what is this forum for?

[meh]

What do we intend to do here in this forum? Is it more of a place for conservatives to fellowship and discuss the Bible and things or are we going to spend most of our time bashing liberals and Democrats? Because if it's a place just to gather to talk about liberals and Democrats I have no interest in being here.

* note the donkey

[NewGuy101]

A little from column A and a little from column B.


:D

[meh]

A little from column A and a little from column B.


:D


:P

Ok. Just know if you bash my donkey I'm coming at you with the force of a freight train.:D

[NewGuy101]

:P

Ok. Just know if you bash my donkey I'm coming at you with the force of a freight train.:D
So you consider yourself more politically liberal I'm guessing rather than theologically.

[Voegelin]

Well, when Senator Schumer warns darkly of "theocrats", when the media goes berserk because a conservative Catholic makes a film about his own faith, when PFAW sends out memos which, in effect, say that conservative Christians are not qualified to be on the Federal Bench, when the NEA tries to inject more PC doctine Christians find offensive into public education and when the ACLU sues to stop a HS student from mentioning Jesus Christ at a graduation, what are Christians who want to participate in the public square supposed to do?

Let it all go without comment?

My parents, my grandparents and their parents going back to the founding of our country had more freedom to express their faith in the public square than I do. I'm not about to let that go unchallenged. I'm sorry the Democratic Party of today is allied with the forces it is. But that is it is not my fault nor I am going to refrain from commenting upon that alliance.

[CyberPaladin]

A little from column A and a little from column B.


:D

Same here.;)

[NewGuy101]

Well, when Senator Schumer warns darkly of "theocrats", when the media goes berserk because a conservative Catholic makes a film about his own faith, when PFAW sends out memos which, in effect, say that conservative Christians are not qualified to be on the Federal Bench, when the NEA tries to inject more PC doctine Christians find offensive into public education and when the ACLU sues to stop a HS student from mentioning Jesus Christ at a graduation, what are Christians who want to participate in the public square supposed to do?

Let it all go without comment?

My parents, my grandparents and their parents going back to the founding of our country had more freedom to express their faith in the public square than I do. I'm not about to let that go unchallenged. I'm sorry the Democratic Party of today is allied with the forces it is. But that is it is not my fault nor I am going to refrain from commenting upon that alliance.Eh, I dislike both mainline parties...:holy:

[AllForJesus]

I for sure am not going to do tat because honeslty i have no idea about politics there and i have no intention to know...
i also am ZERO in all the debate going on around the subject...
Oh also plus to that i didnt' know that Christian were to be or Liberals or consevatives here in Lebanon we have one kind... but form what i learned in this forum i think we are conservatives:D:D

[CyberPaladin]

Eh, I dislike both mainline parties...:holy:

I don't care for either party that much either but usually endup voting republician since 3rd party candidates are a waste of a vote.

[AllForJesus]

I don't care for either party that much either but usually endup voting republician since 3rd party candidates are a waste of a vote. this is for me a bit like what arabic will sound to you:P:P

[Sothron]

We are here to kvetch and to commune in a spirit of non-liberalism. ;)

[CyberPaladin]

this is for me a bit like what arabic will sound to you:P:P
ROFL

Sorry for not explaining it well.:hug: :hug: :hug:
Would you even want me to?

[AllForJesus]

ROFL

Sorry for not explaining it well.:hug: :hug: :hug:
Would you even want me to?maybe if you have time you can pm it to me:)

[meh]

So you consider yourself more politically liberal I'm guessing rather than theologically.
Right. I'm very conservative as far as theology goes and except for abortion somewhere to the left of Ted Kennedy politically. I find him very conservative. :P

So. Do ya'll want Christians like that around here or no?

[NewGuy101]

Right. I'm very conservative as far as theology goes and except for abortion somewhere to the left of Ted Kennedy politically. I find him very conservative. :P

So. Do ya'll want Christians like that around here or no?
What exactly is your view on abortion? Most people seem to confuse the conservative view in the first palce.

[meh]

I'm pro-life.

[Miss Shelby]

What do we intend to do here in this forum? Is it more of a place for conservatives to fellowship and discuss the Bible and things or are we going to spend most of our time bashing liberals and Democrats? Because if it's a place just to gather to talk about liberals and Democrats I have no interest in being here.

* note the donkeyI say we bash liberalism and democratism. Or more to the point, just expose them. Either way, liberals are going to take that as bashing. There are plenty of forums to fellowship in, but not many where you can get down and dirty.

[meh]

Cool.

Ok then. If this forum is where you have to be poth politically and Biblically conservative, I'll leave ya to it.

[Debi1967]

I'll stick mainly to theology and topics that have a direct effect on us as Conservative Christians

[Voegelin]

Eh, I dislike both mainline parties...:holy:

That is the history of America. No one ever gets what they want. But unless one withdraws entirely from the fray, there is a choice to be made and there are compromise to be accepted.

Eric Hoffer put it nicely in The True Believer; The Nature of Mass Movements (http://brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/743) :
Free men are aware of the imperfection inherent in human affairs, and they are willing to fight and die for that which is not perfect. They know that basic human problems can have no final solutions, that our freedom, justice, equality, etc. are far from absolute, and that the good life is compounded of half measures, compromises, lesser evils, and gropings toward the perfect. The rejection of approximations and the insistence on absolutes are the manifestation of a nihilism that loathes freedom, tolerance, and equity.

The danger of withdrawal from the fray (which is a legitimate Christian position in my opinion, just not one I hold) is that PFAW may get its way. The ACLU may win. The NEA might get politicians to make it impossible to homeschool. Euthanasia might not only be government funded by common. All positions which do not reflect the will of government and are based upon religion may be excluded from the public square. We see that argument being made right now. Oppose abortion? Your religion teaches that. You have no right to have that view reflected in law. Same with gay marriage. Same with a host of issues. People who hold these positions for non -religious reasons will be excluded as well.

I'm sorry that the poster of this OP is concerned over Democrat bashing. But the Democratic Party is where those who seeks to exclude faith (unless it is the faith of Jim Wallis, Rabbi Michael Lerner and other liberals) from public discourse find a home. Don't see me or other Republicans saying Senator Obama is a theocrat when he speaks of his faith. Don't see us saying there is a danger of theocrats in the "religious left" taking over government. Don't see us filing lawsuit after lawsuit to stop liberal Christians from expressing their faith in the public square. Don't see conservatives filing a complaint with the IRS when black clergy endorse a Democratic candidate as we saw Barry Lynn do in 2004 to Catholic clergy who did nothing more than suggest Catholics cast votes which reflect the teachings of their church.

[NewGuy101]

That is the history of America. No one ever gets what they want. But unless one withdraws entirely from the fray, there is a choice to be made and there are compromise to be accepted.

Eric Hoffer put it nicely in The True Believer; The Nature of Mass Movements (http://brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/743) :


The danger of withdrawal from the fray (which is a legitimate Christian position in my opinion, just not one I hold) is that PFAW may get its way. The ACLU may win. The NEA might get politicians to make it impossible to homeschool. Euthanasia might not only be government funded by common. All positions which do not reflect the will of government and are based upon religion may be excluded from the public square. We see that argument being made right now. Oppose abortion? Your religion teaches that. You have no right to have that view reflected in law. Same with gay marriage. Same with a host of issues. People who hold these positions for non -religious reasons will be excluded as well.

I'm sorry that the poster of this OP is concerned over Democrat bashing. But the Democratic Party is where those who seeks to exclude faith (unless it is the faith of Jim Wallis, Rabbi Michael Lerner and other liberals) from public discourse find a home. Don't see me or other Republicans saying Senator Obama is a theocrat when he speaks of his faith. Don't see us saying there is a danger of theocrats in the "religious left" taking over government. Don't see us filing lawsuit after lawsuit to stop liberal Christians from expressing their faith in the public square. Don't see conservatives filing a complaint with the IRS when black clergy endorse a Democratic candidate as we saw Barry Lynn do in 2004 to Catholic clergy who did nothing more than suggest Catholics cast votes which reflect the teachings of their church.
No, the problem I have is that neither part offers close to anything that I want. It's not even about getting all that I want it's about getting SOMETHING that I want.

[Miss Shelby]

If this forum is where you have to be poth politically and Biblically conservative, I'll leave ya to it.
Bye bye. :wave:

[Voegelin]

No, the problem I have is that neither part offers close to anything that I want. It's not even about getting all that I want it's about getting SOMETHING that I want.

Sometimes you can't even get that. Sometimes the best you can get is not to get what you really, really don't want.

Happened to Alexander Hamilton. He detested Thomas Jefferson for, among other reasons, what he saw as the Jacobinism among Jefferson's followers (sound familiar, doesn't it?)

But Aaron Burr was worse. So when the election of 1800 was tossed into Congress, Hamilton lobbied for his arch-enemy, Thomas Jefferson.

Didn't work out so well for Hamilton. Burr shot him dead. But, bad as Jefferson was, Hamilton saved the country from something worse.

[GreenMunchkin]

This forum is for conservative Christians.

Politics are irrelevant, given we're not all from the same country, even.

[SunMessenger]

What do we intend to do here in this forum? Is it more of a place for conservatives to fellowship and discuss the Bible and things or are we going to spend most of our time bashing liberals and Democrats? Because if it's a place just to gather to talk about liberals and Democrats I have no interest in being here.

* note the donkeyI have no clue. This reminds me of the basement room of my old house where we were sent as children to play so we would not wreck the rest of the place. In the basement family room we could even throw a ball around. It was much more fun than the upstairs. It kept the upstairs neat and tidy for company. Maybe they created this place for the same purpose. I will think about it and get back to you. By the way Ted Kennedy is an acquaintance of mine and he is old fashion but not conservative. ;)

[Voegelin]

This forum is for conservative Christians.

Politics are irrelevant, given we're not all from the same country, even.


Matthew 22:21 says politics is relevant.

Matthew 27:22 show us what democracy is capable of.

[GreenMunchkin]

Matthew 22:21 says politics is relevant.

Matthew 27:22 show us what democracy is capable of.So propose we have a political sub-forum and allow people the choice of whether they want that here. But your essentially spamming the forum with politics isn't considerate or necessary.

[Voegelin]

So propose we have a political sub-forum and allow people the choice of whether they want that here.

Allow them a choice? I am not taking a choice away from anyone. You mean offer a choice?

But your essentially spamming the forum

That is your characterization. It certainly is not my intent. As I said, I have opinions. Ones you don't share. Fine.

with politics isn't considerate or necessary

Once again, you appeal to a opinion I do not share. Neither does the Catholic church. It tells Catholics:



2239 It is the duty of citizens to contribute along with the civil authorities to the good of society in a spirit of truth, justice, solidarity, and freedom. The love and service of one's country follow from the duty of gratitude and belong to the order of charity. Submission to legitimate authorities and service of the common good require citizens to fulfill their roles in the life of the political community.
2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one's country . . .

2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a4.htm

So tell me, how does a Catholic, commanded to do the above, participate in this forum without mentioning politics?

[porterross]

What do we intend to do here in this forum? Is it more of a place for conservatives to fellowship and discuss the Bible and things or are we going to spend most of our time bashing liberals and Democrats? Because if it's a place just to gather to talk about liberals and Democrats I have no interest in being here.

* note the donkey


This conservative Christian wishes to fellowship with others sharing the same theology. Your political icon should have no bearing on this.


Right. I'm very conservative as far as theology goes and except for abortion somewhere to the left of Ted Kennedy politically. I find him very conservative. :P

So. Do ya'll want Christians like that around here or no?


I do! :hug:




Cool.

Ok then. If this forum is where you have to be poth politically and Biblically conservative, I'll leave ya to it.


Please don't leave on the opinion of a few who can't see the forest for the trees. I doubt many of us wish to see anyone bullied here.


I'm pretty conservative politically and I still love ya, meh. :D Does that answer your question? ;)

[meh]

This conservative Christian wishes to fellowship with others sharing the same theology. Your political icon should have no bearing on this.





I do! :hug:







Please don't leave on the opinion of a few who can't see the forest for the trees. I doubt many of us wish to see anyone bullied here.


I'm pretty conservative politically and I still love ya, meh. :D Does that answer your question? ;)


Aw...thanks love! :hug:

I'm not easy to bully ;) I simply was trying to figure out what this forum's wishes or goals are. They aren't mine, so I'll not participate after this. No skin off my back :)

[porterross]

Aw...thanks love! :hug:

I'm not easy to bully ;) I simply was trying to figure out what this forum's wishes or goals are. They aren't mine, so I'll not participate after this. No skin off my back :)


There does seem to be a great deal of legalism taking precedence over Gospel here and it can be hard to stomach as well as more than little disappointing. :sigh:

[woman.at.the.well]

This forum is for conservative Christians.

Politics are irrelevant, given we're not all from the same country, even.

Politics are irrelevant? Being a conservative christian affects every single aspect of our lives. It influences every single decision we make-up to and including politics. So meh I would expect politics to come up. It's part and parcel.

[D'Ann]

What do we intend to do here in this forum? Is it more of a place for conservatives to fellowship and discuss the Bible and things or are we going to spend most of our time bashing liberals and Democrats? Because if it's a place just to gather to talk about liberals and Democrats I have no interest in being here.

* note the donkey

I prefer that we not bash liberals or Democrats or any group of people. We are Christians first and foremost and part of being Christian is showing compassion and love to others.

[GreenMunchkin]

Politics are irrelevant? Being a conservative christian affects every single aspect of our lives. It influences every single decision we make-up to and including politics. So meh I would expect politics to come up. It's part and parcel.In some ways, yeah. But if people come to the forum expecting it to be about Christianity, and find political-right threads are prolific, it stops being about Christianity and can easily become a conservative politics forum. I just don't see the two as inextricably linked. As conservative Christians, we all agree on certain fundamental things. When it comes to politics, it's a whole lot messier, and having multiple threads dedicated to what one politican said, and what another politician said in return alters what the forum is.

It's about ratio, I think.

[NewGuy101]

I prefer that we not bash liberals or Democrats or any group of people. We are Christians first and foremost and part of being Christian is showing compassion and love to others.
Love also includes discipline which is something most especially liberals fail to understand. A part of loving is having to hurt someones feelings to tell them the truth.

[AllForJesus]

i would like to know what you people know about my politcs here ?
Is There a room for a Lebanese here?

I have no idea why you would like to talk politics?!

[Sothron]

Of course there is room!

I also suggest we have a political subforum. Not everyone on this board is even American so quite frankly a Democrat/Republican tug of war would not even register or make much sense with them.

[NewGuy101]

Of course there is room!

I also suggest we have a political subforum. Not everyone on this board is even American so quite frankly a Democrat/Republican tug of war would not even register or make much sense with them.

AMERICANS RULE! ;)

[CyberPaladin]

Of course there is room!

I also suggest we have a political subforum. Not everyone on this board is even American so quite frankly a Democrat/Republican tug of war would not even register or make much sense with them.
I think a political subforum is great idea.



U.S.A.!!! U.S.A.!!!;)

[Albion]

I have no idea why you would like to talk politics?!

Because Christianity has always, with very few exceptions and objections, been concerned with the values of society and attempting to uphold Christian morality in the public arena.

[meh]

Politics are irrelevant? Being a conservative christian affects every single aspect of our lives. It influences every single decision we make-up to and including politics. So meh I would expect politics to come up. It's part and parcel.
Yeah, that's fine. But several of you have made it pretty clear that you consider anything but Right-wing not really all that Christiany, eh? So fine. I'm looking for a home forum in which I don't have to wade through upteen posts about how ebil I am for being politically liberal. CF currently does not offer this- a home forum for those theologically very conservative put politically very liberal, so I'll just go play games.:D

[magdiel]

Yeah, that's fine. But several of you have made it pretty clear that you consider anything but Right-wing not really all that Christiany, eh? So fine. I'm looking for a home forum in which I don't have to wade through upteen posts about how ebil I am for being politically liberal. CF currently does not offer this- a home forum for those theologically very conservative put politically very liberal, so I'll just go play games.:D
No meh, please stay.
Now concerning politics, I think what some would call politically liberal is in fact politically Christian. IMHO
Loving and helping others can be described liberal in certain circles.
I type myself mostly as politically conservative especially with pro-life issues, anti-gay marriage etc. (Right Wing) [Which are most important to me]
but certain things I am what ppl would call "left wing" as in anti-war, immigration etc.

I think conservative Christians are pretty cut and dry, easily defined with words.
But politically we may have some differences in this forum.

[Macrina]

Meh, I hope you'll stay. As I mentioned in another post (http://www.christianforums.com/t5785592-dips-the-toe-back-in-the-water.html), I'm going to give it another try here. Not every conservative Christian is going to look like every other conservative Christian. We should be able to come together for discussion without demanding complete homogeneity.

[Albion]

I think conservative Christians are pretty cut and dry, easily defined with words.

Unfortunately, if that were so, we'd already have a definition of what our forum stands for.

In addition to conservative Christians we have

1. Those who think that being a Bible-believer (no matter how you interpret it) makes one a conservative. As opposed to whom? Christians who DON'T believe in the Bible?

2. Those who think that if you are a liberal on every social issue and also with theology but tend to be polite or quiet or reserved in some other way, you're a conservative Christian. and

3. Those who think that no definition is possible, so the "Conservative Christians" forum is the place for anyone and everyone.

[GreenMunchkin]

Those who think that being a Bible-believer (no matter how you interpret it) makes one a conservative. As opposed to whom? Christians who DON'T believe in the Bible?As astonishing as it is, yes. There are many many people at CF who call themselves Christian and yet class the Bible as a bunch of disjointed fairy-tales. :(

Believing the Bible is the inerrant Word does make someone conservative. How we then interpret its meaning on some issues doesn't alter who is and isn't conservative, as to all involved, it's not a matter of interpreting its inerrancy.

[Albion]

As astonishing as it is, yes. There are many many people at CF who call themselves Christian and yet class the Bible as a bunch of disjointed fairy-tales. :(

There are some, I'm sure, but the problem with this point is that most liberals DO call themselves believers in the Bible. Even if they think its a bunch of human writings about God, they will still say that they "believe in the Bible." To them, that is honest since they will explain that they value some of the insights in the Bible, take strength from the inspiring wording and sentiments, and generally assert that they find some way that they are "believers in the Bible." It all depends upon what one means by "believe." So if our statement is too limited or loose, we are creating a big loophole, even if it seems strong enough to define us, ourselves.



Believing the Bible is the inerrant Word does make someone conservative.

Unfortunately, it doesn't.

It makes one a Bible believer in the truest sense of the word, which is why I readily accepted all the suggestions that our language speak of the Bible as you did there. BUT it isn't sufficient to just let it go at that.

I know many Liberals who believe in the inerrancy of scripture. That doesn't prevent them from finding in it support for almost every Liberal theological and social cause that most concervatives oppose, from abortion to homosexual relations, to same-sex marriages, to keeping God out of the schools entirely, etc. Yes, anyone who accepts the Bible as inerrant and the Word of God will not be able to argue for EVERY Liberal POV, but differences of interpretation--even among people who all accept the inerrancy of the Bible--can still produce serious Liberal vs. Conservative differerences. An affirmation about the Bible as inerrant, etc. does not do the job all by itself. That has always been my point. It's not unimportant in the least, but it doesn't define "conservative Christian" in itself.

How we then interpret its meaning on some issues doesn't alter who is and isn't conservative,

Oh, it certainly does. You can have a liberal Christian who believes in the Bible exactly the way you, I, Lisa, Talitha, New Guy, Jim, or anyone else here does and then come up with totally different conclusions, liberal ones. It doesn't require one to be so liberal as to consider the Bible a human creation to do that.


Why would you be opposed to upholding and outlining the standard, basic, conservative positions on the unique Lordship of Jesus, sacredness of human life, conventional Christianity as regards marital relations, etc. so as to close the door on liberalism presenting itself as Bible-based?

[GreenMunchkin]

Some liberals claim they believe the Bible is inerrant? :scratch: It doesn't even compute in my head.

The liberal Christians I've talked to here don't think the devil exists; believe homosexuality is fine; in fact, one believes sin is only a sin if it harms someone else. Maybe there are other views, but the ideas of liberlism and the Bible's inerrancy seem mutually exclusive.

Have never come across that before.

[Albion]

Some liberals claim they believe the Bible is inerrant? :scratch: It doesn't even compute in my head.

I know that's illogical as we see it, but I've encountered it. There are those who seriously believe that the Bible supports homosexuality, pacifism, universalism, and will argue those from a literal reading of various passages.


The liberal Christians I've talked to here don't think the devil exists; believe homosexuality is fine; in fact, one believes sin is only a sin if it harms someone else. Maybe there are other views, but the ideas of liberlism and the Bible's inerrancy seem mutually exclusive.

Have never come across that before.

And for many liberal Christians, you are right. But as I was saying to Talitha, I think it was, we ought not be so sloppy or concise as to unintentionally put out the welcome mat for the other liberal Christians. It's not going to harm anything here.

[Izdaari]

I know that's illogical as we see it, but I've encountered it. There are those who seriously believe that the Bible supports homosexuality, pacifism, universalism, and will argue those from a literal reading of various passages.
Right, Albion, it is possible to be inerrantist and still believe those things. Likewise, it also possible to not be inerrantist and still be almost totally orthodox. For myself, I would say I believe the Bible is divinely inspired but not inerrant; that is, God did not dictate the exact words, but gave the divinely chosen human authors, good holy men all who understood much of God, freedom to express what God wanted to say in their own words, and approved the final result. As such, it does contain human error, but that's not a problem: it says what God wanted to say to us, and serves very well as God's primary revelation to humanity.

A good example might be the differences between the four Gospels in the story of the crucifixion and resurrection. Some of the details differ, and they can't all be right. But that's evidence of the truth of the overall story, since the accounts differ exactly as much as one would expect four different true sets of eyewitness testimony to differ. If you had four witnesses in court who gave the exact same story, you'd suspect collusion. But if the story is substantially the same but with detail differences, they're likely to be telling the truth. One might even say that God cleverly used human error to make His point!

[Voegelin]

Oh, it certainly does. You can have a liberal Christian who believes in the Bible exactly the way you, I, Lisa, Talitha, New Guy, Jim, or anyone else here does and then come up with totally different conclusions, liberal ones. It doesn't require one to be so liberal as to consider the Bible a human creation to do that.

There are also many websites maintained by those who are not Christian at all and which contain page after page of scripture which is there to be copied and pasted to refute conservative Christians. Exclude tradition, exclude what the vast majority of Christians have believed and written about for the last 2,000 years, allow only debate based upon what a poster picks from Scripture and we'll have threads which are nothing but dueling Scripture. Conservatives will leave and liberals--both Christian and non Christian--will run what is left of the forum.

Why would you be opposed to upholding and outlining the standard, basic, conservative positions on the unique Lordship of Jesus, sacredness of human life, conventional Christianity as regards marital relations, etc. so as to close the door on liberalism presenting itself as Bible-based?

Good question.

[Albion]

Right, Albion, it is possible to be inerrantist and still believe those things. Likewise, it also possible to not be inerrantist and still be almost totally orthodox. For myself, I would say I believe the Bible is divinely inspired but not inerrant; that is, God did not dictate the exact words, but gave the divinely chosen human authors, good holy men all who understood much of God, freedom to express what God wanted to say in their own words, and approved the final result. As such, it does contain human error, but that's not a problem: it says what God wanted to say to us, and serves very well as God's primary revelation to humanity.

A good example might be the differences between the four Gospels in the story of the crucifixion and resurrection. Some of the details differ, and they can't all be right. But that's evidence of the truth of the overall story, since the accounts differ exactly as much as one would expect four different true sets of eyewitness testimony to differ. If you had four witnesses in court who gave the exact same story, you'd suspect collusion. But if the story is substantially the same but with detail differences, they're likely to be telling the truth. One might even say that God cleverly used human error to make His point!

Good points. But I think it's correct to say that although the work inerrant found its way into recent posts, the problem is not built into the CC statement, including recent suggestions for tweaking it.

[Albion]

There are also many websites maintained by those who are not Christian at all and which contain page after page of scripture which is there to be copied and pasted to refute conservative Christians. Exclude tradition, exclude what the vast majority of Christians have believed and written about for the last 2,000 years, allow only debate based upon what a poster picks from Scripture and we'll have threads which are nothing but dueling Scripture. Conservatives will leave and liberals--both Christian and non Christian--will run what is left of the forum.

Yes, this is essentially what I've been trying to express, including the last part.

I agree with you that there are consequences if we do a sloppy or too loose job of this; it's not as though we'll merely have a conservative Christian forum with a few extra visitors who don't agree with us. I thought I could see right at the beginning that a number of those who wanted to be here were tired of the fighting that they've known in every denominational forum. There, everyone knows going in that the denomination in question has both Liberals and Conservatives. They hoped for a place of their own here and would quickly flee if it turns sour on them.

[Voegelin]

Yes, this is essentially what I've been trying to express, including the last part.

You've expressed it well. I, and I'm sure others, appreciate you holding down the fort on this.

I thought I could see right at the beginning that a number of those who wanted to be here were tired of the fighting that they've known in every denominational forum.

Figuring out who is sincere and who is using Christian principles against the faith becomes tedious. I would like some place where we do not have John 8:7 and Matthew 7:1 constantly tossed at us as if those two verses are the entire faith. Tired of lectures on how "true" Christianity is communism too.

There is another problem here and it is denominational. If we don't have unity among conservative Christians this forum won't last. What are we unified on? Obviously not on the finer points of theology. Not on the demand, by some, that everything be based upon Scripture. It is as unjust to demand of a Catholic that all their posts reference Scripture as it is of a Catholic to demand of Protestants that they cite a Papal Encyclical or a doctor of the Church.

So where does that leave us? With what we work together on everyday in the public square--promoting the sanctity of life, upholding marriage, opposing attempts (be it in China or in the west) to put restrictions on the free exercise of religion, countering relativism and so on.

Yet there are objections to that . . . so I dunno . . .

[Albion]

What are we unified on? Obviously not on the finer points of theology. Not on the demand, by some, that everything be based upon Scripture. It is as unjust to demand of a Catholic that all their posts reference Scripture as it is of a Catholic to demand of Protestants that they cite a Papal Encyclical or a doctor of the Church.

So where does that leave us? With what we work together on everyday in the public square--promoting the sanctity of life, upholding marriage, opposing attempts (be it in China or in the west) to put restrictions on the free exercise of religion, countering relativism and so on.

Yet there are objections to that . . . so I dunno . . .

Thank you for the kind words, V.

We do have provision as it stands for the Catholic perspective, although as you said, it has made some uneasy. I think that gradually most members have begun to realize that not everything would have to be believed in identically among us for the forum to have strong rules and to work harmoniously. Also, that there is no way to word it so that this could be done, even if we wanted things to be like that.

[Voegelin]

We do have provision as it stands for the Catholic perspective, although as you said, it has made some uneasy . . .

It perplexes me. I have no idea where this is coming from in the context of creating a "conservative Christian" forum.