Let's talk! About the new vision for CF!

[Redheadedstepchild]

So I see other congregational forums are hard at work talking about how they want to be structured. Is this something we need to be doing? Do we even care?

I don't know what's happened before or what we need. I personally think debate is ok as long as it's for edification and people are respectful. I certainly don't have all the answers. OTOH, I don't exactly want to be attacked in my own home.

Any ideas?

Anyone....anyone???

[CaDan]

The Worst Catholic On the Internet (tm) wanders in selling the proposition he is putting to all the Congregation forums.

Weighted Voting. That is, every person gets a vote for each post the person has made in a forum. Here in Wesley's Parish, I might get two or three votes; a long time member would get thousands of votes. This way, the folks most committed to a forum have the greatest say in who moderates it.

[Morgaine1205]

We should probably start thinking about a few things for our corner of CF. Wesley's Parish has always been a haven for us, it's always been quiet, calm and peaceful.

My understanding of the new vision (http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=36472413&postcount=1) is that we, as members of Wesley's Parish determine how things will go here - such as:

1. Do we wish to allow interdenominational debate here?

2. Do we wish to allow inter-faith debate here?

3. Picking our mods.

CaDan has suggested a method of weighted voting for mods, and I think his suggestion has great merit - this would ensure that we in the Parish determine who will be our mods - and that's a great thing. There's been a lot of talk about this process becoming a popularity contest, and I can see that happening in places, I'm hopeful that won't happen here. I'm hopeful that we will use prayer, discernment and knowledge to choose who will mod in our little corner of CF! :)

I would also suggest that we all remember to wander outside our corner and keep our voices heard as far as other rules, etc.

LET'S TALK! What do we think?

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

wow..weighted votes sounds like a good idea. how exactly do we find out how many posts we made in the forum?

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

As far as Mods go, according to Erwin the current mods will stay on till the end of 2007 and then those who want to stay will be up for a vote for an opportunity to stay 12 more months. As far as NEW mods coming in..he didnt say much about it. he DID however mention that in order to even be a nominee for a new mod you must be nominated by a current mod!

Since this our our place of fellowship, i would say..we want to welcom questions from those of other denominations, and those that are other religions, or non-christians, like we always did, but that we should only be able to debate amongst ourselves. thats my opinion. how do we start a wiki for rules..im clueless.

[Kryzoz]

As far as Mods go, according to Erwin the current mods will stay on till the end of 2007 and then those who want to stay will be up for a vote for an opportunity to stay 12 more months. As far as NEW mods coming in..he didnt say much about it. he DID however mention that in order to even be a nominee for a new mod you must be nominated by a current mod!

Since this our our place of fellowship, i would say..we want to welcom questions from those of other denominations, and those that are other religions, or non-christians, like we always did, but that we should only be able to debate amongst ourselves. thats my opinion. how do we start a wiki for rules..im clueless.
I'll help with the wiki. I'm wikified! Secondly, we have to decide as a body what rules we want. Whether we want them to be specifically for WP or if we want to have input on the rules of all of Ct as well. I will keep you all abreast of any wiki's regarding rules that I see

[Kryzoz]

wow..weighted votes sounds like a good idea. how exactly do we find out how many posts we made in the forum?
Perhaps "find all posts" but for someone who has made thousands of posts that might be difficult, yes?

[humblet]

Tried to post this earlier, but they were still working on some things, so I'll give it another try!

...well my question is, since my 'icon' is just 'Christian', am I considered a member in this forum now that the rules have changed? I attend a United Methodist church and this is the place that I consider to be my 'home forum' (or whatever you'd call it, lol)...just wondering how all that works now. Or is that something that has to be decided on in each individual forum as well?

[humblet]

As far as Mods go, according to Erwin the current mods will stay on till the end of 2007 and then those who want to stay will be up for a vote for an opportunity to stay 12 more months. As far as NEW mods coming in..he didnt say much about it. he DID however mention that in order to even be a nominee for a new mod you must be nominated by a current mod!

Since this our our place of fellowship, i would say..we want to welcom questions from those of other denominations, and those that are other religions, or non-christians, like we always did, but that we should only be able to debate amongst ourselves. thats my opinion. how do we start a wiki for rules..im clueless.
That's good to know about the mods...I truly hope that things don't get out of hand...

I agree that it's good to welcome questions from anyone who wants to ask. My concern is that those questions don't turn into arguments or debates. It’s one thing when people want to learn more about what we believe-it’s another if they’re here just to cause problems and tell us that our faith is all wrong. I like the safe-haven that the WP forum has been for me since I joined a few months ago, and I think that it would be horrible to lose that here.

So I agree, allow questions from all but debate only amongst ourselves. Possibly have a special section that is just for debating with those who want to debate but are not members? Or would we even want that at all?

[Redheadedstepchild]

Tried to post this earlier, but they were still working on some things, so I'll give it another try!

...well my question is, since my 'icon' is just 'Christian', am I considered a member in this forum now that the rules have changed? I attend a United Methodist church and this is the place that I consider to be my 'home forum' (or whatever you'd call it, lol)...just wondering how all that works now. Or is that something that has to be decided on in each individual forum as well?
I have no idea about the faith icon thing. I thought Erwin's post indicated that there would no longer be a need for them, but then again if each area makes their own rules....

[Redheadedstepchild]

I like CaDan's idea, however being that I'm pretty new here I probably wouldn't have much of a vote. Still, it's a good idea.

[Redheadedstepchild]

Hey Morgaine- if it's not too messy, do you want to merge my rules thread with this one? Or delete it? I don't want to contribute to any confusion.

[Redheadedstepchild]

That's good to know about the mods...I truly hope that things don't get out of hand...

I agree that it's good to welcome questions from anyone who wants to ask. My concern is that those questions don't turn into arguments or debates. It’s one thing when people want to learn more about what we believe-it’s another if they’re here just to cause problems and tell us that our faith is all wrong. I like the safe-haven that the WP forum has been for me since I joined a few months ago, and I think that it would be horrible to lose that here.

So I agree, allow questions from all but debate only amongst ourselves. Possibly have a special section that is just for debating with those who want to debate but are not members? Or would we even want that at all?
I'd be ok with a separate debate area, or even putting [debate] tags on thread started for that purpose. The thing I noticed is that we as a group don't tend to be debators, so my feeling is that debate thread/areas won't get used much. Maybe I'm wrong about that though.

[Redheadedstepchild]

I'll help with the wiki. I'm wikified! Secondly, we have to decide as a body what rules we want. Whether we want them to be specifically for WP or if we want to have input on the rules of all of Ct as well. I will keep you all abreast of any wiki's regarding rules that I see
Have you seen this?

http://www.christianforums.com/f770-ecumenical-forums-wiki.html I guess this is where we go to work. I'm glad you're wikified because I'm clueless!

[eklectic]

Is it possible to have a "Debates" section here in WP so that those who wish to debate can do so while still allowing those who come here only for friendly fellowship to still feel protected?

[Kryzoz]

Have you seen this?

http://www.christianforums.com/f770-ecumenical-forums-wiki.html I guess this is where we go to work. I'm glad you're wikified because I'm clueless!
No can't say that I have. my question is. Now that we see that this is in existance do we want WP to have a wiki as well?

[Morgaine1205]

Hey Morgaine- if it's not too messy, do you want to merge my rules thread with this one? Or delete it? I don't want to contribute to any confusion.
Good idea! I'll do that now :)

[Morgaine1205]

I merged the two threads we had going on basically the same topic - hopefully this won't appear too jumbled.

In Him,
Morgy

[Redheadedstepchild]

No can't say that I have. my question is. Now that we see that this is in existance do we want WP to have a wiki as well?
Yeah, I think so.

I hope more people come by to contribute!

[Celticflower]

I know alot of people seem to be sold on this new improved version of CF, but I'm not convinced it is for the best. Personally, I like the idea of the faith icons -- it helps to give a clue to where a person is coming from with their ideas and/or statements. If you no longer have to declare how will we be able to keep debates in the Parish to ONLY those from the Wesley traditions?

I don't like the idea of being attacked in my own "home" either, but under the new "rules" just how will that be preventable?

[humblet]

I know alot of people seem to be sold on this new improved version of CF, but I'm not convinced it is for the best. Personally, I like the idea of the faith icons -- it helps to give a clue to where a person is coming from with their ideas and/or statements. If you no longer have to declare how will we be able to keep debates in the Parish to ONLY those from the Wesley traditions?

I don't like the idea of being attacked in my own "home" either, but under the new "rules" just how will that be preventable?
I was thinking the same thing...although I was unsure if he meant that faith icons would be gone altogether or what it's going to be. I personally like to see the icons, too, even though some-like mine even though I attend a U.M. church-may be only the genaric Christian icon.

[humblet]

P.S. ...are we supposed to be posting this stuff in the other thread now? *L* Or is this the thread everything was merged into??? I'd better go look, lol...

[Redheadedstepchild]

The threads have been merged.

I like the faith icons too, if only because I see being methodist as part of my identity. I would keep mine (if able) based on that alone. OTOH I understand about having a generic icon. And frankly, there are other denominations that share some of our beliefs. For example, I don't have a problem with someone from a pentecostal holiness church talking about holiness in our forums, after all their church grew out of the Wesleyan tradition. I just don't want anyone coming in here to tell us that our core beliefs are wrong. So maybe to that end we need to further define and list out what makes us Wesleyan (in a broad sense), so that people will understand when they come in what is not up for debate.

Honestly, I've been thinking that the new rules will mean more work for the mods. We will put whatever rules in place...sooner or later someone will break them and the mods will have to respond. And, because the mods are volunteers, a thread or post in violation may sit for awhile before it can be addressed. I think we are all going to have to do a good job of reporting and ignoring.

[Kryzoz]

What is the point of removing the faith icons? If we remove them we may as well remove every other icon. Of course it creates division, but it also creates a sense of community.

[Redheadedstepchild]

It occurs to me that we could have a subforum for holiness that could include related discussions and anyone that holds those ideals.

I'm going to back off and let someone else go post nuts.:P

[baruch4]

what if there wl b 3 athiests vs 1 christian here, shall we must accept an athiest mod?

[Morgaine1205]

Just to attempt to answer a few questions - and please, anyone correct me if I'm wrong or misinterpreting the new 'rules'.

No, we can stop debating from non-Wesleyan folks if we choose to do so, by saying our board rules state no outside debate. Basically, as I understand it, we write our own rules for WP (Wesley's Parish).

It is possible to have an atheist mod here, but very unlikely. You have to have 100 posts in order to vote on mods, and it's my understanding (last time I looked) that staff will nominate those they think would do a good job - I'll go look up some clarification on that tonight after work. Stay tuned!

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

I have no idea about the faith icon thing. I thought Erwin's post indicated that there would no longer be a need for them, but then again if each area makes their own rules....
no, some have misunderstood or misread what erwin had written. he never said he was getting rid of the faith icons. what he said was that people would be in control of their own faith icons from now on. (you used to have to pm an admin in order to change your faith icon..now you can change it yourself any time you want)

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

Is it possible to have a "Debates" section here in WP so that those who wish to debate can do so while still allowing those who come here only for friendly fellowship to still feel protected?
i have no problem with that..how bout everyone else? we can make a debate subforum in WP ??

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

No can't say that I have. my question is. Now that we see that this is in existance do we want WP to have a wiki as well?
yes..we need a wiki to make our subforum rules..how do we start one?

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

I know alot of people seem to be sold on this new improved version of CF, but I'm not convinced it is for the best. Personally, I like the idea of the faith icons -- it helps to give a clue to where a person is coming from with their ideas and/or statements. If you no longer have to declare how will we be able to keep debates in the Parish to ONLY those from the Wesley traditions?

I don't like the idea of being attacked in my own "home" either, but under the new "rules" just how will that be preventable?
we will still have faith icons, they arent being taken away. As well as not being attacked..dont worry..we are putting up a no debating rule in our main WP section so we won't be attacked!

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

what if there wl b 3 athiests vs 1 christian here, shall we must accept an athiest mod?
why would 3 atheists be members of wesleys parish??

[Celticflower]

no, some have misunderstood or misread what erwin had written. he never said he was getting rid of the faith icons. what he said was that people would be in control of their own faith icons from now on. (you used to have to pm an admin in order to change your faith icon..now you can change it yourself any time you want)

Which opens it up to a whole new path of mis-use and abuse. If you can change your icon any time you want what is to stop a person form changing their icon daily, hourly, threadly in order to post in a thread or pose as something they are not? If the icons can be changed on a whim what useful purpose will they serve?

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

Just to attempt to answer a few questions - and please, anyone correct me if I'm wrong or misinterpreting the new 'rules'.

No, we can stop debating from non-Wesleyan folks if we choose to do so, by saying our board rules state no outside debate. Basically, as I understand it, we write our own rules for WP (Wesley's Parish).

It is possible to have an atheist mod here, but very unlikely. You have to have 100 posts in order to vote on mods, and it's my understanding (last time I looked) that staff will nominate those they think would do a good job - I'll go look up some clarification on that tonight after work. Stay tuned!
from what erwin wrote..in order to be a mod you must have 100 posts and you must be nominated by a current mod, then after that you have to get voted in by your forum peers and only those in the forum with alteast 100 posts can even vote (which stops people from creating sock accounts just for voting purposes).

[Celticflower]

why would 3 atheists be members of wesleys parish??
For the same reasons atheist used to go into the old AOL religion chats --to cause problems, to raise doubts, to make themselves feel secure in their non-beliefs by tearing down the beliefs of others. I'm not saying all atheist are like this, but there are some with a clear agenda of doing away with all religions and they will use any forum to do it.

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

Which opens it up to a whole new path of mis-use and abuse. If you can change your icon any time you want what is to stop a person form changing their icon daily, hourly, threadly in order to post in a thread or pose as something they are not? If the icons can be changed on a whim what useful purpose will they serve?
For years we were able to change our icons on our own..its only been less than a year since they started making you pm and admin to change it..they are just changing it back. your right..people can abuse it. BUT..overall i guess ya gotta see that we are adults and should be able to be trusted to be honest. yes..there are those that won't be honest, but they wont get away with much. i mean if i change to a baptist icon tomorrow and go vote in their forum..i think they would question me. Not only that but thats why CaDan is going around to all the congregational forums suggesting weighted voting...meaning for every post you have in a forum..thats how many votes you get. So even if i went and made 3 posts in the Baptist forum..ya i could have 3 votes..but people that have been there for years would get 1,000 votes and 3,000 votes each. So my 3 measly votes would mean NOTHING..so i AGREE with weighted voting..IF we have an easy way of finding out how many posts each voter has in the forum!

[Redheadedstepchild]

Which opens it up to a whole new path of mis-use and abuse. If you can change your icon any time you want what is to stop a person form changing their icon daily, hourly, threadly in order to post in a thread or pose as something they are not? If the icons can be changed on a whim what useful purpose will they serve?
Which is why, I think, we need to spell out what it is we believe. An icon may or may not be an accurate reflection of one's beliefs, but their words surely will be.

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

For the same reasons atheist used to go into the old AOL religion chats --to cause problems, to raise doubts, to make themselves feel secure in their non-beliefs by tearing down the beliefs of others. I'm not saying all atheist are like this, but there are some with a clear agenda of doing away with all religions and they will use any forum to do it.
it isnt going to be a problem here. We will make a no debating rule, so they can't debate. As far as votes go..if we do weighted voting..the atheists wont have much votes since as of now they have exactly ZERO posts here in WP!

WE now have control of this forum..this is a GOOD thing and will protect us even more ...dont worry.

[Celticflower]

All in all I find this whole situation confusing -- on the one hand we have Erwin basically doing away with certain rules and guidelines. Ont he other hand we have denominatinal forums who can now create "rules" to protect their members. What if the "rules" enacted by an individual forum conflict with the general openness of the site as a whole? It seems to me that instead of creating an atmosphere where unity is possible we will quite possibly descend to the middle school clique mentality. How can "everything be open to everyone" but "forums can create rules to exclude debate from those with outside beleifs or no beliefs at all"?

It seems that there are too many contradictions and loopholes for things to work -- even if we are "all adults".

[GraceSeeker]

So I agree, allow questions from all but debate only amongst ourselves. Possibly have a special section that is just for debating with those who want to debate but are not members? Or would we even want that at all?

As has been done before, people can always start a thread for wider ranging debate elsewhere in the forum and provide a link to it. That would allow for others to debate the idea. But there are somethings, I think might be good to keep just within the family -- I'm thinking of General Conference debates next year. Would a non-Methodist (apologies to our Nazarene brothers who are also here) even understand the issues that might be important to us?

I know that I am very new to this forum, but I can attest that this corner of it is among the quietest and most friendly internet discussion sites I have ever found. I like having a refuge like this. Still good discussion, but little animosity.

[GraceSeeker]

For years we were able to change our icons on our own..its only been less than a year since they started making you pm and admin to change it..they are just changing it back. your right..people can abuse it. BUT..overall i guess ya gotta see that we are adults and should be able to be trusted to be honest. yes..there are those that won't be honest, but they wont get away with much. i mean if i change to a baptist icon tomorrow and go vote in their forum..i think they would question me. Not only that but thats why CaDan is going around to all the congregational forums suggesting weighted voting...meaning for every post you have in a forum..thats how many votes you get. So even if i went and made 3 posts in the Baptist forum..ya i could have 3 votes..but people that have been there for years would get 1,000 votes and 3,000 votes each. So my 3 measly votes would mean NOTHING..so i AGREE with weighted voting..IF we have an easy way of finding out how many posts each voter has in the forum!


At first the idea of weighted voting sounded rather attractive. I recognize that I would have little weight in my votes for the present, but I'm not worried about that, I generally find that long-term posters have a good handle on things and I can trust them.

But then...then I remembered a few of my "friends" on other forums. To be honest, some of them just like to stir things up. They too have been around a long time. Sometimes they have as much as twice as many posts as the next closest poster on the forum. Weighted voting means only that the most prolific get to be heard even more. If that person is one who just likes to hear himself/herself talk a lot, how much weight do we want to give to such a person in making decisions for the community?

[humblet]

i have no problem with that..how bout everyone else? we can make a debate subforum in WP ??
I would not object to a debate subforum.

I'm assuming this subforum would be where members of WP can debate/discuss with non-members...or would *all* debate and discussion (including between fellow members of WP) be restricted to this area?

[Redheadedstepchild]

OK, so I spent some time looking at all the various beliefs of our various denominations. I propose that we use the belief statement as posted on the Church of the Nazarene website as a starting point (because it is the most simplified of the statements).

Here it is with some thoughts of mine posted at the end:

These are the beliefs Nazarenes hold to be true:


We believe in one God-the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

We believe that the Old and New Testament Scriptures, given by plenary inspiration, contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living.

We believe that man is born with a fallen nature, and is, therefore, inclined to evil, and that continually.

We believe that the finally impenitent are hopelessly and eternally lost.

We believe that the atonement through Jesus Christ is for the whole human race; and that whosoever repents and believes on the Lord Jesus Christ is justified and regenerated and saved from the dominion of sin.

We believe that believers are to be sanctified wholly, subsequent to regeneration, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

We believe that the Holy Spirit bears witness to the new birth, and also to the entire sanctification of believers.

We believe that our Lord will return, the dead will be raised, and the final judgment will take place.

I propose we add to that the following:


We believe we are justified by faith alone, and not by good works. However, good works are seen as a natural fruit growing out of faith.


I also think it may be a good idea to briefly describe prevenient, justifying, and sanctifying grace, and provide a statement about free will. A link to the Wesleyan Quadrilateral might be a good idea as well.

The only thing I am having trouble with is the idea of whole or entire sanctification…I believe that sanctification is a lifelong process, as we are human and will always struggle with sin. But that’s why someone else really needs to chime in as my understanding of doctrine is basic at best.

[Redheadedstepchild]

As for rules, I may be anal ^_^ but I don't believe in reinventing the wheel. I kinda like what the Lutherans are doing in their wiki. Here's a Link (http://www.christianforums.com/t5672534-wiki-theologia-crucis-lutherans-tcl.html)

We could use that as a place to start and amend it as needed based on how we want to handle debate.

[ParaCristo]

You guys are doing great so far...I read thru the whole thread....
I too agree on a debate area rather then in the general area of WP as a whole....

we need a Wiki expert here in the WP....even if we have to get another member from some other denom...
Karen...Dave would be perfect...(he is a Wiki Type dude)
But, he won't be back for a while...
any other suggestions?

[Kryzoz]

You guys are doing great so far...I read thru the whole thread....
I too agree on a debate area rather then in the general area of WP as a whole....

we need a Wiki expert here in the WP....even if we have to get another member from some other denom...
Karen...Dave would be perfect...(he is a Wiki Type dude)
But, he won't be back for a while...
any other suggestions?
I got wikied. If you shoot me the rules I can make the wiki for us :)

[Sophia7]

Just to attempt to answer a few questions - and please, anyone correct me if I'm wrong or misinterpreting the new 'rules'.

No, we can stop debating from non-Wesleyan folks if we choose to do so, by saying our board rules state no outside debate. Basically, as I understand it, we write our own rules for WP (Wesley's Parish).

It is possible to have an atheist mod here, but very unlikely. You have to have 100 posts in order to vote on mods, and it's my understanding (last time I looked) that staff will nominate those they think would do a good job - I'll go look up some clarification on that tonight after work. Stay tuned!

Hi, everyone. After a brief rest from staff, I'm back to help with the transition to the new CF.

I agree with Morgaine. The congregational forums can restrict or not restrict debate, as they wish. One possibility is to keep the rules similar to how they are currently, with only fellowship posts or questions allowed from those who do not affiliate themselves with a particular denomination. You could also include a special subforum for debate by non-WP members if that's what you all decide. I've always thought that would be a good idea for the congregational areas because a lot of people would like to debate certain beliefs but not in high-traffic and sometimes hostile areas like GT.

It's unlikely that the members of the congregational forums would nominate atheists as moderators in their forums. Atheists would be more likely to be nominated in places like GA and some of the friendship forums.

Another thing you may want to consider is whether you want all of your mods to be of your own denomination(s). Previously on the Ecumenical Team (which has been responsible for overseeing all of the congregational forums), we have not had enough staff to do so, so we have assigned many mods to forums of other denominations. This is not my home forum, but I have worked as part of the WP staff for about a year, in addition to my other duties. Personally, I have enjoyed working in different congregational forums, and I think it can be good to have a mix of people of different perspectives, with at least some who are very familiar with the beliefs of a denomination to address any theological issues that come up. Frankly, though, that doesn't happen too often in a place like WP. Out of all the reports that we received in the last year, there were very few times when specialized doctrinal knowledge was necessary. Most reports deal with things like flaming and spamming and debating in congregational areas--things that any mod should be able to handle. Someone who is a good mod will be a good mod regardless of their denominational affiliation. I know that there are some congregational forums where it would not work to have mods not of those groups, but at least in most Protestant denominations, it's not that big a deal (and in some of the more contentious forums, an outside voice can be a calming influence). Just something to consider as you plan for the future. :)

[Sophia7]

Tried to post this earlier, but they were still working on some things, so I'll give it another try!

...well my question is, since my 'icon' is just 'Christian', am I considered a member in this forum now that the rules have changed? I attend a United Methodist church and this is the place that I consider to be my 'home forum' (or whatever you'd call it, lol)...just wondering how all that works now. Or is that something that has to be decided on in each individual forum as well?

This is something that will have to be decided on in each congregational area--whether you want to let people who identify themselves as Methodist or Nazarene or whatever but use the general Christian icon have full privileges as far as debating and such. This has been a controversy in a few congregational forums. My opinion is that if people self-identify as a member of a group, whether they use that specific icon or a more general one, they should be allowed to debate. If you frequent WP, you get to know who your members are, regardless of their icons. Especially now that icons can be changed by all members themselves, I think it's important to take them at their word. However, you could be more restrictive if you want; it's up to you.

[Sophia7]

All in all I find this whole situation confusing -- on the one hand we have Erwin basically doing away with certain rules and guidelines. Ont he other hand we have denominatinal forums who can now create "rules" to protect their members. What if the "rules" enacted by an individual forum conflict with the general openness of the site as a whole? It seems to me that instead of creating an atmosphere where unity is possible we will quite possibly descend to the middle school clique mentality. How can "everything be open to everyone" but "forums can create rules to exclude debate from those with outside beleifs or no beliefs at all"?

It seems that there are too many contradictions and loopholes for things to work -- even if we are "all adults".

It is my understanding that the congregation-specific rules will not be allowed to contradict the general CF rules--whatever those end up being. With everything up in the air right now, that kind of makes it difficult to make rules, doesn't it? :confused:

[Celticflower]

Especially now that icons can be changed by all members themselves, I think it's important to take them at their word. However, you could be more restrictive if you want; it's up to you.

Since icons can be easily changed now how restrictive can you truly be? Sorry, Maybe I'm just not trusting enough for this new CF.

[Sophia7]

Since icons can be easily changed now how restrictive can you truly be? Sorry, Maybe I'm just not trusting enough for this new CF.

I think most people will be honest about their icons, especially with more openness in general at CF now (such as no more CO areas). Those who are deceptive about things like that usually cause trouble in other ways and are easy to spot.

[Sophia7]

As for rules, I may be anal ^_^ but I don't believe in reinventing the wheel. I kinda like what the Lutherans are doing in their wiki. Here's a Link (http://www.christianforums.com/t5672534-wiki-theologia-crucis-lutherans-tcl.html)

We could use that as a place to start and amend it as needed based on how we want to handle debate.

They have a great start. You could easily adapt something similar to your needs.

[Redheadedstepchild]

Outside of debate, are we concerned about the type of posts that "non-Wesleyans" make? Can they answer questions/teach or must they stick to asking questions and fellowship posts? I'm thinking in particular of people who practice holiness but consider themselves non-denominational or pentecostal.

[Redheadedstepchild]

Since icons can be easily changed now how restrictive can you truly be? Sorry, Maybe I'm just not trusting enough for this new CF.
I think this is where defining who we are in the rules is key. If someone is posting incorrect info we can then ask them to clarify or remove the post.

Besides, if they change icons to post here, then change their icon back to something else, won't the new icon show up in all their posts????

[Sophia7]

I have created a wiki for Wesley's Parish:
http://www.christianforums.com/t5679126-wiki-wesleys-parish-wp.html#post36617084

Anyone can edit it and add rules. It's not hard to do. It can be as simple as regular posting and editing your posts, unless you want to do some fancy formatting. So if you want to get started with writing rules, go ahead. They can be revised as necessary. There have already been some great ideas discussed in this thread.

[Sophia7]

I think this is where defining who we are in the rules is key. If someone is posting incorrect info we can then ask them to clarify or remove the post.

Besides, if they change icons to post here, then change their icon back to something else, won't the new icon show up in all their posts????

Yes, good points. It won't be hard to detect those who are trying to manipulate the rules.

[Redheadedstepchild]

I have created a wiki for Wesley's Parish:
http://www.christianforums.com/t5679126-wiki-wesleys-parish-wp.html#post36617084

Anyone can edit it and add rules. It's not hard to do. It can be as simple as regular posting and editing your posts, unless you want to do some fancy formatting. So if you want to get started with writing rules, go ahead. They can be revised as necessary. There have already been some great ideas discussed in this thread.
Thank you!

[Sophia7]

No problem. :)

[A New Dawn]

I, and some of the other staff, are starting a series of threads in each congregational to lead them in how to accomplish the things that need to be done, since each forum will have the chance to be semi-autonomous. If you want to continue to discuss things here, that is fine, but maybe put a summary in the other threads so we know when you all have reached decisions. :)

Thanks.

[humblet]

Outside of debate, are we concerned about the type of posts that "non-Wesleyans" make? Can they answer questions/teach or must they stick to asking questions and fellowship posts? I'm thinking in particular of people who practice holiness but consider themselves non-denominational or pentecostal.
I don't think that they should be able to teach; I think that this should be a place where people come to learn about Wesleyan theology, so I think they should stick to asking questions and fellowshipping.

[humblet]

I, and some of the other staff, are starting a series of threads in each congregational to lead them in how to accomplish the things that need to be done, since each forum will have the chance to be semi-autonomous. If you want to continue to discuss things here, that is fine, but maybe put a summary in the other threads so we know when you all have reached decisions. :)

Thanks.
So...have we made any decisions yet? Should we wait to get more input from other members or just go ahead and wiki (*L*, that sounds funny ^_^ ) them and tweak as we go?

[Kryzoz]

Apostle's Creed=Belief statement? Maybe

[T2woman]

Wow, I've been under the weather for a few days and Bam... :scratch: Izza Cornfuzed..

All I know is I love the non-adversarial additude here. Some of the other forums are bitter and ugly during some "dabates". I pray that does not happen here:prayer:

[T2woman]

OK, so I spent some time looking at all the various beliefs of our various denominations. I propose that we use the belief statement as posted on the Church of the Nazarene website as a starting point (because it is the most simplified of the statements).

Here it is with some thoughts of mine posted at the end:

These are the beliefs Nazarenes hold to be true:

We believe in one God-the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
We believe that the Old and New Testament Scriptures, given by plenary inspiration, contain all truth necessary to faith and Christian living.
We believe that man is born with a fallen nature, and is, therefore, inclined to evil, and that continually.
We believe that the finally impenitent are hopelessly and eternally lost.
We believe that the atonement through Jesus Christ is for the whole human race; and that whosoever repents and believes on the Lord Jesus Christ is justified and regenerated and saved from the dominion of sin.
We believe that believers are to be sanctified wholly, subsequent to regeneration, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
We believe that the Holy Spirit bears witness to the new birth, and also to the entire sanctification of believers.
We believe that our Lord will return, the dead will be raised, and the final judgment will take place.I propose we add to that the following:

We believe we are justified by faith alone, and not by good works. However, good works are seen as a natural fruit growing out of faith.
I also think it may be a good idea to briefly describe prevenient, justifying, and sanctifying grace, and provide a statement about free will. A link to the Wesleyan Quadrilateral might be a good idea as well.

The only thing I am having trouble with is the idea of whole or entire sanctification…I believe that sanctification is a lifelong process, as we are human and will always struggle with sin. But that’s why someone else really needs to chime in as my understanding of doctrine is basic at best.
I love this! Thank you for posting it. :)

[Redheadedstepchild]

So...have we made any decisions yet? Should we wait to get more input from other members or just go ahead and wiki (*L*, that sounds funny ^_^ ) them and tweak as we go?
no decisions, just a lot of me rambling.

I won't be quite so hyper once school starts up again!

[Redheadedstepchild]

I don't think that they should be able to teach; I think that this should be a place where people come to learn about Wesleyan theology, so I think they should stick to asking questions and fellowshipping.

Ok

Apostle's Creed=Belief statement? Maybe

I almost included it. I think it's a good place to start. We might also include some basic info about those things that are unique to the Wesleyan tradition.


All I know is I love the non-adversarial additude here. Some of the other forums are bitter and ugly during some "dabates". I pray that does not happen here:prayer:

No kidding!

Actually, I think the one thing everyone seems to agree with so far is having a sub forum for debate. Is that right?

[Redheadedstepchild]

Ok, y'all go check out the Calvinist Wiki here (http://www.christianforums.com/t5677834-wiki-semper-reformanda.html)

I like the way this is set up. We could do something similar and provide links to our individual denominations belief statements, much like our "Who we are/What we believe" sticky thread. It looks like they are also setting up separate areas for debate. Here are the rules they have posted:

B. Conduct
1. Members
a. As a member you are duty bound to uphold the doctrine set out under A1.

b. This does not mean, for example, that someone affirming the London Baptist Confession of 1689 cannot criticize or question the Articles of Religion.

c. Only members may be moderators of SR.

2. Non-Members:
a. Whilst we welcome non-SR members from seeking a greater understanding of our beliefs and practice this must be confined to the sub-forum “Ask a Calvinist”.
b. Whilst we welcome non-SR members who wish to debate with us our beliefs and practice this must be confined to the sub-forum “Debate with a Calvinist”.
c. Threads that seek to undermine the doctrine set out under A1 are not permitted anywhere except the sub-forum “Debate with a Calvinist”.


These rules can only be changed by a three-quarters majority vote of the Semper Reformanda membership. All voting will take place over a period of two weeks in a public poll.

What do you guys think?

[humblet]

Apostle's Creed=Belief statement? Maybe

Modern English Version
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, God's only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended (http://www.creeds.net/ancient/descendit.htm) to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. AMEN.


And here's the Nicene Creed for good measure:

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary
and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father [and the Son],
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Ok I almost included it. I think it's a good place to start. We might also include some basic info about those things that are unique to the Wesleyan tradition.
Agreed :thumbsup:


Actually, I think the one thing everyone seems to agree with so far is having a sub forum for debate. Is that right?
That sounds right to me. If it's not, somebody chime in!

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

what in the world is going on..why are a bunch of the above posts saying "ANONYMOUS REPORTER" ...if you look at the bottom of each post you can see many diffeent people made the posts because you can see the link to each persons home page. What happened??

[Redheadedstepchild]

Oh, that's weird. Are all the threads like that?

[humblet]

Just came across this. It's from the U.M website, but under the heading 'Distinctive Wesleyan Emphases' and it covers things such as prevenient grace, justification and assurance, sanctification and perfection, and faith and good works. Is it something you think we can use?

http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1812

[Redheadedstepchild]

Just came across this. It's from the U.M website, but under the heading 'Distinctive Wesleyan Emphases' and it covers things such as prevenient grace, justification and assurance, sanctification and perfection, and faith and good works. Is it something you think we can use?

http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?mid=1812

:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:

Yay!!!!

(I don't know about you, but I find the UMC website a pain to navigate)

Seriously, you should put that in the Wiki thread.

[humblet]

:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow:

Yay!!!!

(I don't know about you, but I find the UMC website a pain to navigate)

Seriously, you should put that in the Wiki thread.
*L* yeah, I know what you mean. I googled Wesleyan theology and found it that way ;)

Do you mean just put the link in the Wiki thread? I haven't been there yet, so it'll have to wait til morning and I can figure out what I'm doing, lol (unless someone else would like to do it?)

Heading off to bed soon...'nite everybody, and God bless you all! :hug:

[zoziw]

I don't often post in the congregational forums, when I do it is usually in WP.

I just made a comment to the Wiki asking if the Evangelical Missionary Church of Canada could be added to the list of denominations. I have left a link to our Statement of Faith in the Wiki and highlighted some of the distinctive Methodist views in it.

Let me know if it can be added. :)

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

So have we decided to have a debate subforum or not?
could someone tell me how to add somethign to the wiki.. i am clueless

[Sophia7]

So have we decided to have a debate subforum or not?

There seems to be a consensus in favor of it.


could someone tell me how to add somethign to the wiki.. i am cluelessThere's an edit button at the bottom of the wiki page. Just click that, and you can add stuff to it. It's very similar to editing a regular post. There is also a discussion button if you want to discuss any of your changes or suggestions there.

[Redheadedstepchild]

Here is the belief statement from the Evangical Missionary Church of Canada:beliefs (http://www.emcc.ca/default.asp?id=6)

Is your church charismatic? If so would you be comfortable with not teaching or debating about spiritual gifts here? (I'm not making any rules - just throwing out ideas for discussion). Other than that, I think the beliefs are pretty similar to the other Wesleyan churches.

What does everyone else think?

[zoziw]

Is your church charismatic?

No, we are not charismatic.

[Celticflower]

*L* yeah, I know what you mean. I googled Wesleyan theology and found it that way ;)

Do you mean just put the link in the Wiki thread? I haven't been there yet, so it'll have to wait til morning and I can figure out what I'm doing, lol (unless someone else would like to do it?)

Heading off to bed soon...'nite everybody, and God bless you all! :hug:
I suggest pasting the whole thing not just posting the link. It is really easy for people to not click a link, but if it is in front of their eyes they may take the time to read it.

[GraceSeeker]

The ONE thing that I don't want is to have battles between differing points of view as to what is and is not right theology. Save that for some place else on the board.

Since CF has divisions for differing theological perspectives, I like to think of them as a place of sanctuary for those of that perspective. Here, in our own place, I can delve into things like "How does ones view of entire sanctification effect the way I do ministry?", without having to stop half way through the discussion because someone with a different theological bent wants to challenge my idea of sanctification as all wrong.

I certainly don't mind if said person wants me to explain what my view of sanctification is and why I believe in it, but I don't want to get side tracked into endless debates about it. Again, save that for General Theology.

If preserving the quietness of Wesley's Parish means that we limit Calvinists from coming in here to debate, so be it. I have plenty of other places where I can engage in that debate and where they can engage me. But, I do think having a sub-forum where non-Wesleyans can come and ask questions and perhaps engage in more back and forth discussions (but again not battles) would be something I am amenable to.




As to some of the suggested theological statements of faith, I wonder if we need them at all? Wouldn't it be enough to be a self-described Wesleyan based on their identity as belonging to the denominations previously associated with this space? Yes, I know that people will be able to change their identification, but those who do so to troll by jumping from thread to thread are going to be found out rather quickly and can be delt with by the mods.

One of the things I have been reminded of frequently in the United Methodist Church is just how pluralistic we are. Set a codified theological point of view and we may have many United Methodists who are excluded from Wesley's Parish. Something would just seem wrong about that. And how would one moderate the integrity of one's assumed theological point of view. Are we going to really tell someone who has been a lifelong member of one of the Wesleyan denominations that they are too Calvinistic to debate that subject in Wesley's Parish? Would we exclude George Whitfield just because he didn't agree with John Wesley on everything?

[GraceSeeker]

I don't often post in the congregational forums, when I do it is usually in WP.

I just made a comment to the Wiki asking if the Evangelical Missionary Church of Canada could be added to the list of denominations. I have left a link to our Statement of Faith in the Wiki and highlighted some of the distinctive Methodist views in it.

Let me know if it can be added. :)

Here is the belief statement from the Evangical Missionary Church of Canada:beliefs (http://www.emcc.ca/default.asp?id=6)

Is your church charismatic? If so would you be comfortable with not teaching or debating about spiritual gifts here? (I'm not making any rules - just throwing out ideas for discussion). Other than that, I think the beliefs are pretty similar to the other Wesleyan churches.

What does everyone else think?

No, we are not charismatic.



This I think is part of the danger of actually listing a set of theological beliefs to be allowed to participate in debate in the forum vs. my suggestion that we consider participation based on membership in a particular denomination.

If one compares Evangelical Missionary Church of Canada beliefs with those of the United Methodist Church there are several points of conflict. So coming up with our WP list of theological beliefs that all can accept will be like creating a new denomination out of all of the potential ones -- either it will be so specific as to exclude nearly everyone, or so general as to include nearly everyone. I don't think either of those options would serve us well. Yet, while there are differences between us, on the whole it seems there might be a fit -- after all I don't think we are trying to replicate COCU. (Who here even remembers that disaster?)

[Redheadedstepchild]

Yeah, I sorta realized that when I went looking through all the beliefs...it got overwhelming real quick. My idea is to provide links to the beliefs of the different churches, so that if someone wants more info they can at least have a reference.

[humblet]

The ONE thing that I don't want is to have battles between differing points of view as to what is and is not right theology. Save that for some place else on the board.

Since CF has divisions for differing theological perspectives, I like to think of them as a place of sanctuary for those of that perspective. Here, in our own place, I can delve into things like "How does ones view of entire sanctification effect the way I do ministry?", without having to stop half way through the discussion because someone with a different theological bent wants to challenge my idea of sanctification as all wrong.

I certainly don't mind if said person wants me to explain what my view of sanctification is and why I believe in it, but I don't want to get side tracked into endless debates about it. Again, save that for General Theology.

If preserving the quietness of Wesley's Parish means that we limit Calvinists from coming in here to debate, so be it. I have plenty of other places where I can engage in that debate and where they can engage me. But, I do think having a sub-forum where non-Wesleyans can come and ask questions and perhaps engage in more back and forth discussions (but again not battles) would be something I am amenable to.

I think that everyone who has commented has agreed that we don't want battles here with those of other faiths coming in telling us we're wrong and they're right! As I'm trying to understand what you're saying, you're in favor of an area in WP for others to come in and ask questions and engage in discussions? Are you using the words discussion and debate interchanegably? I believe that I've seen other groups here decide to have a discussion/debate area and leaving room for the mods to be able to step in when necessary if things become too heated and do whatever mods do (move the thread to a more appropriate place or close it or whatever...) is this the sort of thing you have in mind?

As to some of the suggested theological statements of faith, I wonder if we need them at all? Wouldn't be enough to be a self-described Wesleyan based on their identity as belonging to the denominations previously associated with this space? Yes, I know that people will be able to change their identification, but those who do so to troll by jumping from thread to thread are going to be found out rather quickly and can be delt with by the mods.

One of the things I have been reminded of frequently in the United Methodist Church is just how pluralistic we are. Set a codified theological point of view and we may have many United Methodists who are excluded from Wesley's Parish. Something would just seem wrong about that. And how would one moderate the integrity of one's assumed theological point of view. Are we going to really tell someone who has been a lifelong member of one of the Wesleyan denominations that they are too Calvinistic to debate that subject in Wesley's Parish? Would we exclude George Whitfield just because he didn't agree with John Wesley on everything?

I think that we need to have *something* written, if not at least the Nicene creed which was what those who posted in any of the Christian's Only section had to adhere to before these changes took place. I've seen in another denomination's rules that to be a member they must adhere to the Nicene Creed as well as at least one of the following and then gave a list of things that were specific to that denomination. Of course there are differences in belief, otherwise we'd all call ourselves Wesleyans or Methodists or Nazarenes or whatever. But what are the things (beliefs) that we can all identify with that set us apart from other denominations? For someone who doesn't know if they're really Wesleyan or not, what would we tell them it is that makes us that?

[Redheadedstepchild]

The ONE thing that I don't want is to have battles between differing points of view as to what is and is not right theology. Save that for some place else on the board.

Since CF has divisions for differing theological perspectives, I like to think of them as a place of sanctuary for those of that perspective. Here, in our own place, I can delve into things like "How does ones view of entire sanctification effect the way I do ministry?", without having to stop half way through the discussion because someone with a different theological bent wants to challenge my idea of sanctification as all wrong.

I certainly don't mind if said person wants me to explain what my view of sanctification is and why I believe in it, but I don't want to get side tracked into endless debates about it. Again, save that for General Theology.

If preserving the quietness of Wesley's Parish means that we limit Calvinists from coming in here to debate, so be it. I have plenty of other places where I can engage in that debate and where they can engage me. But, I do think having a sub-forum where non-Wesleyans can come and ask questions and perhaps engage in more back and forth discussions (but again not battles) would be something I am amenable to.



There has been a proposal for a subforum for debate. Perhaps instead it could be a subforum for question/discussion.

I guess we may need to define the difference between discussion and debate.

[Redheadedstepchild]

I suggest pasting the whole thing not just posting the link. It is really easy for people to not click a link, but if it is in front of their eyes they may take the time to read it.
Well, if you go to the link you will see that it's 2 pages long. I think it is good information to have however. What if we posted a summary?

[GraceSeeker]

There has been a proposal for a subforum for debate. Perhaps instead it could be a subforum for question/discussion.

I guess we may need to define the difference between discussion and debate.


For me there is little difference between those ideas. Discussion is debate when there are differences politely discussed. Once it is no longer polite then it becomes an argument. The difference between them is often more in tone than in substance. To draw that line is something I think we can leave to moderator discreation.

[humblet]

This I think is part of the danger of actually listing a set of theological beliefs to be allowed to participate in debate in the forum vs. my suggestion that we consider participation based on membership in a particular denomination.
So is your suggestion then to allow people who are *members* (as opposed to those who only attend services) of those denominations to be members here? (Sorry, sometimes I'm slow, lol) Just want to clarify what you're proposing :)

Here is what the former "rules" stated:


This forum is for members of and people who attend Wesleyan Churches (this includes Methodists, Church of the Nazerene, Wesleyan Church, ect.).
Non-Wesleyans (Catholics, Presbyterians, Baptists, ect.) can only ask questions and make fellowship posts. Non-Wesleyans are not allowed to debate under forum rules in this forum.

[GraceSeeker]

I think that we need to have *something* written, if not at least the Nicene creed which was what those who posted in any of the Christian's Only section had to adhere to before these changes took place. I've seen in another denomination's rules that to be a member they must adhere to the Nicene Creed as well as at least one of the following and then gave a list of things that were specific to that denomination. Of course there are differences in belief, otherwise we'd all call ourselves Wesleyans or Methodists or Nazarenes or whatever. But what are the things (beliefs) that we can all identify with that set us apart from other denominations? For someone who doesn't know if they're really Wesleyan or not, what would we tell them it is that makes us that?


Well, again I'm not sure that we really do need to have something written -- the UMC doesn't even have an "official" statement of faith. (Check out our Book of Discipline and decision by our Judicial Council if you were unaware of that; you will see that we have historical documents but no creed.) The closest thing we have that is "official" is not our Articles of Religion (which I personally would think is a pretty good standard) but the preamble of our constitution:The Church [so note, this is a statement about our view of the universal Church, not the United Methodist Church] is a community of all true believers under the Lordship of Christ. It is the redeemed and redeeming fellowship in which the Word of God is preached by persons divinely callled, and the Sacraments are duly administered according to Christ's own appointment. Under the discipline of the Holy Spirit the Church seeks to provide for the maintenance of worship, the edification of believers, and the redemption of the world.

The Church of Jesus Christ exists in and for the world, and its very dividedness is a hindrance to its mission in the world....

[Celticflower]

Well, if you go to the link you will see that it's 2 pages long. I think it is good information to have however. What if we posted a summary?
That would work for me.

[GraceSeeker]

Well, I tried to post in wiki, but I guess I can't till I get to 100 posts. So, I guess I'll just take up space here.

It has been suggested by some that we do need some sort of statement. While I don't see the same need for it that others do, I am willing to contribute to the discussion if that is what is truly desired. Thus allow me to suggest the following for consideration. I think it is Wesleyan in character. While I doubt anything will be accept with unanimity, it might, nonetheless, be something around which we can find a great deal of concurance. I have constructed it using as a template many of the different denomination links provided in the wiki space, however it is not the statement of any one particular denomination. Thus, I must take full responsibility for its content, whether it is useful for our purposes or not.



A PROPSOED STATEMENT OF FAITH FOR THE WESLEY'S PARISH COMMUNITY

The Holy Trinity
We affirm the existence of the one Eternal God who has revealed Himself as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, three distinct Persons, mysteriously united as one being in the Godhead which the Church historically has described as the Holy Trinity.

God The Father
We affirm that the first Person of the Holy Trinity, God the Father, is the Eternal One and reigns supremely. He has provided a covenant through which His creatures can be redeemed and through which His creation will be liberated from evil and brought to final righteousness at the end of the age.

God The Son
We affirm that the second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Eternal Son, became incarnate as Mary's virgin-born Child, Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ. In His unique Person, He revealed to us both the fullness of deity and the fullness of humanity. By His life, suffering, death, resurrection and ascension He provided the only way of salvation. His sacrifice on the cross once for all was to reconcile the Holy God and sinners, was an atoning sacrifice for the whole of humanity, and thereby provides the only way of access to the Father.
Now He intercedes as High Priest before the Father, awaiting the day when He will return to judge every person, living and dead, and to consummate His Kingdom.

God The Holy Spirit
We affirm that the third Person of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit, was active from the beginning in creation, revelation and redemption. It was through His anointing that prophets received the Word of God, priests became intermediaries between God and His people, and kings were given ruling authority. The Spirit's presence and power, measured in the Old Testament, were found without measure in Jesus of Nazareth, the Anointed. The Spirit convicts and woos the lost, gives new birth to the penitent and abides in the believer, perfecting holiness and empowering the Church to carry out Christ's mission in the world. He came to indwell His Church at Pentecost, enabling believers to yield fruit and endowing them with spiritual gifts according to His will. He bears witness to Christ and guides God's people into His truth. He inspired the Holy Scriptures, God's written Word, and continues to illuminate His people concerning His will and truth. His guidance is always in harmony with Christ and the truth as given in the Holy Scriptures.

Humanity
We affirm that man and woman are fashioned in the image of God and are different from all of God's other creatures. God intends that we should glorify Him and enjoy Him forever. Since the Fall of Adam the corruption of sin has pervaded every person and extended into social relationships, societal systems, and all creation. This corruption is so pervasive that we are not capable, apart from the grace of God, of positive response to God's offer of redemption. However, we also affirm that the prevenient, or preparing grace of God can be found in this world, the action of God calling people to himself. Only through the justifying, regenerating and sanctifying work of the Triune God can we be easily conformed to the image of Christ, and restored to the relationships which God has intended for us.

The Holy Scriptures
We affirm as the only written Word of God the Old and New Testaments. These Holy Scriptures contain all that is necessary for our knowledge of God's holy and sovereign will, of Jesus Christ the only Redeemer, of our salvation, and of our growth in grace. They are to be received through the Holy Spirit as the guide and final authority for the faith and conduct of individuals and the doctrines and life of the Church. Whatever is not clearly revealed in, or plainly established as truth by, the Holy Scriptures cannot be required as an article of faith nor be taught as essential to salvation. Anything contrary to the teachings of the Holy Scriptures is contrary to the purposes of God and must, therefore, be opposed. The authority of Scripture derives from the fact that God, through His Spirit, inspired the authors, causing them to perceive God's truth and record it. Though these Holy Scriptures have been preserved during the long process of transmission through copyists and translators imperfectly, we nonetheless hold them to have been preserved with sufficient reliability as to still be trusted as supremely authoritative for the Church's teaching, preaching, witness, identifying error, correcting the erring, and training believers for ministry in and through the Church.

Salvation
We affirm that God offers salvation to a sinful humanity and a lost world through Jesus Christ. By His death on the cross the sinless Son propitiated the holy wrath of the Father, a righteous anger occasioned by sin. No other satisfaction for sin is necessary; none other can atone. By His resurrection from the dead, the glorified Son raises us to newness of life. When we appropriate by faith God's atoning work in Jesus Christ we are forgiven, justified, regenerated by His Holy Spirit, and adopted into the family of God. By His grace He sanctifies His children, purifying their hearts by faith, renewing them in the image of God, and enabling them to love God and neighbor with whole heart. The fullness of God's great salvation will come with the return of Christ. This cosmic event will signal the resurrection of the saved to eternal life and the lost to eternal damnation, the liberation of creation from the Adamic curse, God's final victory over every power and dominion, and the establishment of the new heaven and the new earth.
Through the declaration of Scripture and the testimony of the Holy Spirit, the obedient believer can be certain of forgiveness, salvation, a continuing walk with Christ, and the promise of resurrection life. The Scriptures do, however, warn against failing to abide in Christ, being hardened by sin, or being overcome by the world. To allow such an approach to the praxis of one’s faith is to open oneself to the temptation to consciously reject Christ, abandon one's faith, and ultimately be lost. On the other hand, those who allow for the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit in their lives are, through His grace, enabled to love God with all their hearts, souls, strength, and minds, and their neighbor as themselves, and thus prepared for greater growth in grace.

The Church
We affirm that the Church of Jesus Christ is the community of all true believers under His sovereign Lordship. This Church, the Body of Christ, is one because it shares one Lord, one faith, one baptism. It is holy because it belongs to God and is set apart for His purposes in the world. It is apostolic because it partakes of the authority granted to the apostles by Christ Himself. It is universal because it includes all believers, both living and dead, in every nation, regardless of denominational affiliation. Its authenticity is to be found wherever the pure Word of God is preached and taught; wherever the Sacraments of Baptism and Holy Communion are celebrated in obedience to Christ's command; wherever the gifts of the Holy Spirit upbuild the body and bring spiritual growth; wherever the Spirit of God creates a loving, caring fellowship, and a faithfulness in witness and service to the world; and wherever discipline is administered with love under the guidance of the Word of God. The Church, as the Bride of Christ, will ultimately be joined with her Lord in triumphant glory.

Ethics
We affirm that we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works. These works are the loving expressions of gratitude by the believer for the new life received in Christ. They do not earn one's salvation nor are they a substitute for God's work of redemption. Rather, they are the result of regeneration and are manifest in the believer as evidence of a living faith.
God's law for all human life, personal and social, is expressed in two divine commands: Love the Lord God with all your heart, and love your neighbor as yourself. These commands reveal what is best for persons in their relationship with God, others, and society. They set forth the principles of human duty in both individual and social action.
God has called us to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with Him. In the Scriptures are found the standards and principles that guide the believer in this walk. These ethical imperatives, willingly accepted by the believer, enable us to be a part of God's purpose in the world. Moreover, in this we are called to an obedience that does not stop short of our willingness to suffer for righteousness' sake, even unto death.
Our life in Christ includes an unstinting devotion to deeds of kindness and mercy and a wholehearted participation in collective efforts to alleviate need and suffering. The believer will work for honesty, justice and equity in human affairs, all of which witness to inherent rights and a basic dignity common to all persons created in the image of God. Such contemporary issues as racism, housing, welfare, education, capitalism, hunger, crime, sexism, family relationships, aging, sexuality, drugs and alcohol, abortion, leisure, pornography, terrorism and related issues call for prayerful consideration, thoughtful analysis and appropriate action from Christians, and must always be a matter of concern to the Church. Thus, we remember that faith without works is dead.

[GraceSeeker]

So is your suggestion then to allow people who are *members* (as opposed to those who only attend services) of those denominations to be members here? (Sorry, sometimes I'm slow, lol) Just want to clarify what you're proposing :)

Here is what the former "rules" stated:

This forum is for members of and people who attend Wesleyan Churches (this includes Methodists, Church of the Nazerene, Wesleyan Church, ect.).
Non-Wesleyans (Catholics, Presbyterians, Baptists, ect.) can only ask questions and make fellowship posts. Non-Wesleyans are not allowed to debate under forum rules in this forum.

No. I wasn't using the term "member" in an official sense.

By "member" I was really referring to anyone who choose to self-identify on this forum as being primarily affiliated with one of those "Wesleyan" denominations as previously (or perhaps subsequently) defined. The means of that affiliation -- whether by membership, attendance, or simply self-perception -- was something I was willing to leave in the hands of the individual to determine for him/herself.

For example, you might have a person that was born and raised in a non-Wesleyan denomination employed as a part-time youth worker in a Wesleyan congregation. Though they would come from a different theological perspective, I would be willing to receive more than just "fellowship" posts from such a person. So, if they wanted to, for the purposes of this forum, self-identify as a Wesleyan, even if they might actually be a member elsewhere, I would not be opposed to that.

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

There seems to be a consensus in favor of it.


There's an edit button at the bottom of the wiki page. Just click that, and you can add stuff to it. It's very similar to editing a regular post. There is also a discussion button if you want to discuss any of your changes or suggestions there.
thank you for your help

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

maybe we are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. There are going to be CF wide rules that applly everywhere on the board that will cover all the basics. in my opinion the only rule we need to add to our subforum is no debating unless you are part of wesleys parish. Then if we want we can create subforum FOR those that do wish to debate..but we havent made a final decision on the subforum idea..we might need a poll for that..if so, ill create a poll..let me know.

[Sophia7]

Yeah, I sorta realized that when I went looking through all the beliefs...it got overwhelming real quick. My idea is to provide links to the beliefs of the different churches, so that if someone wants more info they can at least have a reference.

May I suggest that you do that in a sticky thread in your forum rather than in the rules? Otherwise, the rules could get too ponderous and overwhelming to people who visit WP. Maybe you could leave it at listing the groups that are allowed to debate here.

If you really want to include more info about those groups in the rules, you could embed a link to their websites (for example, United Methodist Church (http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1353935/k.69CC/The_mission_of_The_United_Methodist_Church_is_to_make_disciples_of_Jesus_Christ.htm)). However, I think most people who just want to find out your rules wouldn't click on additional links.

[RadicallyTransformedMom]

May I suggest that you do that in a sticky thread in your forum rather than in the rules? Otherwise, the rules could get too ponderous and overwhelming to people who visit WP. Maybe you could leave it at listing the groups that are allowed to debate here.

If you really want to include more info about those groups in the rules, you could embed a link to their websites (for example, United Methodist Church (http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1353935/k.69CC/The_mission_of_The_United_Methodist_Church_is_to_make_disciples_of_Jesus_Christ.htm)). However, I think most people who just want to find out your rules wouldn't click on additional links.
i really think what your saying makes sense! i think a sticky is a great idea..who else agrees??

[GraceSeeker]

maybe we are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. There are going to be CF wide rules that applly everywhere on the board that will cover all the basics. in my opinion the only rule we need to add to our subforum is no debating unless you are part of wesleys parish. Then if we want we can create subforum FOR those that do wish to debate..but we havent made a final decision on the subforum idea..we might need a poll for that..if so, ill create a poll..let me know.

May I suggest that you do that in a sticky thread in your forum rather than in the rules? Otherwise, the rules could get too ponderous and overwhelming to people who visit WP. Maybe you could leave it at listing the groups that are allowed to debate here.

If you really want to include more info about those groups in the rules, you could embed a link to their websites (for example, United Methodist Church (http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1353935/k.69CC/The_mission_of_The_United_Methodist_Church_is_to_make_disciples_of_Jesus_Christ.htm)). However, I think most people who just want to find out your rules wouldn't click on additional links.


Yep. That's pretty much where I've been on this all along -- though coming up with my own statement of faith was sort of a fun exercise.


(BTW, thanks for the info on how to post in wiki, but I'm a newbie and it continues to tell me I need to reach 100 posts first.)

[Sophia7]

(BTW, thanks for the info on how to post in wiki, but I'm a newbie and it continues to tell me I need to reach 100 posts first.)

Oh, I didn't realize that. Well, you could make a bunch of quick posts in the Friendship forums or somewhere. ;)

[Redheadedstepchild]

If you really want to include more info about those groups in the rules, you could embed a link to their websites (for example, United Methodist Church (http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1353935/k.69CC/The_mission_of_The_United_Methodist_Church_is_to_make_disciples_of_Jesus_Christ.htm)). However, I think most people who just want to find out your rules wouldn't click on additional links.

This is what I did...only I didn't put them in the Wiki, just in the discussion pending what everyone decided. We already have a sticky thread...which probably needs to be updated with a few more links.

I think we need *something* that defines a bit who we are, but I'm all for just the one rule of debating only in the debate subforum.

[Redheadedstepchild]

maybe we are making this way more complicated than it needs to be. There are going to be CF wide rules that applly everywhere on the board that will cover all the basics. in my opinion the only rule we need to add to our subforum is no debating unless you are part of wesleys parish. Then if we want we can create subforum FOR those that do wish to debate..but we havent made a final decision on the subforum idea..we might need a poll for that..if so, ill create a poll..let me know.
Yes, a poll!

[Sophia7]

Yes, a poll!

I believe that the plan for the congregational forums is to come to some kind of consensus in the wiki, and then the list of rules that is created will be put into a poll and voted on by the members of that forum.

[Redheadedstepchild]

Ok, well then everyone please go check the Wiki discussion and post your thoughts about whether or not you would like a debate forum, if any other rules are needed, and if you would like to have some kind of beliefs statement in the Wiki.

TY!!!:)

[GraceSeeker]

Ok, well then everyone please go check the Wiki discussion and post your thoughts about whether or not you would like a debate forum, if any other rules are needed, and if you would like to have some kind of beliefs statement in the Wiki.

TY!!!:)


I guess that leaves me out. I need another 70 posts to post in Wiki and I don't intend to post just for postings sake.

Also, if anyone finds my suggested belief statement worth being part of the discussion, http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=36646141&postcount=90, someone else is going to have to copy it and post it there as I can't.

[Sophia7]

Ok, well then everyone please go check the Wiki discussion and post your thoughts about whether or not you would like a debate forum, if any other rules are needed, and if you would like to have some kind of beliefs statement in the Wiki.

TY!!!:)

If you all decide that you want a debate subforum, you should read this wiki:
http://www.christianforums.com/t5677070-wiki-creation-of-a-new-congregational-forum.html

You can request a new forum in the Suggest New Forums (http://www.christianforums.com/f395-suggest-new-forums.html) area.

[Sophia7]

I don't intend to post just for postings sake.

I wouldn't either. :)

[humblet]

Well, I tried to post in wiki, but I guess I can't till I get to 100 posts. So, I guess I'll just take up space here.

It has been suggested by some that we do need some sort of statement. While I don't see the same need for it that others do, I am willing to contribute to the discussion if that is what is truly desired. Thus allow me to suggest the following for consideration. I think it is Wesleyan in character. While I doubt anything will be accept with unanimity, it might, nonetheless, be something around which we can find a great deal of concurance. I have constructed it using as a template many of the different denomination links provided in the wiki space, however it is not the statement of any one particular denomination. Thus, I must take full responsibility for its content, whether it is useful for our purposes or not.

Thanks for taking the time to write this all out:thumbsup: It was pretty long, so I'm not quoting all that you wrote, but I think it's post #90. Thoughts everyone?

[Redheadedstepchild]

I guess that leaves me out. I need another 70 posts to post in Wiki and I don't intend to post just for postings sake.

Also, if anyone finds my suggested belief statement worth being part of the discussion, http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=36646141&postcount=90, someone else is going to have to copy it and post it there as I can't.
Why are you out? I can copy & paste your ideas there unless anyone has an objection.

[GraceSeeker]

I can copy & paste your ideas there unless anyone has an objection.

¡Muchas gracías!

[Redheadedstepchild]

¡Muchas gracías!
Ok! Let me know what else you would like to put up. :)

[hugheschase9]

i want to have a new CF!!!

[Diane_Windsor]

I just don't want anyone coming in here to tell us that our core beliefs are wrong. So maybe to that end we need to further define and list out what makes us Wesleyan (in a broad sense), so that people will understand when they come in what is not up for debate.

I agree with you. I think all congregational fora need to define their terms. :) Define the term "Wesleyan" for this forum.

My .02 cents . . .

[GraceSeeker]

I agree with you. I think all congregational fora need to define their terms. :) Define the term "Wesleyan" for this forum.

My .02 cents . . .

Wesleyan (adjective)

1. A person who adheres to the basic theological positions preached as part of the Wesleyan revival that occurred in England in the mid-1700s.

2. A follower of the tenets taught by John Wesley.

3. Of or pertaining to the Wesleys (John and Charles).

4. A member of the Wesleyan Church.

[Redheadedstepchild]

Wesleyan (adjective)

1. A person who adheres to the basic theological positions preached as part of the Wesleyan revival that occurred in England in the mid-1700s.

2. A follower of the tenets taught by John Wesley.

3. Of or pertaining to the Wesleys (John and Charles).

4. A member of the Wesleyan Church.
added to the wiki discussion.

[Sophia7]

Beyond the definitions, you're going to need to start making some concrete decisions on whether you want to create a debate sub-forum. As I recall, the consensus was moving toward that. So far your rules are similar to how they were before, which is fine, but the sub-forum idea has not been settled yet. As it is, it will be hard to enforce any rules in the congregational areas until their forum-specific rules are solidified.

As I understand it, the plan is to leave the wiki open for a week or two until the rules are pretty well formulated and everyone who wants to has had a chance to contribute. Then you can create a poll and take a vote from your members to approve the new rules. If you haven't done so already, you may want to take a look at some of the other congregational wikis to see how they are writing their rules. It could give you some ideas about any additional things you may want to add to your rules. :)

It would probably also be good to add something about voting on the rules being allowed only by Wesleyans.

[humblet]

Yes, I had a question about that. How are we going to know who is a member/ who is allowed to vote? Will people have to 'sign up' so to speak and say this is their congregational forum? Will there be a list of members kept somewhere? Just wondering how that is supposed to work.....

[Sophia7]

Yes, I had a question about that. How are we going to know who is a member/ who is allowed to vote? Will people have to 'sign up' so to speak and say this is their congregational forum? Will there be a list of members kept somewhere? Just wondering how that is supposed to work.....

I think you can decide that. You could start a voter-registration thread, I suppose, and require people to sign up ahead of time in order to have their vote counted. Another option would be to just state the requirement in the wiki and trust that people are who they say they are when they vote. You could go by icons, but not everyone has a denomination-specific icon. You probably know who your regular posters are, and you could check the votes and discount any that are obviously done by non-Wesleyans. You could also require a minimum number of posts in order to be eligible to vote or something. It's up to you. (Some of these ideas could be applied to voting on moderators when the time comes, too.)

I wouldn't expect too many people to try to taint your poll. This is a pretty quiet forum, and you all are fairly agreeable :). Some congregational forums are going through a much more contentious process of forming rules (my own, for example :().

[GraceSeeker]

I think you can decide that. You could start a voter-registration thread, I suppose, and require people to sign up ahead of time in order to have their vote counted. Another option would be to just state the requirement in the wiki and trust that people are who they say they are when they vote. You could go by icons, but not everyone has a denomination-specific icon. You probably know who your regular posters are, and you could check the votes and discount any that are obviously done by non-Wesleyans. You could also require a minimum number of posts in order to be eligible to vote or something. It's up to you. (Some of these ideas could be applied to voting on moderators when the time comes, too.)

I wouldn't expect too many people to try to taint your poll. This is a pretty quiet forum, and you all are fairly agreeable :). Some congregational forums are going through a much more contentious process of forming rules (my own, for example :().


Personally, I like the idea of using icons.

When you say that not everyone has a denomination-specific icon, I am assuming the problem is that there are is no way to design a new icon for all 342,729 different denominations in the world. Is there a way to create an icon specific to each congregational forum? Then we could just require that one "registers" by being willing to use our Wesely Parish icon if they don't use an icon from a list of the recognized Wesleyan denominations.

[humblet]

I think that the Lutheran denominational forum has done a wonderful job regarding the new "rules". I especially appreciate how they were able to clarify who is eligible to be a "full" member of their congregational forum as well as how those members will be identified:

"2. Generally full members will be members of a Lutheran or Moravian congregation, but realizing that that is not always possible, there might be some who are Lutheran who do not belong for whatever reason to such a congregation. Note that a Lutheran congregation doesn't have to have Lutheran in it's name.

These individuals who are Lutheran without belonging to a Lutheran congregation, will however have certain characteristics.
A. They will uphold the Apostles, Nicene, and Anthansian Creeds (http://www.bookofconcord.org/creeds.html).
B. They will hold to the Augsburg Confession (http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.html) as a true confession of biblical truths.
C. They will hold the five solas as they were originally formulated.
a. sola Scriptura, scripture alone, the books of the New and Old Testament in the Bible are the sole rule and norm of faith.

b. sola Gracia, grace alone, we are saved totally by the grace of God and man cannot contribute or cooperate in his justification.

c. sola Fida, faith alone, we are saved through faith, and not by works.

d. solus Christus, Christ alone, we are saved totally for the glory and by the works of Christ.

e. soli Deo Gloria, glory to God alone. The purpose of everything is and totally shall be the glory of God.

It is asked that full members either display through their icons (either outwardly exposed or identifying Lutheran in some way when a cursor hovers over the faith icon) or put something identifying themselves as such somewhere such as in their signature line in order to help the moderators of the forum."

If you'd like to see the rest of what they've done (perhaps we'd like to model ours similarly?) read here: http://www.christianforums.com/t5672534-wiki-theologia-crucis-lutherans-tcl.html

[GraceSeeker]

I think that the Lutheran denominational forum has done a wonderful job regarding the new "rules". I especially appreciate how they were able to clarify who is eligible to be a "full" member of their congregational forum as well as how those members will be identified:

"2. Generally full members will be members of a Lutheran or Moravian congregation, but realizing that that is not always possible, there might be some who are Lutheran who do not belong for whatever reason to such a congregation. Note that a Lutheran congregation doesn't have to have Lutheran in it's name.

These individuals who are Lutheran without belonging to a Lutheran congregation, will however have certain characteristics.
A. They will uphold the Apostles, Nicene, and Anthansian Creeds (http://www.bookofconcord.org/creeds.html).
B. They will hold to the Augsburg Confession (http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.html) as a true confession of biblical truths.
C. They will hold the five solas as they were originally formulated.
a. sola Scriptura, scripture alone, the books of the New and Old Testament in the Bible are the sole rule and norm of faith.

b. sola Gracia, grace alone, we are saved totally by the grace of God and man cannot contribute or cooperate in his justification.

c. sola Fida, faith alone, we are saved through faith, and not by works.

d. solus Christus, Christ alone, we are saved totally for the glory and by the works of Christ.

e. soli Deo Gloria, glory to God alone. The purpose of everything is and totally shall be the glory of God.

It is asked that full members either display through their icons (either outwardly exposed or identifying Lutheran in some way when a cursor hovers over the faith icon) or put something identifying themselves as such somewhere such as in their signature line in order to help the moderators of the forum."

If you'd like to see the rest of what they've done (perhaps we'd like to model ours similarly?) read here: http://www.christianforums.com/t5672534-wiki-theologia-crucis-lutherans-tcl.html


There is some good stuff there. There is also some stuff I disagree with. For instance "people who are not full members [of the Lutheran congregational forum] may ask questions and indeed even debate". While I think we ought to be open to questions, I think debate ought to be limited to the proposed sub-forum. Otherwise you are going to have a potential for trolls. The Lutherans plan to let their mods decide when someone has crossed the line, but that means mods will have to make that determination on a case by case basis making the line hard to define and resulting in people actually crossing it (though perhaps unintentionally) before something can be done. I think that by simply saying "NO" to outside debate except in a subforum we should provide, that we can avoid what I see as a potential problem.

If creating a viable and functioning subforum were to become an issue, I also see an alternative, that is the creation of a couple of threads specifically for non-Wesleyans to ask their questions in and carry on extended debate, but that they couldn't take that debate to other threads within the forum. For example, I am a member of a Muslim forum where I have a thread "Things in Islam I am curious about..." The members there have allowed me to ask about anything I wish without taking offense to it. There is also a thread, "Questions about Judaism answered by Jew" that is probably the most active thread on this Muslim forum. Several rabbis participate in it, but the Muslim moderators are very careful to make sure that only Jews provide answers in that thread so as to keep unproductive debate from closing the thread.

[Redheadedstepchild]

I like what the Lutherans have done. I also like how the Calvanists have theirs set up. It seems very clear and consise to me...and they have provisions for separate areas for debating and asking questions. Take a look:

Wiki: Semper Reformanda (http://www.christianforums.com/t5677834)

A. Membership
1. To be considered a member of the Semper Reformanda forum with full posting privileges, including the right to debate, you must adhere to the doctrine set forth in The Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, Athanasian Creed and the Definition of Chalcedon and at least one of the following:


I. Articles of Religion (Anglican)
II. London Baptist Confession of 1646 or 1689 (Baptist)
III. Savoy Declaration (Congregational/Independent)
IV. Second Helvetic Confession (Reformed)
V. The Goat Yard Declaration of Faith (Baptist)
VI. The Gospel Standard Articles of Faith (Baptist)
VII. Three Forms of Unity (Reformed)
VIII. Westminster Standards (Presbyterian)
B. Conduct
1. Members
a. As a member you are duty bound to uphold the doctrine set out under A1.

b. This does not mean, for example, that someone affirming the London Baptist Confession of 1689 cannot criticize or question the Articles of Religion.

c. Only members may be moderators of SR.

d. All those who break these rules shall be dealt with in accordance with Staff Protocol.

2. Non-Members:
a. Whilst we welcome non-SR members from seeking a greater understanding of our beliefs and practice this must be confined to the sub-forum “Ask a Calvinist”.

b. Whilst we welcome non-SR members who wish to debate with us our beliefs and practice this must be confined to the sub-forum “Debate with a Calvinist”.

c. Threads that seek to undermine the doctrine set out under A1 are not permitted anywhere except the sub-forum “Debate with a Calvinist”.

d. All those who break these rules shall be dealt with in accordance with Staff Protocol.



These rules can only be changed by a three-quarters majority vote of the Semper Reformanda membership. All voting will take place over a period of two weeks in a public poll.

[GraceSeeker]

Well, again, I can post in wiki yet, but I have tried to incorporate the suggestions taken from the above two congregational forums to see if I can work out something for us in Wesley's Parish. Below is my offering that I submit for continued discussion:



Rules of Wesley’s Parish (http://www.christianforums.com/f367-theologia-crucis-lutherans.html) (the WP congregational forum).

1. Everyone is welcome to post socially, and people who are not full members may ask questions. A sub-forum is provided for non-Wesleyans who wish to debate points of Wesleyan, or any other, theology and praxis. No person may use Wesley’s Parish for proselytizing, period. Wesley’s Parish members will be allowed to defend the teachings and practices of their faith through the parish forum. All persons are asked to remember John Wesley’s “General Rules” which enjoin one to give evidence of their salvation by:
First – “by doing no harm, by avoiding evil in every kind.” In other words, coarse language, ad hominem arguments, personal attacks, and incendiary comments have no place within the parish.
Secondly – “by doing good, by being, in every kind, merciful after their power, as they have opportunity, doing good of every possible sort, and, as far as possible, to all men.” In other words, when in doubt, give people the benefit of the doubt. Use “build-ups” rather than “put-downs” in one’s conversation. Heed Paul’s advice to practice hospitality, live in harmony with one another, and “as far as it depends on you, to live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18).
Thirdly – “by attending upon all the ordinances of God. Such are, the public worship of God; the ministry of the word, either read or expounded; the supper of the Lord; family and private prayer; searching the Scriptures; and fasting or abstinence.” While it is beyond the prevue of Wesley’s Parish to monitor individual behavior apart from that which actually takes place within this parish, we nonetheless encourage all persons to avail themselves of all the means of grace which Wesley identifies in these his General Rules. All other general rules of Christian Forums are in force in Wesley’s Parish as well.

2. Generally full members will be members of a denomination which is in concert with the historic teachings of John and Charles Wesley. The following list includes those that are recognized at the present time:

The United Methodist Church
Who we are (http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1355347/k.2F4F/Our_Church.htm)
What we believe (http://www.umc.org/site/c.lwL4KnN1LtH/b.1355349/k.FC63/Our_Faith.htm)

The Church of the Nazerene
Who we are (http://www.nazarene.org/ministries/administration/visitorcenter/about/display.aspx)
What we believe (http://www.nazarene.org/ministries/administration/visitorcenter/beliefs/display.aspx)

The Free Methodist Church of North America
Who we are (http://www.freemethodistchurch.org/Sections/About%20Us/Basic%20Info/FAQs/What%27s%20A%20Free%20Methodist.htm)
What we believe (http://www.freemethodistchurch.org/Sections/About%20Us/Beliefs/Doctrines/Doctrines%20Menu%20page.htm)

The Wesleyan Church
Who we are (http://www.wesleyan.org/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=5D665BEB18CA469B8EC3798EF2E3612D&nm=About+Us&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=B9FC838185E74372B60A077AFA1D0324)
What we believe (http://www.wesleyan.org/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=5B7EE5C4A5BA407D93A6AF61EF94B471&nm=Spiritual+Helps&type=Publishing&mod=Publications%3A%3AArticle&mid=8F3A7027421841978F18BE895F87F791&tier=4&id=5464710074024B8BA82C3E55BD140EF8)

The Methodist Church of Great Britian
Who we are (http://www.methodist.org.uk/index.cfm?fuseaction=welcome.content&cmid=9)
What we believe (http://www.methodist.org.uk/index.cfm?fuseaction=welcome.content&cmid=14)

The African Methodist Episcopal Church
Who we are (http://www.ame-church.com/about-us/)
What we believe (http://www.ame-church.com/about-us/beliefs.php)

Church of Christ in Christian Union
Who we are (http://www.cccuhq.org/aboutus.asp)
What we believe (http://www.cccuhq.org/aboutus.asp)


We recognize that this is not an exhaustive list of all those denominations, let alone all individuals, who hold to the historic Wesleyan perspectives on theology and the practice of Christian faith. We also recognize that not all members of these denomination may themselves personally hold Wesleyan beliefs. Thus, in a spirit of openness, we invite any and all who are members of any of these above named denominations or who claim to hold to the beliefs found in the teachings of John Wesley to participate as a full-member of Wesley’s Parish.

Those individuals who are Wesleyan without belonging to an historically Wesleyan denomination, will however have find that they are able to affirm the “What we believe” positions of at least one of the above named denominations. Upon registering such affirmation with the WP community, all such individuals will be accepted as full-members of the Parish. Denominations can be added to the above list if nominated and approved by a ¾ agreement of all voting WP members in a public poll. (Said poll shall be open for a period of 2 weeks from date of first posting by a WP moderator.)

It is asked that full members either display through their icons (either outwardly exposed or identifying themselves as Wesleyan in some way when a cursor hovers over the faith icon) or put something identifying themselves as Wesleyan somewhere such as in their signature line in order to help the moderators of the forum.

3. Subforum:
While we welcome non-WP members seeking a greater understanding of our beliefs and practice this must be confined to the sub-forum. Non-WP members who wish to debate with us our beliefs and practice must confine those debates to the sub-forum. Threads that seek to undermine the beliefs and practices of historic Wesleyan beliefs and praxis are not permitted anywhere except in the sub-forum. All those who break these rules shall be dealt with in accordance with the decision of WP moderators and, at their discretion, may be banned from the entire Parish, including the sub-forum.

[Sophia7]

Personally, I like the idea of using icons.

When you say that not everyone has a denomination-specific icon, I am assuming the problem is that there are is no way to design a new icon for all 342,729 different denominations in the world. Is there a way to create an icon specific to each congregational forum? Then we could just require that one "registers" by being willing to use our Wesely Parish icon if they don't use an icon from a list of the recognized Wesleyan denominations.

You could require that if you wanted to, but I know that some Methodists, Nazarenes, etc. (and people of other denominations, too), like to use the general Christian icon, even if there is a specific one available. But it's up to you all to decide. That would be an easy way to check people's denominational affiliation--unless they selected the icon just in order to vote since all members can change their icons themselves now. I don't think many people would be likely to do that, but it's a remote possibility.

[Sophia7]

Well, again, I can post in wiki yet, but I have tried to incorporate the suggestions taken from the above two congregational forums to see if I can work out something for us in Wesley's Parish. Below is my offering that I submit for continued discussion:



Rules of Wesley’s Parish (http://www.christianforums.com/f367-theologia-crucis-lutherans.html) (the WP congregational forum).

1. Everyone is welcome to post socially, and people who are not full members may ask questions. A sub-forum is provided for non-Wesleyans who wish to debate points of Wesleyan, or any other, theology and praxis. No person may use Wesley’s Parish for proselytizing, period. Wesley’s Parish members will be allowed to defend the teachings and practices of their faith through the parish forum. All persons are asked to remember John Wesley’s “General Rules” which enjoin one to give evidence of their salvation by:
First – “by doing no harm, by avoiding evil in every kind.” In other words, coarse language, ad hominem arguments, personal attacks, and incendiary comments have no place within the parish.
Secondly – “by doing good, by being, in every kind, merciful after their power, as they have opportunity, doing good of every possible sort, and, as far as possible, to all men.” In other words, when in doubt, give people the benefit of the doubt. Use “build-ups” rather than “put-downs” in one’s conversation. Heed Paul’s advice to practice hospitality, live in harmony with one another, and “as far as it depends on you, to live