*This* is the problem with "New CF"

[Orthosdoxa]

Fruits of the spirit, indeed.

Way to point the finger and stir the pot at the same time, "Trousers"! Very well done! :thumbsup:

[Joykins]

JimfromOhio, I think you would make a great mod. I think you're wise to wait until the wiki stabilizes and isn't so new and chaotic.

[invisible trousers]

I'll also vote yes on JimfromOhio's mod application; he's demonstrated a willingness to actually be a level-headed, decent person and try to work within the new rules, as opposed to someone like a pastor from Louisiana with the penchant of creating female Mormon sock accounts on various message boards.

[GreenMunchkin]

I noticed that the some of the posters who are "Fundamentalist" or "Conserative" are causing problems. I can see DrSteveJ's posts are causing some grief among the members. After reading many posts among "conservative posters", I very much oppose to legalism that some conservatives/fundies are promoting around the forum. Conservatives objected to these changes because of legalistic views. Something that was practiced by the Pharisees, legalism-loving, conservative and separatistic.

I want to be a moderator but some people here are causing problems in Wiki and CF has made me put that on "hold".Jim, really, it's time you stop politicking your way into a mod position. You started on the day of the announcement :doh:

You've labelled the conservative contingent "Pharisees and legalistic" a good 20 times now and it's manipulative, arrogant nonsense.

I'll be voting No, No, A Thousand Times No.

[FriendsFellowship]

Major happening:

http://www.christianforums.com/t5787680

[JimfromOhio]

All I did was to identify the heart motives of others- Luke 6:8; John 2:24-25 and to distinguish our heart motives - Job 38:36; Proverbs 21:2. What comes around, goes around again. When we argue and disagree, we will know what kind of a Christian others are and what kind of a heart they have. We always argue over things that we love, or that we disagree.

[Chococat]

I noticed that the some of the posters who are "Fundamentalist" or "Conserative" are causing problems. I can see DrSteveJ's posts are causing some grief among the members. After reading many posts among "conservative posters", I very much oppose to legalism that some conservatives/fundies are promoting around the forum. Conservatives objected to these changes because of legalistic views. Something that was practiced by the Pharisees, legalism-loving, conservative and separatistic.

I give up. Now Christians are being persecuted on a Christian forum.

[JimfromOhio]

Ewrin is being persecuted of his decisions.

[GreenMunchkin]

Ewrin is being persecuted of his decisions."Persecuted"?? :doh: Christians in Muslim countries are persecuted. Erwin is being taken to task because he made bad decisions.

What are you doing here, Jim? You clearly hate conservative Christians. As you've been saying for weeks, we're legalistic and Pharisees. Are you just here to upset people and cause strife? Are you here campaigning? You're clearly not here to fellowship, so why are you here?

[JimfromOhio]

"Persecuted"?? :doh: Christians in Muslim countries are persecuted. Erwin is being taken to task because he made bad decisions.

What are you doing here, Jim? You clearly hate conservative Christians. As you've been saying for weeks, we're legalistic and Pharisees. Are you just here to upset people and cause strife? Are you here campaigning? You're clearly not here to fellowship, so why are you here?

Why? Expressing my beliefs. Today, Christians often use words to persecute Christians simply because they believe one is making bad decisions. Every Christian must decide whether they will us their liberty to decide on their decisions based on their convictions, not driven by words. Erwin made decisions he felt it is God's will because circumstances made him change directions. There were problems before the change and there are problems after the change. No one is happy. I left CF because CF's policy was to legalistic.

[GreenMunchkin]

How does that equate with conservative Christians being Pharisees and legalistic? And if that's how you feel, why are you in this forum?

[JimfromOhio]

How does that equate with conservative Christians being Pharisees and legalistic? And if that's how you feel, why are you in this forum?

I have stated in other threads and I will repeat.......

My view of Conservative Christians believe what the Bible teaches in context which are the basics of what Christians believe and unite on. I thought it meant the belief in the Bible as the written standard for Truth and the belief that God IS truth, and everything that is good, right, and true comes from HIM. Beliefs are biblical and doctrinally orthodox. God's Word (the Bible) sometimes wounds us deeply and it is imperative because through the Bible, God speaks loudly. Do we accept the Bible as the Word of God, as the sole Authority in all matters of faith and practice, or do we not? It should be remembered that acceptance of the Bible as the sole authority for teaching comes not from rational arguments or human traditions. Its not the scriptures that are corrupted. Its a man's heart that is corrupted. Intelligence, reason, and choice. God reveals Himself primarily through the pages of Scripture; that is why I believe the Bible as my absolute authority. I do believe very much in being a responsible Christian, however that responsibility is defined for the Christian by the Bible but no humanism reasoning. We should all take a long hard look at what things we consider to be important from God's perspective rather than man's perspective. We must be careful not to disobey God's Word to any Christians' reasoning that can lead to legalism.

[Albion]

I have stated in other threads and I will repeat.......

My view of Conservative Christians believe what the Bible teaches in context which are the basics of what Christians believe and unite on. I thought it meant the belief in the Bible as the written standard for Truth and the belief that God IS truth, and everything that is good, right, and true comes from HIM. Beliefs are biblical and doctrinally orthodox. God's Word (the Bible) sometimes wounds us deeply and it is imperative because through the Bible, God speaks loudly. Do we accept the Bible as the Word of God, as the sole Authority in all matters of faith and practice, or do we not? It should be remembered that acceptance of the Bible as the sole authority for teaching comes not from rational arguments or human traditions. Its not the scriptures that are corrupted. Its a man's heart that is corrupted. Intelligence, reason, and choice. God reveals Himself primarily through the pages of Scripture; that is why I believe the Bible as my absolute authority. I do believe very much in being a responsible Christian, however that responsibility is defined for the Christian by the Bible but no humanism reasoning. We should all take a long hard look at what things we consider to be important from God's perspective rather than man's perspective. We must be careful not to disobey God's Word to any Christians' reasoning that can lead to legalism.

That might be a definition of something. It's not a definition of a Conservative Christian since there's no commitment in it to conserving anything, maintaining any perspective, or standing for any established norm.

In fact, it views all traditional understandings from a negative perspective, i.e. the mistaken notion that if men have believed the Bible consistently, they must be "legalists" or "humanists." In fact, it is only those who reinvent the Christian understanding of the faith from generation to generation who are the proponents of "human reasoning."

[JimfromOhio]

That might be a definition of something. It's not a definition of a Conservative Christian since there's no commitment in it to conserving anything, maintaining any perspective, or standing for any established norm.

In fact, it views all traditional understandings from a negative perspective, i.e. the mistaken notion that if men have believed the Bible consistently, they must be "legalists" or "humanists." In fact, it is only those who reinvent the Christian understanding of the faith from generation to generation who are the proponents of "human reasoning."

Depending on how you "define" of committment to conservative Christian. Is there an actual list of all can agree?

[Albion]

Depending on how you "define" of committment to conservative Christian. Is there an actual list of all can agree?

Yes, there have been several attempts to present a statement that is true to the meaning of the word, but we always get opposition to them from people who insist that the word means something they heard along the way or just kind always thought was the case. Talitha, for example, cannot hear of any use of the word "traditional" since if there ever was anything in the past that she thinks is wrong, she thinks the use of that word would mean we are thereby committing ourselves to upholding it.

No Conservative who knows that first thing about Conservatism or conservative thought would say such a thing. Still, she is unwilling to hear that since somewhere in the past she has associated the word with something that it is not.

[JimfromOhio]

Yes, there have been several attempts to present a statement that is true to the meaning of the word, but we always get opposition to them from people who insist that the word means something they heard along the way or just kind always thought was the case. Talitha, for example, cannot hear of any use of the word "traditional" since if there ever was anything in the past that she thinks is wrong, she thinks the use of that word would mean we are thereby committing ourselves to upholding it.

No Conservative who knows that first thing about Conservatism or conservative thought would say such a thing. Still, she is unwilling to hear that since somewhere in the past she has associated the word with something that it is not.

I have say my own perspective until I see the actual list we can all agree on. Right now, we don't.

[Albion]

I have say my own perspective until I see the actual list we can all agree on. Right now, we don't.


You asked me for something, and I am going to provide it. But it takes letting me sort back through hundreds of posts.

Here's one that was put together many days ago and, although reasonable and true, couldn't satisfy enough people. So we have nothing after all this time.

by Simon_Templar:
Conservative Christianity is defined by its allegiance to the Holy Scriptures and the traditional beliefs and teachings of the Christian Church on issues of theology and morality. Central to this worldview is the belief that Truth exists objectively and independently of our perception. Truth is unchanging and absolute.
God is Truth. He has revealed His Truth in the person of His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, in the Holy Bible, His written word, and in the Holy Church, which includes all who call upon the Name of the Lord Jesus, submitting their lives to Him in faith.

[Albion]

Here's another attempt, one that was hoped would overcome the nit-picking apart of Simon's statement. There was nothing wrong this this one, either.

by AV1611
"Conservative Christianity is defined by its allegiance to the Holy Scriptures and the traditional beliefs and teachings of the Christian Church on issues of theology and morality."

[JimfromOhio]

You asked me for something, and I am going to provide it. But it takes letting me sort back through hundreds of posts.

Here's one that was put together many days ago and, although reasonable and true, couldn't satisfy enough people. So we have nothing after all this time.

by Simon_Templar:
Conservative Christianity is defined by its allegiance to the Holy Scriptures and the traditional beliefs and teachings of the Christian Church on issues of theology and morality. Central to this worldview is the belief that Truth exists objectively and independently of our perception. Truth is unchanging and absolute.
God is Truth. He has revealed His Truth in the person of His Only Begotten Son, Jesus Christ, in the Holy Bible, His written word, and in the Holy Church, which includes all who call upon the Name of the Lord Jesus, submitting their lives to Him in faith.



My question is this: "traditional beliefs and teachings of the Christian Church" .......

Is it based on our denominational tradition?

We do submit to the Church's authority as long as they are following according to the Word of God, Tradition and Denomination's (or local Church's) membership rules.

Before Holy Scriptures came along, traditions were relied on. Now that God have provided the Holy Scriptures that have been AGREED by the "CHURCH". Therefore, traditions stays with the denomination of the "CHURCH" while the Holy Scripture in the FINAL authority.

[JimfromOhio]

Here's another attempt, one that was hoped would overcome the nit-picking apart of Simon's statement. There was nothing wrong this this one, either.

by AV1611
"Conservative Christianity is defined by its allegiance to the Holy Scriptures and the traditional beliefs and teachings of the Christian Church on issues of theology and morality."




Sounds good but still pretty broad.

[Albion]

And "thanks" to Codger for reminding us that this one was offered later in another vain hope of getting something conservative as a statement so that we could get our forum going. It's the same one, but as per AV1611's attempt, shorter, since one complaint was that we didn't need something broad. And this is taken from a different time in our discussion just to show that we kept working and trying.

Conservative Christians Forum


Conservative Christianity is defined by its allegiance to the Holy Scriptures and the traditional beliefs and teachings of the Christian Church on issues of theology and morality.

[Albion]

Sounds good but still pretty broad.

OK Jim. Here's what we got back from Talitha in reply to AV1611's somewhat briefer statement intended to meet the objections of those who called Simon's statement too broad:

"Albion, I believe that the meaning of the word "conservative" needs to be broader "

[Albion]

On July 25, on the Liberal Trollers thread, Ragged Robin attempted to approach it from the impartial dictionary direction. I supported it, but again, opposition

Conservative

A person whose political or religious beliefs are centered on tradition and keeping things the way they are.

Antonyms leftist, liberal, progressive

Christianity

1 : the religion derived from Jesus Christ (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Christ) , based on the Bible as sacred scripture, and professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies
2 : conformity to the Christian (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Christian) religion

[JimfromOhio]

On July 25, on the Liberal Trollers thread, Ragged Robin attempted to approach it from the impartial dictionary direction. I supported it, but again, opposition

Conservative

A person whose political or religious beliefs are centered on tradition and keeping things the way they are.

Antonyms leftist, liberal, progressive

Christianity

1 : the religion derived from Jesus Christ (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Christ) , based on the Bible as sacred scripture, and professed by Eastern, Roman Catholic, and Protestant bodies
2 : conformity to the Christian (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Christian) religion

Bible study, discipleship, and others are the heartbeat of conservative evangelicalism. Many of us within the conservative circle would not deny the importance of biblical truths, worship, fellowship, or evangelism in the Christian life. Are we going to be "ultra-conservative"?

With the concept of the primary definition of conservative is "Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change." The more I am "conservative" in my convictions, but more liberal and flexible in my opinions. On the topics of theology and salvation doctrine, I will always hold those convictions with gaining depth in understanding, but not changing as I get older. As I grow, my comments can be considered "liberal" in some areas, others perceive me as "hard line" biblically. It is clear that the bible do not use labeling except: "only those with Christ or without". One Christian's conservative is another Christian's liberal. I am very conservative because I desire for the Gospel and sticking to my core biblical beliefs.

[Albion]

My question is this: "traditional beliefs and teachings of the Christian Church" .......

Is it based on our denominational tradition?

No. The forum is not titled that way.

We do submit to the Church's authority as long as they are following according to the Word of God, Tradition and Denomination's (or local Church's) membership rules.

When the word "tradition" or "traditional" have been used in proposed statement, it has meant the customary or standard, not a theological meaning about how doctrine might be set.

Before Holy Scriptures came along, traditions were relied on.

See the above.


Jim, we have to have a statement or we have no forum. It has in some way to refer to conservative beliefs and values. At least you are driving in that direction if it could be explained satisfactorally to you, I think. On any issues where there is a divide between the denoms that is longstanding, both have their place here.

But if someone says, "The Holy Spirit just told me that Mary was the Mother of Pontius Pilate," we'd have BENCHMARKS, STANDARDS, etc. to go by in deciding if that is a valid point of debate. The Church, nor any significant number of Chrstians ever held to that idea so no, it is not, conservative Christianity, even if the speaker could put together two verses from scripture with a big speculation and say that it's his view of the scriptures, like it or not.

[Albion]

Bible study, discipleship, and others are the heartbeat of conservative evangelicalism. Many of us within the conservative circle would not deny the importance of biblical truths, worship, fellowship, or evangelism in the Christian life. Are we going to be "ultra-conservative"?

Look, we're being denied the ability to be conservative. Are we now going to worry about "how" conservative one is--moderately conservative, ultra conservative, etc.? I don't even know how to define those terms or if there really is such a definition, but we're not hoping to lock people out with a hypernarrow definition. As it is, NO ONE is locked out from debating at length, including Liberals. Is that better?

With the concept of the primary definition of conservative is "Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change." The more I am "conservative" in my convictions, but more liberal and flexible in my opinions.

The definition has nothing to do with flexibility or the person doing the posting. It is about ideas.

On the topics of theology and salvation doctrine, I will always hold those convictions with gaining depth in understanding, but not changing as I get older. As I grow, my comments can be considered "liberal" in some areas, others perceive me as "hard line" biblically. It is clear that the bible do not use labeling except: "only those with Christ or without". One Christian's conservative is another Christian's liberal. I am very conservative because I desire for the Gospel and sticking to my core biblical beliefs.

What YOUR own beliefs are is not the issue, nor is the perception of others who may well be totally wrong. To conserve the faith and values of Christianity is all that we are hoping to include in the definition. Why that is so impossible to get done, I am not sure. An uneasiness about some group taking over? Right now, they are all invited to try, since we don't say anything about conservative Christianity in our official statements.

Well, Jim, you asked, and I tried to accomodate you. I''m worn out now.

[Jim47]

I just recieved a report of a link to a personal web site promoting traffoc there. This is a direct violation of 3.1 and no changes to the wiki will chnage that.

Wiki rules can not be in disagreement with CF forum wide rules.

Anymore of these links will be removed as they are direct violation and are subject to debate.

See this report for referance

http://www.christianforums.com/t5796539-conservative-christians-raggedrobin-07-29-2007.html#post37164301

[DerSchweik]

It's still there. Along with threads supporting paedophilia and bestiality and a world of blasphemy. We actually share members and mods. If anyone can explain how that's not an affront to God, I'd be grateful, but as things stand, am thinking up ways to destroy the internet.
Thanks for the warning.

I've no desire to even know about what goes on there and will avoid it entirely. Thanks.

In Him,

[jameseb]

There is a forum that people refer to as ~E~ which, for people who don't know, stands for IIDB; Internet Infidels. It's a horrible, horrible place, and I've only ever managed to spend a few minutes there about 3 times.


Oh yes. I'm a member there. Quite a few people here at CF post in ~E~ about yours truly, the CC forum. They bash, ridicule and trash-talk members here behind their backs. Since last night I've been in a fight with some of them over there and here at CF over just that sort of trash-talking. They love to talk about people and threads in this forum, often posting links to the discussions so they can all gossip-monger about it there.

IIDB members reading this and not like being called out on it? Deal with it.

Mind you, there are some truly nice and sincere people there... I'm not trying to lump them all in one basket. However, there is a signifcant number who's only reason for existence seems to be for the purpose of ridiculing and maligning CC members.

[GreenMunchkin]

Oh yes. I'm a member there. Quite a few people here at CF post in ~E~ about yours truly, the CC forum. They bash, ridicule and trash-talk members here behind their backs. Since last night I've been in a fight with some of them over there and here at CF over just that sort of trash-talking. They love to talk about people and threads in this forum, often posting links to the discussions so they can all gossip-monger about it there.

IIDB members reading this and not like being called out on it? Deal with it.

Mind you, there are some truly nice and sincere people there... I'm not trying to lump them all in one basket. However, there is a signifcant number who's only reason for existence seems to be for the purpose of ridiculing and maligning CC members.No, granted, there are some lovely people there who tend not to get involved in the two-faced gossip-mongering. I saw your posts, though, about people using IIDB to attempt to black-ball Aadiya. Their sheer lack of integrity and Christian kindness is woeful. :hug::hug:

[jameseb]

No, granted, there are some lovely people there who tend not to get involved in the two-faced gossip-mongering. I saw your posts, though, about people using IIDB to attempt to black-ball Aadiya. Their sheer lack of integrity and Christian kindness is woeful. :hug::hug:


Yes, they were very shameful.... and unlike them I say that at IIDB and here at CF.

[drstevej]

No, granted, there are some lovely people there who tend not to get involved in the two-faced gossip-mongering. I saw your posts, though, about people using IIDB to attempt to black-ball Aadiya. Their sheer lack of integrity and Christian kindness is woeful. :hug::hug: Notice the number of ~E denizens now on FOUR.MS staff?
Not surprising.