that I agree, at least for this example. There is probably a correlation between self-identified belief and knowledge. However, I've encountered people who are atheists or changed denominations or religions, but are very well informed about religion in general or about the religion that they left. There are people who know a lot more about evolution than most, yet don't believe it themselves. That said, I think hard feelings often result when one person is talking about belief but the other person perceives it as a debate about knowledge. Knowledge can be subjected to facts and logic, but belief can't really be, at least not successfully.

 

It is often difficult -- at least for me -- to easily perceive whether people are talking about belief, not knowledge. I imagine it's difficult for many others too, probably why so many of us are told as children not to talk about religion and politics, since belief and knowledge in those realms are a blur. Maybe I should apply that rule to my future posting here. :p

[Rosie_0801]

It is often difficult -- at least for me -- to easily perceive whether people are talking about belief, not knowledge. I imagine it's difficult for many others too, probably why so many of us are told as children not to talk about religion and politics, since belief and knowledge in those realms are a blur. Maybe I should apply that rule to my future posting here. :p

 

Or maybe you shouldn't because there is another saying that goes "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em." :lol:

[Murphy101]

Isn't this what many Christians do when discussing issues? Especially homosexuality. I'm trying to figure out how it is different.

 

ETA: FTR, I am a Christian but I'm just really confused by this part of your post considering I've seen the same kind of explanation used here but regarding different issues.

 

If I say it is a disordered idea, Sadie says I am saying her relative is disordered. I'm not. I'm saying she has a disordered idea of sexuality. According to Sadie, that *should* be entirely okay and it would be wrong for her to take my stance so personal. But also according to Sadie that is not at all how she feels about it, she contradicts her own opinion on discussing ideas when it comes to her ideas being treated that way.

 

As for christians... Are you referring to love the sinner, hate the sin in general?

 

I do suppose it can be taken that way. But then again, I don't usually tell a sinner their ideas aren't worthy of respect either. I'd have no one to talk to!

[albeto.]

Different things to different people? To me it means not to be insulted, which is why I haven't gone into the YEC thread.

 

Being challenged or being corrected is not being insulted. It should come as no surprise to find YEC being exposed as failing to hold up to general scientific scrutiny in an educational board. It should come as no surprise to find that scientific claims require evidence, but regardless of how genuinely or sincerely it is believed, personal testimony does not count as evidence in a scientific discourse. It is not an insult to point this out. 

 

People have different expectations with regard to what is appropriate on discussion forums. I respect the fact that you choose not to participate in discussions where your sensitivity could potentially cause a problem for you. I think recognizing that people may or may not be able to match your own social/emotional expectations is commendable and I hope more people adopt this practice.

 

However.... if you have an actual example of someone actually insulting you then please, by all means link it. If you prefer to keep the poster private, then please PM me. Otherwise, these vague, evasive accusations continue to defame the character of this elusive "someone" who apparently is stalking these forums harassing Christians. That's quite an accusation to make, and while I'm grateful to hear the kind words said about me upthread*, I think it's problematic for anyone to be targeted like this. I'm no more tolerant of this continued accusation just because I now have reason to believe it's not me. If your intention is to not be nasty as you implied upthread, or if you desire to avoid the appearance of nastiness, continued [false, certainly unverified] accusations of someone verbally attacking others does not lend to obtaining that goal. I ask you in kindness, and please don't take my directness as indicative of anger or anything like that, I simply want to be frank so as to avoid confusion: Please stop making these accusations unless you are willing to provide some evidence for them. In any other circumstance, this might be construed as harassment, and I think an argument can be made for that here.

 

 

 

*Really guys, thank you. That means a lot to me. 

[MFG]

But most things that I would seek advice about you and I would see eye to eye on. For everything else I would say baptists only please.

But even Baptists are not a monolithic bunch. Baptists run the theological and social spectrums from conservative to liberal.

[Joker]

But even Baptists are not a monolithic bunch. Baptists run the theological and social spectrums from conservative to liberal.

 

Yes. The Baptist churches I grew up attending in Texas (where I was baptized) are very different from the ones I attended in Florida. No comparison. The ones here are the reason we are no longer Baptist.