ND Rules discussion

[Jim47]

Hi folks

I know you are all a peace loving bunch, but I really need to ask if you like the rules above, if you agree with them or not?
http://foru.ms/t5838248-current-nondenominational-forum-rules.html
The Mods here just really need to have this answered so that we know how to work reports etc.

If you want one of us can unlock the rules as posted above and we can make them what ever ND members want, but we need your guidance as we are not ND members.

I believe thse went through a wiki and have been approved, is that correct?

I can also post a poll once I have an indication of what you wnat or don't want.

So please discuss here.

[HypnoToad]

There were several people PM'ing about this last night, and it appears many would prefer non-members not being allowed to debate, so probably should poll on that.

Also, this statement:

"The non-denominational forum should only be moderated by Christians, preferably frequently posting non-denonminational members.

Only Nondenominational Christians should be able to vote on potential moderators of the Nondenominational forum."

... is really too soft-worded. "Should" and "preferably" don't mean much, and imho, should be a more solid statement like, "the forum WILL only have Christian moderators" and "only members of the non-denom congregation will vote on moderators and forum rule polls."

[Jessica01]

A more definite wording is important.

I am leery of this forum as ithas seemed to be a free for all as to who hcan say what. There are alot of doctrines being toosed out as sermons that conflict greatly with orthdox Christianity.

[bill16652]

Only thing I would say is that there probably should be a membership list if you adopt this. Also I now consider myself a member of this congregation but saw nothing other than posting here to indicate membership.

[Jessica01]

I see that other congregational forums have master lists. There needs to be some clarity with the defintion of nondenominational.

[bill16652]

I see that other congregational forums have master lists. There needs to be some clarity with the defintion of nondenominational.I agree, perhaps a thread can be started to discuss common areas of belief and common concerns that can be addressed through your WIKI

[bill16652]

A more clarifying definition would be commonly held beliefs that we can all agree on such as the trinity. In order to debate you must be a member. Membership will be determined by a master list.

[Jim47]

Please keep your thoughts coming. In a few days we can form this into a poll thread when we have more input.


One thing you must keep in mind though, when making a statement about who can Mod here you want to include Christian mods and Christian supermods or as I am now called a catagory mod. Reason being is we are needed to assist here and sometimes.

No non ND mod will ever vote in your polls, there is no need for that.

One of the big things we need to have cleared up is who is allowed to debate and what are they allowed to debate.

You could make it very restrictive and say ND members only, or you could say that only Trinitarian Christians only. I would suggest the later as this will allow others to come in and discuss theology with you, but you could maybne put some kind of limit on it too, such as one may bear a Christian icon but his debate tells us he is not a Christian and only trolling. I know how hard this can be to define, and it can always be changed again later.

[bill16652]

Please keep your thoughts coming. In a few days we can form this into a poll thread when we have more input.


One thing you must keep in mind though, when making a statement about who can Mod here you want to include Christian mods and Christian supermods or as I am now called a catagory mod. Reason being is we are needed to assist here and sometimes.

No non ND mod will ever vote in your polls, there is no need for that.

One of the big things we need to have cleared up is who is allowed to debate and what are they allowed to debate.

You could make it very restrictive and say ND members only, or you could say that only Trinitarian Christians only. I would suggest the later as this will allow others to come in and discuss theology with you, but you could maybne put some kind of limit on it too, such as one may bear a Christian icon but his debate tells us he is not a Christian and only trolling. I know how hard this can be to define, and it can always be changed again later.All of that sounds good to me. Input for debate parameters is needed please. Make your voice heard as to what if any limitations we should have. Also, since everyone here at least in what I have read believes in the trinity I think that might be a good debate rule as well.

[tapero]

Hi folks

I know you are all a peace loving bunch, but I really need to ask if you like the rules above, if you agree with them or not?
http://foru.ms/t5838248-current-nondenominational-forum-rules.html
The Mods here just really need to have this answered so that we know how to work reports etc.

If you want one of us can unlock the rules as posted above and we can make them what ever ND members want, but we need your guidance as we are not ND members.

I believe thse went through a wiki and have been approved, is that correct?

I can also post a poll once I have an indication of what you wnat or don't want.

So please discuss here.

Hi Jim, An FSR such as link you gave above may not be edited.

Only the wiki is place to post article changes (which of course all can do) and discussion is best done in the wiki itself, which is what is snapshot then replaces current fsr.

I dont' see any discussion your referring to in the wiki.

Here is the wiki for non denom for those seeking to see what's contained at the moment. Any can edit it by hitting edit or post in discussionby hitting discussion.

http://foru.ms/t5740660-wiki-non-denominational-wiki.html

Just a personal note, from what I see in the article, looks good to me.

Thanks,
tapero

[marke]

A more definite wording is important.

I am leery of this forum as ithas seemed to be a free for all as to who hcan say what. There are alot of doctrines being toosed out as sermons that conflict greatly with orthdox Christianity.
"There are alot of doctrines being toosed out as sermons that conflict greatly with orthdox Christianity."

Isn't that the truth. Non-scriptural nonsense runs the gambit from way off base to down right anti-Christ and those who are not as well versed in scripture take it for sound doctrine an are led astray from the truth.

People are following the words of man, because they don't want to conform themselves to THE WORD and want to instead make up their own word and that's plain WRONG.

Worse than that, their unsupported by scripture (except out of context one liners) opinions cause people to run from so called "Christians" who can't even follow the words they profess to be scripture to Islam and other systems of belief.

Worse than that, if you point out the error of their ways, you "flame" them which is why I agree, Christians and no one else should be mods so they might actually stand up against wrong teaching and remove wrong teaching instead of the posts of those who point out the wrong teaching.

God bless

Marke

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

"There are alot of doctrines being toosed out as sermons that conflict greatly with orthdox Christianity."

Isn't that the truth. Non-scriptural nonsense runs the gambit from way off base to down right anti-Christ and those who are not as well versed in scripture take it for sound doctrine an are led astray from the truth.

People are following the words of man, because they don't want to conform themselves to THE WORD and want to instead make up their own word and that's plain WRONG.

Worse than that, their unsupported by scripture (except out of context one liners) opinions cause people to run from so called "Christians" who can't even follow the words they profess to be scripture to Islam and other systems of belief.

Worse than that, if you point out the error of their ways, you "flame" them which is why I agree, Christians and no one else should be mods so they might actually stand up against wrong teaching and remove wrong teaching instead of the posts of those who point out the wrong teaching.

God bless

Marke


People are following the words of man, because they don't want to conform themselves to THE WORD and want to instead make up their own word and that's plain WRONG. Thats my complaint also.

[Jim47]

Hi Jim, An FSR such as link you gave above may not be edited.

Only the wiki is place to post article changes (which of course all can do) and discussion is best done in the wiki itself, which is what is snapshot then replaces current fsr.

I dont' see any discussion your referring to in the wiki.

Here is the wiki for non denom for those seeking to see what's contained at the moment. Any can edit it by hitting edit or post in discussionby hitting discussion.

http://foru.ms/t5740660-wiki-non-denominational-wiki.html

Just a personal note, from what I see in the article, looks good to me.

Thanks,
tapero



Any rule can be edited Tapero or done away with. Its done all the time, it just takes a majority consensus in a poll to approve.

Again, I'm not saying that the current rules have to be changed, but when mods work reports thats all we have to go by and many people are not happy because we can not take any action per current rules. Its all up to you folks what you want.

[Nadiine]

Originally Posted by marke http://www3.foru.ms/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://foru.ms/showthread.php?p=39392513#post39392513)
"There are alot of doctrines being toosed out as sermons that conflict greatly with orthdox Christianity."

Isn't that the truth. Non-scriptural nonsense runs the gambit from way off base to down right anti-Christ and those who are not as well versed in scripture take it for sound doctrine an are led astray from the truth.

People are following the words of man, because they don't want to conform themselves to THE WORD and want to instead make up their own word and that's plain WRONG.

Worse than that, their unsupported by scripture (except out of context one liners) opinions cause people to run from so called "Christians" who can't even follow the words they profess to be scripture to Islam and other systems of belief.

Worse than that, if you point out the error of their ways, you "flame" them which is why I agree, Christians and no one else should be mods so they might actually stand up against wrong teaching and remove wrong teaching instead of the posts of those who point out the wrong teaching.

God bless

Marke

(your reply to Marke's post):
People are following the words of man, because they don't want to conform themselves to THE WORD and want to instead make up their own word and that's plain WRONG. Thats my complaint also.
You say this, yet you're the one that preaches anti Trinity and Jesus is CREATED. Those ARE unorthodox - I realize you are stating that it's the Trinity and Jesus' Deity that is "unorthodox" man's words....:sigh:

I feel that needs to be noted here as to your position on the identity of God.

[Nadiine]

All of that sounds good to me. Input for debate parameters is needed please. Make your voice heard as to what if any limitations we should have. Also, since everyone here at least in what I have read believes in the trinity I think that might be a good debate rule as well.
Yes it would be a good rule - I feel terrible for visitors and brand new Christians coming in as nontrinitarians are infiltrating this area with other doctrines - they may as well head to the Mormon, JW & liberal sections; I see no difference in the foundational beliefs.

[bill16652]

A suggestion was made for debate between members on main forum and have a sub forum for limited debate for non members, think this is a good idea. Also in order to do this and have an accurate vote we really need to develop a membership list.

[HypnoToad]

Also in order to do this and have an accurate vote we really need to develop a membership list.
The rules also need a statement as to who is allowed to become a member.

[bill16652]

The rules also need a statement as to who is allowed to become a member.Agreed when I came into this forum I read a statement that basically left it open to all that were not part of a denom.

[HypnoToad]

Agreed when I came into this forum I read a statement that basically left it open to all that were not part of a denom.
The current rules define who is non-denominational, but never states they are the only ones who can be members. So, it needs to be specified if we want limits to that effect.

[bill16652]

ok that is definitely needed especially if we are going to have two debate areas one for members and one for non members

[J4Jesus]

I used to post here some but every time it seems there was so much debate from someone who did not believe in the basics of Christianity. 'Non denominational' used to be as you have stated here but the last several years it seems some churches, faiths, and religions other than Christianity are now clasifying themselves as 'non denomicational.' When they don't seem to believe in the same Jesus the Bible talks about and don't even think the Bible is nessecary and does not believe it, then its like any other secular site. That was way before the 7-7-7 change.

Now anyone can post anywhere but not always debate against every Christian principle that a certain congregation believes in. It may be difficult to do the same here as some other forums since there are such various beliefs, but it would at least be within the church, not outside.

I don't know if my voice counts here since it seemed I was more or less run off every time I came ( it was fruitless and a waste of time, and too time consuming). But if so I would be for some kind of rule about not debating with everyone. Of course sincere questions would be another thing. And there are debate areas on the site where anyone can debate anyone.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[bill16652]

I used to post here some but every time it seems there was so much debate from someone who did not believe in the basics of Christianity. 'Non denominational' used to be as you have stated here but the last several years it seems some churches, faiths, and religions other than Christianity are now clasifying themselves as 'non denomicational.' When they don't seem to believe in the same Jesus the Bible talks about and don't even think the Bible is nessecary and does not believe it, then its like any other secular site. That was way before the 7-7-7 change.

Now anyone can post anywhere but not always debate against every Christian principle that a certain congregation believes in. It may be difficult to do the same here as some other forums since there are such various beliefs, but it would at least be within the church, not outside.

I don't know if my voice counts here since it seemed I was more or less run off every time I came ( it was fruitless and a waste of time, and too time consuming). But if so I would be for some kind of rule about not debating with everyone. Of course sincere questions would be another thing. And there are debate areas on the site where anyone can debate anyone.

Just my 2 cents worth.Totally agree if we can get a majority vote on what we will acecept as beliefs.

[bill16652]

Also pulled over from should we debate doctrine here? Seems to be agreement to a seperate area main page debate between members and a sub forum for debate with non members. Imperitive we nail down a definition of wjho can be a member and also what beliefs members should hold. Develop membership list that would be a good start then move on to rules for debate set up sub forum for non member debate. Sure there is lots more as well.

[Nadiine]

I used to post here some but every time it seems there was so much debate from someone who did not believe in the basics of Christianity. 'Non denominational' used to be as you have stated here but the last several years it seems some churches, faiths, and religions other than Christianity are now clasifying themselves as 'non denomicational.' When they don't seem to believe in the same Jesus the Bible talks about and don't even think the Bible is nessecary and does not believe it, then its like any other secular site. That was way before the 7-7-7 change.

Now anyone can post anywhere but not always debate against every Christian principle that a certain congregation believes in. It may be difficult to do the same here as some other forums since there are such various beliefs, but it would at least be within the church, not outside.

I don't know if my voice counts here since it seemed I was more or less run off every time I came ( it was fruitless and a waste of time, and too time consuming). But if so I would be for some kind of rule about not debating with everyone. Of course sincere questions would be another thing. And there are debate areas on the site where anyone can debate anyone.

Just my 2 cents worth.
:thumbsup: I SO relate to your first paragraph. Yes, it's been a continual battle in this forum to keep the proper definition of what a Christian is & believes.

It seems everybody including cults want to grab the nametag & pin it onto their shirts. If the bible cannot define what a Christian is (being the authority from the sources), then who are WE to make personal definitions and be correct?

I hope this section changes - almost anything can be better than what I"m seeing recently in the doctrines being peddled around here. :holy: :angel:

[bill16652]

:thumbsup: I SO relate to your first paragraph. Yes, it's been a continual battle in this forum to keep the proper definition of what a Christian is & believes.

It seems everybody including cults want to grab the nametag & pin it onto their shirts. If the bible cannot define what a Christian is (being the authority from the sources), then who are WE to make personal definitions and be correct?

I hope this section changes - almost anything can be better than what I"m seeing recently in the doctrines being peddled around here. :holy: :angel:Absolutely! While differing beliefs make for lively debate they dont always make for a peaceful forum. Only the members can decide what they want this forum to be, a place of learning and peace, or a place of dissention. I think the idea of seperate debate sections would work to everyones benefit.

[Tavita]

Absolutely! While differing beliefs make for lively debate they dont always make for a peaceful forum. Only the members can decide what they want this forum to be, a place of learning and peace, or a place of dissention. I think the idea of seperate debate sections would work to everyones benefit.

I'm fully supportive of separate debate sections.

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

You say this, yet you're the one that preaches anti Trinity and Jesus is CREATED. Those ARE unorthodox - I realize you are stating that it's the Trinity and Jesus' Deity that is "unorthodox" man's words....:sigh:

I feel that needs to be noted here as to your position on the identity of God. Nadiine, this is my position. I believe that God our Father is also called the Holy Spirit, and that He has many name titles. I believe that "life began" with God, and "ALL" who came afterward were either created or born. His most holy name "Yahwah" translated into English means: "Life Began."

[J4Jesus]

I SO relate to your first paragraph. Yes, it's been a continual battle in this forum to keep the proper definition of what a Christian is & believes.

It seems everybody including cults want to grab the nametag & pin it onto their shirts. If the bible cannot define what a Christian is (being the authority from the sources), then who are WE to make personal definitions and be correct?

I hope this section changes - almost anything can be better than what I"m seeing recently in the doctrines being peddled around here. :holy:
Hi Nadiine
Good to see you again !
You were one of the few I could agree with :D ....usually ;) LOL! No biggie!
Yes it seemed like 'anything goes' around here. And now since being open to everyone after the change, watch out! :eek: :help:

[bill16652]

Hi Nadiine
Good to see you again !
You were one of the few I could agree with :D ....usually ;) LOL! No biggie!
Yes it seemed like 'anything goes' around here. And now since being open to everyone after the change, watch out! :eek: :help:I am optimistic that we the members can come to agreement on some rules that will prevent :eek: and turn it into :) . I believe that it will be good.

[J4Jesus]

Yes it would be a good rule - I feel terrible for visitors and brand new Christians coming in as nontrinitarians are infiltrating this area with other doctrines - they may as well head to the Mormon, JW & liberal sections; I see no difference in the foundational beliefs.

Some may ""seem" to believe in God as we do but to them God is a 'force' or ideas, ideals, principles. etc not a PERSON, as in the trinity, these three are one. That makes a world of difference and could have been a major part of the problem. By the way my church is independent , but I just didnt fit here because of some of these things.

[J4Jesus]

I am optimistic that we the members can come to agreement on some rules that will prevent :eek: and turn it into :) . I believe that it will be good.

Hi bill
Great to see you again too.:D
Glad you are going to be able to spend more time around here again

Yes you are a positive person :thumbsup: ( in a rather negative place ;) )

[bill16652]

Hi bill
Great to see you again too.:D
Glad you are going to be able to spend more time around here again

Yes you are a positive person :thumbsup: ( in a rather negative place ;) )Glad you are here as well and hope that all that left will come back and help shape this place along withnthe rest of us so that all can feel welcome.

[Jim47]

Hey folks, I don't have time to readl all the discussion in ths thread so please let me know by PM when youn are ready to procede to a poll. And also make an itemized list of things you wnat to vote on.

Thanks Jim

[bill16652]

To this point the items of agree ment are: Any non-denom christian may be a member. There will be a seperate area sub forum for debate with non members and or unorthodox beliefs debates. Debates should be respectful and always keep in mind that there are visitors watching. Seperate poll: Should we include belief in the trinity as a requirement for membership?

[Nadiine]

To this point the items of agree ment are: Any non-denom christian may be a member. There will be a seperate area sub forum for debate with non members and or unorthodox beliefs debates. Debates should be respectful and always keep in mind that there are visitors watching. Seperate poll: Should we include belief in the trinity as a requirement for membership?
Those look about right to me - I guess since the Nicene Creed covers Jesus being God who came in flesh... if the trinity got voted down, at least that would be something in place as an aside.?

[FreeinChrist]

To this point the items of agree ment are: Any non-denom christian may be a member. There will be a seperate area sub forum for debate with non members and or unorthodox beliefs debates. Debates should be respectful and always keep in mind that there are visitors watching. Seperate poll: Should we include belief in the trinity as a requirement for membership?
Absolutely. I put that in he wiki discussion area.

[HypnoToad]

Hey folks, I don't have time to readl all the discussion in ths thread so please let me know by PM when youn are ready to procede to a poll. And also make an itemized list of things you wnat to vote on.

Thanks Jim
Looks like the polls needed so far are:

1. Whether or not to limit membership to non-denom Christians only.

2. Whether or not to limit debate to members only - probably needs 3 options: 1) Anyone can debate; 2) Only members can debate; 3) Anyone, but debate from non-members will be limited to a separate subforum. (Being respectful is already in the rules.)

3. Will the Trinity be one of the doctrinal standards (non-debatable for anyone, member or not) of the Non-Denom forum?

4. I also think we need to vote to change -
The non-denominational forum should only be moderated by Christians, preferably frequently posting non-denonminational members.

Only Nondenominational Christians should be able to vote on potential moderators of the Nondenominational forum. ... should be rephrased as:
Only Christians can be elected as forum moderators.

Only Nondenominational Forum members are able to vote on potential moderators of the Nondenominational forum, and in forum rule polls.

It's probably best to do 1 and 4 first, we should get membership and voting privileges settled before other votes.

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

To this point the items of agree ment are: Any non-denom christian may be a member. There will be a seperate area sub forum for debate with non members and or unorthodox beliefs debates. Debates should be respectful and always keep in mind that there are visitors watching. Seperate poll: Should we include belief in the trinity as a requirement for membership?Will this sub forum be in the thread starter on the front page for people to find? And if there is majority rule at Foru.ms, then you plan to exclude all who non Trinitarian Christians as heretics?

[Jim47]

Looks like the polls needed so far are:

1. Whether or not to limit membership to non-denom Christians only.

2. Whether or not to limit debate to members only - probably needs 3 options: 1) Anyone can debate; 2) Only members can debate; 3) Anyone, but debate from non-members will be limited to a separate subforum. (Being respectful is already in the rules.)

3. Will the Trinity be one of the doctrinal standards (non-debatable for anyone, member or not) of the Non-Denom forum?

4. I also think we need to vote to change -
... should be rephrased as:


It's probably best to do 1 and 4 first, we should get membership and voting privileges settled before other votes.


When you're ready to poll just let me know, or FiC or any mod here.

I just want to impress one thing upon you. I strongly advise that you use a poll placed in your regular forum here so all ND members can vote. Wiki's are fine to discuss things in but very few people take part in wiki's and are therefore not a good representation of members.

Also the poll must state that only recognized ND members votes will be counted, even if a non ND member votes the vote can be corrected once the poll is done.

Just a word of caution. You've had a lot of free exchange of discussion between non ND members here in the last few monthes, some good and some bad. If you tighten up the rules you can help eliminate the bad, for instance make it a violation for non Trinitarian members to debate, but leave open the option for other Trinitarian Christians to debate. Its all up to you.

I am a member at TCL (Lutherans) and right now we are dying for lack of discussion, that is no fun at all, and we have always had our welcome matt out for all. You can also take a look at our forum specific rules (sticky) http://foru.ms/t5674902-master-rule-list-subject-to-change.html
to give you an idea of what may work for you.

Again, please keep the vote in your own forum and not a wiki, that will allow all ND members to vote equally.

[Cris413]

A more clarifying definition would be commonly held beliefs that we can all agree on such as the trinity. In order to debate you must be a member. Membership will be determined by a master list.
Hi Bill...really glad you're here BTW :wave:

Personally...I'm not real big on memberships and lists of names and such...

I would be opposed to having my name on any such list...and I guess that would exclude me from participating...

But if everyone else agrees...then that would be the forum standard...and I would have to excuse myself...

Thank you for all of your wonderful input. I'm in agreement with all of your suggestions...except this tiny little thing...but it is quite significant to me...personally.


ps...please don't let my personal feelings stand in the way of doing what everyone considers best for the forum...it's certainly not about me... :blush:

[bill16652]

Hi Bill...really glad you're here BTW :wave:

Personally...I'm not real big on memberships and lists of names and such...

I would be opposed to having my name on any such list...and I guess that would exclude me from participating...

But if everyone else agrees...then that would be the forum standard...and I would have to excuse myself...

Thank you for all of your wonderful input. I'm in agreement with all of your suggestions...except this tiny little thing...but it is quite significant to me...personally.


ps...please don't let my personal feelings stand in the way of doing what everyone considers best for the forum...it's certainly not about me... :blush:The nproblem is that without a membership list then others can come in and vote. Membership lists do not limit you because you can belong to more than one, only requirement is that you believe what their WIKI states. Please do not look at this as limiting, it is just a way to maintain order and know who can vote. Be blessed

[bill16652]

Looks like the polls needed so far are:

1. Whether or not to limit membership to non-denom Christians only.

2. Whether or not to limit debate to members only - probably needs 3 options: 1) Anyone can debate; 2) Only members can debate; 3) Anyone, but debate from non-members will be limited to a separate subforum. (Being respectful is already in the rules.)

3. Will the Trinity be one of the doctrinal standards (non-debatable for anyone, member or not) of the Non-Denom forum?

4. I also think we need to vote to change -
... should be rephrased as:


It's probably best to do 1 and 4 first, we should get membership and voting privileges settled before other votes.I have no problem with this and I will tell you that the membership question I think if that isnt the standard then needs further definition in order to prevent anyone and everyone coming over for votes.

[bill16652]

Will this sub forum be in the thread starter on the front page for people to find? And if there is majority rule at Foru.ms, then you plan to exclude all who non Trinitarian Christians as heretics?I exclude no one. Yes the sub forums are located on the front page in other areas. You can check this out as CC has a sub forum for debate only and restrict debate to that sub forum. I really dont want to exclude anyone providing they are civil but we must have some guidelines for beliefs and formembership and so on. I am not telling anyone, I am looking at posts and asking for input and polls to determine membership wishes. By the way the WIKI is stickied at the top now so you can view it and debate rules there, nothing is set in stone until polls have been voted o0n and a snapshot of the WIKI taken, that cant happen until we flesh it out and vote on agreement.

[Cris413]

The nproblem is that without a membership list then others can come in and vote. Membership lists do not limit you because you can belong to more than one, only requirement is that you believe what their WIKI states. Please do not look at this as limiting, it is just a way to maintain order and know who can vote. Be blessed
Thanks for the clarification....something I will have to prayerfully consider...

I'll excuse myself from voting regarding membership...I'll leave that completely up to the others in the forum to decide.

I really don't mean to be picky...as I said...this is a personal feeling and I may be the only one who feels this way...

I do believe memberships promote some kind of exclusivity...again...my personal thoughts...perhaps something along these lines is quite necessary to promote valid voting on issues...

I will certainly keep it in prayer

Many blessings!

[Nadiine]

Thanks for the clarification....something I will have to prayerfully consider...

I'll excuse myself from voting regarding membership...I'll leave that completely up to the others in the forum to decide.

I really don't mean to be picky...as I said...this is a personal feeling and I may be the only one who feels this way...

I do believe memberships promote some kind of exclusivity...again...my personal thoughts...perhaps something along these lines is quite necessary to promote valid voting on issues...

I will certainly keep it in prayer

Many blessings!
:wave: We all have personal opinions and preferences, and I can understand not wanting to feel "exclusive" - unfortunately with what's been let into this forum by Erwin, I almost see no way around this forum without joining one section or another just to weed out the false doctrines and clarify what a Christian is & keep denoms sections from being overrun by problem people.

Our church has membership (the only ND church I've been in that does membership) and I just feel WIERD actually doing a membership there... we haven't yet, even tho we've gone there for about 9 months now & tithe there regularly.
So I know how you feel - but for some reason in this forum, I see no way around joining groups just for clarification of what a Christian is or to keep false teachings from running rampant like they have been.

That's not to pressure you - I just see it as a lesser of 2 problems going on due to Erwin's changes - it's almost making joining areas mandatory for your peace and other's safety. :swoon: :help: (& NO, i'm not happy about it; just coping).

[Cris413]

:wave: We all have personal opinions and preferences, and I can understand not wanting to feel "exclusive" - unfortunately with what's been let into this forum by Erwin, I almost see no way around this forum without joining one section or another just to weed out the false doctrines and clarify what a Christian is & keep denoms sections from being overrun by problem people.

Our church has membership (the only ND church I've been in that does membership) and I just feel WIERD actually doing a membership there... we haven't yet, even tho we've gone there for about 9 months now & tithe there regularly.
So I know how you feel - but for some reason in this forum, I see no way around joining groups just for clarification of what a Christian is or to keep false teachings from running rampant like they have been.

That's not to pressure you - I just see it as a lesser of 2 problems going on due to Erwin's changes - it's almost making joining areas mandatory for your peace and other's safety. :swoon: :help: (& NO, i'm not happy about it; just coping).
Hi sister...thanks for sharing your thoughts. You totally understand where my heart lies with this...

I'm not opposed to forming a membership...particularly if it will resolve some very important issues in the forum...

As you have noted...your reluctance to become a "member" of your church...I would have the same reluctance if my church had a membership...

...which is the same reluctance I have in the forum.

As this is something I'm prayerfully considering...my heart seems to still be leaning toward I would not add my name to this member list....(this is simply a personal choice....one that I hope doesn't indicate a general objection to forming a membership or in anyway discourages others from doing so).

My main concern, before Bill clarified, was that if I were not a member...I could no longer participate in the forum.

If membership does not limit my ability to participate and only limits my ability to vote...then I guess that's more than reasonable and appropriate.

Thank you again sister for sharing your thoughts...:hug: You have some very valid concerns...

[HypnoToad]

Hi sister...thanks for sharing your thoughts. You totally understand where my heart lies with this...

I'm not opposed to forming a membership...particularly if it will resolve some very important issues in the forum...

As you have noted...your reluctance to become a "member" of your church...I would have the same reluctance if my church had a membership...

...which is the same reluctance I have in the forum.

As this is something I'm prayerfully considering...my heart seems to still be leaning toward I would not add my name to this member list....(this is simply a personal choice....one that I hope doesn't indicate a general objection to forming a membership or in anyway discourages others from doing so).

My main concern, before Bill clarified, was that if I were not a member...I could no longer participate in the forum.

If membership does not limit my ability to participate and only limits my ability to vote...then I guess that's more than reasonable and appropriate.

Thank you again sister for sharing your thoughts...:hug: You have some very valid concerns...
As others have said, a membership list may not be wanted by some, but in order for the congregation to be able to operate, it is needed.

As far as participation, fellowship posts will always be accepted from all posters, member or not. The only limits we're looking at is voting, being a forum mod (which might only be limited to any Christians, not Non-Denoms), and debating.

And if there is majority rule at Foru.ms, then you plan to exclude all who non Trinitarian Christians as heretics?
If the congregation votes to included the Trinity requirement for membership, non-Trinitarians will be excluded as non-members. (I realize, though, that "heretics" makes it sound more like you're just being persecuted as a martyr.)

[HypnoToad]

I'd like to let Jim get some things rolling - can we all here agree that we should do a poll on membership, who can be a member for subsequent voting/debating issues? I think our options are 1) membership for anyone 2) membership for non-denom Christians only (as defined in the rules)?

Comments?

[bill16652]

Yes, and once that poll is complete then we need a poll for inclusion in the trinity as a statement of belief yes or no. One other thing that should be included with the first poll on membership is that only people who regularly post here are allowed to vote.

[Nadiine]

If the congregation votes to included the Trinity requirement for membership, non-Trinitarians will be excluded as non-members. (I realize, though, that "heretics" makes it sound more like you're just being persecuted as a martyr.)

No more than I'd be a 'martyr' by being turned down if I tried to join a denom or religious group holding my opposing fundamental beliefs.... ;)

[Cris413]

As others have said, a membership list may not be wanted by some, but in order for the congregation to be able to operate, it is needed. OK...as I said...I will not oppose the forming of a membership list as obviously most agree one is needed to produce effective change.



As far as participation, fellowship posts will always be accepted from all posters, member or not. The only limits we're looking at is voting, being a forum mod (which might only be limited to any Christians, not Non-Denoms), and debating. (bold added by me for clarification) Ok...this is where I'm unclear...

If I choose not to be added to this membership list...this means I will not be allowed to debate as well as not vote? (trust me...no one would ever want me to be a mod...lol ;) so that's not an issue for me) but no longer allowed to debate?

This is kinda like if my church told me...I could no longer worship...or sit in a certain section, or attend church functions...if I didn't sign some membership agreement...

...but I can perfectly understand not being allowed to perform some type of leadership function or have a say in the decision making process...all very reasonable to me...

I really don't want to make a big hoopla out of this...

but if my church asked me to sign a membership or be excluded otherwise...my choice would be simple...exclusion from participation....

I can agree to not voting...I can agree to not being eligible to become a mod....I can agree to the certain forum regulations regarding what is forum decorum and what topics are off limits...

So...will someone with authority please tell me whether or not I will no longer be able to participate in the forum including the privilege of debate if I do not agree to be added to this membership list?

It really isn't a matter of "taking my ball and going home in a huff"...I'm absolutely fine with whatever you all decide.....I simply wish to understand the ramifications...'cause I'm confused....I seem to be reading mixed messages...:pink:

[bill16652]

OK...as I said...I will not oppose the forming of a membership list as obviously most agree one is needed to produce effective change.


(bold added by me for clarification) Ok...this is where I'm unclear...

If I choose not to be added to this membership list...this means I will not be allowed to debate as well as not vote? (trust me...no one would ever want me to be a mod...lol ;) so that's not an issue for me) but no longer allowed to debate?

This is kinda like if my church told me...I could no longer worship...or sit in a certain section, or attend church functions...if I didn't sign some membership agreement...

...but I can perfectly understand not being allowed to perform some type of leadership function or have a say in the decision making process...all very reasonable to me...

I really don't want to make a big hoopla out of this...

but if my church asked me to sign a membership or be excluded otherwise...my choice would be simple...exclusion from participation....

I can agree to not voting...I can agree to not being eligible to become a mod....I can agree to the certain forum regulations regarding what is forum decorum and what topics are off limits...

So...will someone with authority please tell me whether or not I will no longer be able to participate in the forum including the privilege of debate if I do not agree to be added to this membership list?

It really isn't a matter of "taking my ball and going home in a huff"...I'm absolutely fine with whatever you all decide.....I simply wish to understand the ramifications...'cause I'm confused....I seem to be reading mixed messages...:pink:It is up to those that are members which is why I urge all who are interested to vote number one for this first one and then join the forum. As I see it it can go one of two ways either of which will require a sub forum. One is that the trinity is adopted and if so and you cant hold to that definition for this forum then yes you would be a non member. Two, if it is rejected then open to all but sub forum would be for debate by unorthodox members and non christian posts while main board would be for members. If I am missing something please tell me but this is how I see it going depending on the votes.

[HypnoToad]

Ok...this is where I'm unclear...

If I choose not to be added to this membership list...this means I will not be allowed to debate as well as not vote? (trust me...no one would ever want me to be a mod...lol ;) so that's not an issue for me) but no longer allowed to debate?
The debate issue has not been voted on yet.

What I have proposed, is that the main are allows debate for members only. We would also have a subforum where non-members would be allowed to debate. So, you would still be able to debate, but only in that subforum. If you saw an issue in the main area you wanted to debate on, you would be free to start your own thread in the subforum to debate it.

This is kinda like if my church told me...I could no longer worship...or sit in a certain section, or attend church functions...if I didn't sign some membership agreement...
Again, worshipping or fellowshipping would be open to all in the main area, member and non-member.

[Cris413]

OK...I'm all for a forum guideline to include an agreement that only those ND with a Trinitarian belief are able to participate or debate...Absolutely...just like I had to agree to the Nicene Creed orignially to register on CF....

Maybe I am splitting a hair here...but this seems to be getting more and more complicated every day...

I can't help but feel that there are certain issues being pushed forward without allowing some time for prayerful consideration...

I thought it best to excuse myself...even though I am a regular participating ND poster...from voting on the membership thingy so as not to hender what most of you consider an important provision in providing a safe area for participation...and that really is the IMPORTANT issue.

...but if I do not agree to membership...I'd be relegated to a subforum with a non-Trinitarian guideline?

:tutu: confusion still rampant in my brain...

I've participated in sharing my thoughts regarding the forum...so I guess I'll just leave it to you all to decide...

as I say...I would not want to hender any necessary steps taken for the greater good of the forum...simply to satisfy my personal thoughts....

I really appreciate all the thought, care and concern you've shown me...and the time you've taken to address my concerns and to try and clarify things for me...

I'll be keeping this in prayer and my sincere desire is that whatever decisions you all come to are to the glory of God according to His good and perfect purpose and will for the edification and benefit to all who participate...

God bless you all! :amen:

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

The only opposition to the sub forum, is it being placed somewhere other than non denom.

[bill16652]

OK...I'm all for a forum guideline to include an agreement that only those ND with a Trinitarian belief are able to participate or debate...Absolutely...just like I had to agree to the Nicene Creed orignially to register on CF....

Maybe I am splitting a hair here...but this seems to be getting more and more complicated every day...

I can't help but feel that there are certain issues being pushed forward without allowing some time for prayerful consideration...

I thought it best to excuse myself...even though I am a regular participating ND poster...from voting on the membership thingy so as not to hender what most of you consider an important provision in providing a safe area for participation...and that really is the IMPORTANT issue.

...but if I do not agree to membership...I'd be relegated to a subforum with a non-Trinitarian guideline?

:tutu: confusion still rampant in my brain...

I've participated in sharing my thoughts regarding the forum...so I guess I'll just leave it to you all to decide...

as I say...I would not want to hender any necessary steps taken for the greater good of the forum...simply to satisfy my personal thoughts....

I really appreciate all the thought, care and concern you've shown me...and the time you've taken to address my concerns and to try and clarify things for me...

I'll be keeping this in prayer and my sincere desire is that whatever decisions you all come to are to the glory of God according to His good and perfect purpose and will for the edification and benefit to all who participate...

God bless you all! :amen:There really is no agenda here other than a place of peace for those that desire it. Other than what has been p[roposed do you have any suggestions on how we might have the seperation needed for this and still allow the board to be wide open for without membership that is what it would be and by that I do not mean that we should be exclusive but we should all be able to find some peace in our discussions.

[bill16652]

The only opposition to the sub forum, is it being placed somewhere other than non denom.No that is why it is a sub forum it will be here.

[HypnoToad]

The only opposition to the sub forum, is it being placed somewhere other than non denom.
I don't think anyone here suggested that. As far as I can see, it was generally understood by everyone that any subforums we want will be made here, within the Non-Denom forum.

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

No that is why it is a sub forum it will be here.If everyone one here agree,s to have the sub forum here at Non Denom, then it is all systems go.

[Cris413]

There really is no agenda here other than a place of peace for those that desire it. Other than what has been p[roposed do you have any suggestions on how we might have the seperation needed for this and still allow the board to be wide open for without membership that is what it would be and by that I do not mean that we should be exclusive but we should all be able to find some peace in our discussions.

One more parting thought...Personally, I consider that moderation of posts is all that is really necessary to enforce adherence to a Trinitarian belief for participation…As well as I support sub-forums for more definition as to the appropriate forum to participate in according to one's preferrence...

I'm not suggesting there is any agenda other than creating a peaceful, safe place for participants...

Please forgive me if I even remotely insinuated anything of the sort...


And I’m sure you’ve all thought this through as far as who will be the keeper of this Master Membership List. Will there be a vote for that person as well?

What are the qualifications for New Comers to the forum…will there be some sort of form to fill out and agree to before one is allowed to become a member and participate? And who will be in charge of this?

Will there be an open forum vote on allowing New Comers to become members? And who will set up the vote?

How many posts are necessary for a proper evaluation for one’s acceptance/declination into this membership?

Will anyone be subject to excommunication…and for what reasons?

If so what is the protocol for that? And who makes this decision?

Would there be an open forum members vote for some sort of excommunication of a member?

Please forgive me…I’m really not trying to make this more complicated…but these are the issues that come to my mind in the formation of any membership…

And it does have a way of turning into a tangled mess…..which is exactly what concerns me with advocating lists and memberships and such….

And right up there on the top 5 reasons… I personally am ND to begin with…to avoid such things…

Now, I do consider…my thoughts and feelings may be a bit extreme…and this is why I’ve opted out to give way to those of you who are much more apt at resolving these issues than I am and seem to want this membership very badly....

I'm just trying to point out some potential conflicts as I respectfully decline to participate further in the new forum structure…

...and apparently from the new forum as well...

It's all good really...I'm totally OK with it and have the utmost confidence and respect for the decisions and the dicision makers of the new ND forum.

I know you can't see my expressions or hear my tone of voice...but I am truly not being argumentative, simply sharing concerns and expounding on why I feel as strongly as I do...

...and in fact I have a complete heart of submission to the choices being made to steer the forum to that peaceful and safe haven for everyone...


Again....be blessed! :hug:

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

One more parting thought...Personally, I consider that moderation of posts is all that is really necessary to enforce adherence to a Trinitarian belief for participation…As well as I support sub-forums for more definition as to the appropriate forum to participate in according to one's preferrence...

I'm not suggesting there is any agenda other than creating a peaceful, safe place for participants...

Please forgive me if I even remotely insinuated anything of the sort...


And I’m sure you’ve all thought this through as far as who will be the keeper of this Master Membership List. Will there be a vote for that person as well?

What are the qualifications for New Comers to the forum…will there be some sort of form to fill out and agree to before one is allowed to become a member and participate? And who will be in charge of this?

Will there be an open forum vote on allowing New Comers to become members? And who will set up the vote?

How many posts are necessary for a proper evaluation for one’s acceptance/declination into this membership?

Will anyone be subject to excommunication…and for what reasons?

If so what is the protocol for that? And who makes this decision?

Would there be an open forum members vote for some sort of excommunication of a member?

Please forgive me…I’m really not trying to make this more complicated…but these are the issues that come to my mind in the formation of any membership…

And it does have a way of turning into a tangled mess…..which is exactly what concerns me with advocating lists and memberships and such….

And right up there on the top 5 reasons… I personally am ND to begin with…to avoid such things…

Now, I do consider…my thoughts and feelings may be a bit extreme…and this is why I’ve opted out to give way to those of you who are much more apt at resolving these issues than I am and seem to want this membership very badly....

I'm just trying to point out some potential conflicts as I respectfully decline to participate further in the new forum structure…

...and apparently from the new forum as well...

It's all good really...I'm totally OK with it and have the utmost confidence and respect for the decisions and the dicision makers of the new ND forum.

I know you can't see my expressions or hear my tone of voice...but I am truly not being argumentative, simply sharing concerns and expounding on why I feel as strongly as I do...

...and in fact I have a complete heart of submission to the choices being made to steer the forum to that peaceful and safe haven for everyone...


Again....be blessed! :hug:The purpose of the sub forum is for Non Denom and others to discuss unpopular subjects, such as Trinitarism. And that is why a sub forum is proposed for here at Non Denom.

[bill16652]

One more parting thought...Personally, I consider that moderation of posts is all that is really necessary to enforce adherence to a Trinitarian belief for participation…As well as I support sub-forums for more definition as to the appropriate forum to participate in according to one's preferrence...

I'm not suggesting there is any agenda other than creating a peaceful, safe place for participants...

Please forgive me if I even remotely insinuated anything of the sort...


And I’m sure you’ve all thought this through as far as who will be the keeper of this Master Membership List. Will there be a vote for that person as well?

What are the qualifications for New Comers to the forum…will there be some sort of form to fill out and agree to before one is allowed to become a member and participate? And who will be in charge of this?

Will there be an open forum vote on allowing New Comers to become members? And who will set up the vote?

How many posts are necessary for a proper evaluation for one’s acceptance/declination into this membership?

Will anyone be subject to excommunication…and for what reasons?

If so what is the protocol for that? And who makes this decision?

Would there be an open forum members vote for some sort of excommunication of a member?

Please forgive me…I’m really not trying to make this more complicated…but these are the issues that come to my mind in the formation of any membership…

And it does have a way of turning into a tangled mess…..which is exactly what concerns me with advocating lists and memberships and such….

And right up there on the top 5 reasons… I personally am ND to begin with…to avoid such things…

Now, I do consider…my thoughts and feelings may be a bit extreme…and this is why I’ve opted out to give way to those of you who are much more apt at resolving these issues than I am and seem to want this membership very badly....

I'm just trying to point out some potential conflicts as I respectfully decline to participate further in the new forum structure…

...and apparently from the new forum as well...

It's all good really...I'm totally OK with it and have the utmost confidence and respect for the decisions and the dicision makers of the new ND forum.

I know you can't see my expressions or hear my tone of voice...but I am truly not being argumentative, simply sharing concerns and expounding on why I feel as strongly as I do...

...and in fact I have a complete heart of submission to the choices being made to steer the forum to that peaceful and safe haven for everyone...


Again....be blessed! :hug:membership is nothing more or less than accepting what the forum lists as its beliefs. There is no keeper of membership other than staff with a masterlist that is posted. A place for sign in by new people agreeing to whatever is passed as representing this forum they can agree to. There is no application or voting for members but obviously we need some guidelines so people know what they are agreeing to. It is simply what the members put in the WIKI as beliefs and the rules if any regarding discussion and debate. Nothing else. This is why the WIKI is important, also why membership is important as well. It is not to make this exclusive far from it, this forum has many different beliefs. It just seems natural to split it orthodox and unorthodox.

[MichaelTheeArchAngel]

membership is nothing more or less than accepting what the forum lists as its beliefs. There is no keeper of membership other than staff with a masterlist that is posted. A place for sign in by new people agreeing to whatever is passed as representing this forum they can agree to. There is no application or voting for members but obviously we need some guidelines so people know what they are agreeing to. It is simply what the members put in the WIKI as beliefs and the rules if any regarding discussion and debate. Nothing else. This is why the WIKI is important, also why membership is important as well. It is not to make this exclusive far from it, this forum has many different beliefs. It just seems natural to split it orthodox and unorthodox. The word "unorthodox" means, those who dont have the correct opinion. Because that word is insulting, we should try to avoid it.

[bill16652]

The word "unorthodox" means, those who dont have the correct opinion. Because that word is insulting, we should try to avoid it.A common definition that will express the same thing without blurring the lines of the main forum and sub forum please? What would you suggest and still be able to seperate those that really dont want to debate these things?

[bill16652]

Chris 413 I wanted to respond to you and let you know I can see your pain and I am sorry that this process is hurtful to you. What I have posted with you you are a gentle and meek and loving spirit and you are wanted here by many I am sure. I pray that you will stay here and give your input. Just wanted you to know that the love of Christ flows through you.

[Nadiine]

Chris 413 I wanted to respond to you and let you know I can see your pain and I am sorry that this process is hurtful to you. What I have posted with you you are a gentle and meek and loving spirit and you are wanted here by many I am sure. I pray that you will stay here and give your input. Just wanted you to know that the love of Christ flows through you.
I second that - I hope you're able to find another way to look at what the membership is and means... and that it's just something we now have to be faced with due to Erwin's changes.
Otherwise, we may as well hand this entire site over to the enemies of God -
Again, I haven't become a formal member of my own church just out of it feeling wierd to me; I'm not comfortable with it there (yet - maybe God will work in my heart later and change that; I stay open to His leading in that area). But in this venue, I'm happy to join groups & areas without any hesitance. They actually protect me, God's truth and allow me to fellowship & debate freely to help make a difference here.

So anyways, for what that's worth, I hope you stay Chris - you're an asset to this site. :hug: :hug:

[Jessica01]

The word "unorthodox" means, those who dont have the correct opinion. Because that word is insulting, we should try to avoid it.
But that is the word used in the site wide rules.

[Nadiine]

But that is the word used in the site wide rules.
yes, and imho, "unorthodox" is a nice word compared to what I"d actually call it... concepts and teachings all fall into categories of some sort - unorthodox is literally just that -- I see nothing insulting about it, it defines a doctrine that isn't widely accepted in Christendom or by the Orthodox church.

And it's more than just a mere "opinion" when a majority hold it... the bible openly teaches it directly. It's not as if it's pulled out of a hat & guessed on.

Anyways, you're right - I have no other idea of what would define that in a neutral way other than unorthodox. It is what it is.

[Jim47]

I'd like to let Jim get some things rolling - can we all here agree that we should do a poll on membership, who can be a member for subsequent voting/debating issues? I think our options are 1) membership for anyone 2) membership for non-denom Christians only (as defined in the rules)?

Comments?


Ok, I will set up a poll. I think this is good that you are taking it in steps.

Poll tread>>> http://foru.ms/showthread.php?t=6214518

[Cris413]

Hi Bill…I’m very touched by your kind words. As well as by your care and concern and the time you've taken to address mine.

I fully understand my views are a little extreme…this is why I’ve opted out. Call me Switzerland…;)

I simply cannot support, nor rush into a decision regarding the issue of membership without a clear and concise format for the vote. My apologies if I jumped to conclusions based on the few factors presented so far.

As I cannot at this time support it…I also feel just as strongly that I should not oppose it either as I do consider this may be a very necessary step in creating the safe and peaceful environment everyone so very much desires.

As you may have read in my posts…I am very much Trinitarian in my beliefs and absolutely support this as THE Christian fundamental doctrine for this forum.

Personally…I’m for the entire Nicene Creed as the foundation but that seems to have been rejected as not being necessary. I’ll flow with that as well.

I’ve also shared my thoughts regarding denoms. I personally have no problem with denoms as such…only the doctrinal differences that lead to division in the Body

...and the politics associated with many denom structures in the church….ie memberships and such and adherence to some hierarchy that more often than not are mainly concerned about their own agenda rather than God’s agenda.

My consideration to allow denoms to continue as long as the unity is in the Nicene Creed has been rejected as well and I totally understand why… and agree with the reasoning.

I guess the proof will be in the pudding so to speak. I have no problem with a clear and concise presentation of ND forum rules. And just as I agreed to the CF rules & the Nicene Creed when I registered…I have no problem reviewing a “statement of faith” so to speak and making a decision to either agree and continue to post according to the rules…or not and opt out…

This to me is significantly different than a “membership”…again…I may be splitting a hair here…but that’s how strongly I feel about it…even to the point of risking my privilege to continue to post here…

Obviously…"back when" there are those that did “agree” to the forum rules simply to be able to post who in reality did NOT agree with the Nicene Creed…Go figure..?? :(

So, I don’t completely see how a membership list will change these types of issues…Only proper and adequate moderation of threads can address this effectively….IMHO

When all of this started…my thoughts were to put guidelines in place that would equip the Mods to do what they are needed to do….Moderate the forum without their hands tied behind their backs with the 7/7/7 changes…And return ND to at least some basic Christian fundamental guidelines.

I’ve shared my thoughts in the discussions and pretty much they’ve been rejected for what I do consider sound reasoning and I humbly I accept that…so I don’t think it appropriate of me to edit the wiki in an attempt to make what I feel and think part of a permanent sticky…

So I leave it to those better equipped than I to make these decisions…:)

I’ll continue to participate in ND as long as the Lord leads me to or someone tells me I’m no longer permitted to.

Many of you have been a huge blessing to me and I do believe I have grown in God’s word and even though there have been some pretty dark pitfalls to navigate…I believe I have been sharpened by my experiences here in ND…


Please consider…my participation in ND is something I’ve be prayerfully considering for quite some time. It’s been all I could do on several occasions to resist posting a farewell thread similar to 7thDiscipleofChrist’s not so long ago…

I don’t want to abandon ND…but I really must consider whether or not…under the current circumstances or even the proposed membership…how my participation affects the condition of my heart and whether or not it is even possible for me to glorify God as He should be glorified in ALL that I do. (personally me...I see others seem to have no problems in this area)

I’m not very pleased with the way I’ve reacted in a few posts to the heresies and blasphemies presented in this forum lately…

Anyway, please forgive the long dissertation…just got a lot on my heart about this.

You all have some very important decisions to make regarding ND…please don’t get side tracked by me…

It’s all about HIM and I’m A-Okay….;)

:hug: :hug: :hug:

[bill16652]

Hi Bill…I’m very touched by your kind words. As well as by your care and concern and the time you've taken to address mine.

I fully understand my views are a little extreme…this is why I’ve opted out. Call me Switzerland…;)

I simply cannot support, nor rush into a decision regarding the issue of membership without a clear and concise format for the vote. My apologies if I jumped to conclusions based on the few factors presented so far.

As I cannot at this time support it…I also feel just as strongly that I should not oppose it either as I do consider this may be a very necessary step in creating the safe and peaceful environment everyone so very much desires.

As you may have read in my posts…I am very much Trinitarian in my beliefs and absolutely support this as THE Christian fundamental doctrine for this forum.

Personally…I’m for the entire Nicene Creed as the foundation but that seems to have been rejected as not being necessary. I’ll flow with that as well.

I’ve also shared my thoughts regarding denoms. I personally have no problem with denoms as such…only the doctrinal differences that lead to division in the Body

...and the politics associated with many denom structures in the church….ie memberships and such and adherence to some hierarchy that more often than not are mainly concerned about their own agenda rather than God’s agenda.

My consideration to allow denoms to continue as long as the unity is in the Nicene Creed has been rejected as well and I totally understand why… and agree with the reasoning.

I guess the proof will be in the pudding so to speak. I have no problem with a clear and concise presentation of ND forum rules. And just as I agreed to the CF rules & the Nicene Creed when I registered…I have no problem reviewing a “statement of faith” so to speak and making a decision to either agree and continue to post according to the rules…or not and opt out…

This to me is significantly different than a “membership”…again…I may be splitting a hair here…but that’s how strongly I feel about it…even to the point of risking my privilege to continue to post here…

Obviously…"back when" there are those that did “agree” to the forum rules simply to be able to post who in reality did NOT agree with the Nicene Creed…Go figure..?? :(

So, I don’t completely see how a membership list will change these types of issues…Only proper and adequate moderation of threads can address this effectively….IMHO

When all of this started…my thoughts were to put guidelines in place that would equip the Mods to do what they are needed to do….Moderate the forum without their hands tied behind their backs with the 7/7/7 changes…And return ND to at least some basic Christian fundamental guidelines.

I’ve shared my thoughts in the discussions and pretty much they’ve been rejected for what I do consider sound reasoning and I humbly I accept that…so I don’t think it appropriate of me to edit the wiki in an attempt to make what I feel and think part of a permanent sticky…

So I leave it to those better equipped than I to make these decisions…:)

I’ll continue to participate in ND as long as the Lord leads me to or someone tells me I’m no longer permitted to.

Many of you have been a huge blessing to me and I do believe I have grown in God’s word and even though there have been some pretty dark pitfalls to navigate…I believe I have been sharpened by my experiences here in ND…


Please consider…my participation in ND is something I’ve be prayerfully considering for quite some time. It’s been all I could do on several occasions to resist posting a farewell thread similar to 7thDiscipleofChrist’s not so long ago…

I don’t want to abandon ND…but I really must consider whether or not…under the current circumstances or even the proposed membership…how my participation affects the condition of my heart and whether or not it is even possible for me to glorify God as He should be glorified in ALL that I do. (personally me...I see others seem to have no problems in this area)

I’m not very pleased with the way I’ve reacted in a few posts to the heresies and blasphemies presented in this forum lately…

Anyway, please forgive the long dissertation…just got a lot on my heart about this.

You all have some very important decisions to make regarding ND…please don’t get side tracked by me…

It’s all about HIM and I’m A-Okay….;)

:hug: :hug: :hug: Please, share your thoughts. I think your input is just as valuable as anyone else. I am sorry if something was overlooked, I promise to look at everything you say.

[Cris413]

Please, share your thoughts. I think your input is just as valuable as anyone else. I am sorry if something was overlooked, I promise to look at everything you say.
Again,

Thank you soooo much for your thoughtfulness...:blush:

I've really commented all in the last post that has been on my heart.

Perhaps I don't fully understand this "membership" thingy...

As you'll note above my character I'm already a senior "member" whatever that means...:)

As I say...after all the dust settles...and the new forum rules are posted...if there is some "statement of faith" I need to agree to to continue to participate...I'll prayerfully consider it and see where the Lord leads me

...and if that means my name is included in some list somewhere...then so be it...

Many are already included in the list that really counts...

In the Lambs Book of Life....:clap: :amen:


I will be keeping all of this in prayer...that will be my contribution...now don't worry about me...there are much more pressing issues at hand...;)

I really do not wish to derail the process...

:prayer:

[J4Jesus]

I like this definition of Non Denominational. Many of the forums are only for those of their certain denomination and so those who aren't in those churches have no place.So this is good.



++ DEFINITION OF NON-DENOMINATIONAL ++

For the purposes of this forum, Non-Denominational will be defined as anyone who is not part of a denominational church.

A denominational church is a church that submits to a central authority on matters of doctrine, ordination, and/or discipline and/or aligns itself with recognized body of churches under shared doctrine, ordination, and/or discipline. Churches such as the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, Assemblies of God, Restoration Movement, Baptist Conferences, and others who may not use the label of "denomination" yet fit the definition above are considered denominational for the purpose of this forum.

A non-denomintional church as a church may submit to an association for purpose of resource sharing (such as the Willowcreek Association), but that association does not rule the decisions of the individual congregations and spans denominational lines.



But if everyone who is in denominations also can be a member or debate, why have any rules at all? Its just grand central station for anyone and everyone. That would be like the site debate area and IMO why it is the way it has become. I only say that because to me it appears that is how it has been

[HypnoToad]

But if everyone who is in denominations also can be a member or debate, why have any rules at all? Its just grand central station for anyone and everyone. That would be like the site debate area and IMO why it is the way it has become. I only say that because to me it appears that is how it has been
That's why we will soon vote on who will be allowed membership. I believe the vote will likely be for only non-denominational Christians to be members, because, as you say, letting everyone be a member makes this forum no different than the General Theology and General Apologetics sections, making this forum have no purpose whatsoever.

*the vote is going on now*

[J4Jesus]

That's why we will soon vote on who will be allowed membership. I believe the vote will likely be for only non-denominational Christians to be members, because, as you say, letting everyone be a member makes this forum no different than the General Theology and General Apologetics sections, making this forum have no purpose whatsoever.
You got it

[DeanM]

That's why we will soon vote on who will be allowed membership. I believe the vote will likely be for only non-denominational Christians to be members, because, as you say, letting everyone be a member makes this forum no different than the General Theology and General Apologetics sections, making this forum have no purpose whatsoever.

*the vote is going on now*

And to be considered nondenominational, one would have to display the ND icon?

This icon is a cross. While this is great symbol of Christianity to most, I personally do not display crosses.

Personally, I am just not comfortable with it. I don't hold it against anyone else, though. It is a symbol of faith for many, and I respect that.

I choose not to display crosses for personal reasons.

Would this make me automatically disqualified to be considered ND?

[HypnoToad]

And to be considered nondenominational, one would have to display the ND icon?

This icon is a cross. While this is great symbol of Christianity to most, I personally do not display crosses.

Personally, I am just not comfortable with it. I don't hold it against anyone else, though. It is a symbol of faith for many, and I respect that.

I choose not to display crosses for personal reasons.

Would this make me automatically disqualified to be considered ND?
*For anyone reading - this was addressed in the poll thread Poll on who will be considered a member (http://foru.ms/t6214518-poll-on-who-will-be-considered-a-member.html) - but, no, it is not required to display any particular icon, as long as you are a non-denominational Christian*

[Nadiine]

That's why we will soon vote on who will be allowed membership. I believe the vote will likely be for only non-denominational Christians to be members, because, as you say, letting everyone be a member makes this forum no different than the General Theology and General Apologetics sections, making this forum have no purpose whatsoever.

*the vote is going on now*
That makes sense - it would make the ND area like any other, general & wide open (which imho isn't working too well)

I saw your link, I'll go vote.