Tell us now what you want Jim

[IamRedeemed]

Do you want Relativism to rule this forum?

Please answer YES or NO. Please do not interject suppositions and accusations of the people you think
are being unloving, legalistic, prejudice or whatever else. Please stick to the question.

Just YES or NO.

Do you want this forum to be ruled by Relativism?

Edit to add: The members of this forum need to know which God it is going to serve
so that they can decide whether to be for or against being associated as a member of this forum.
No sense in the soldiers fighting for something the general doesn't believe in as he
will just lead them into slaughter.

[NewGuy101]

No and No

[IamRedeemed]

Not that your name is Jim but.......

Perhaps you weren't listening too good this morning in the thread, "How can I help?"

The question has already been answered.

That is why I gave the following analogy that, there is no reason for the soldiers to continue to fight
for something the general doesn't believe in because he'll only lead them to slaughter.
The relativism in this forum is coming from the top down.

Now that I realise this, it makes no sense to fight for the "Conservative" in the title because
it is not a genuine foundation of this forum.

And that is the reason I left.

I find it funny though that now that the battle has been fought and the truth has been
revealed all kinds of people are coming out of the woodwork wanting people to stay and
fight yet they were no where to be found during the battle.

Whatever you have left here, maybe you can salvage somehow I doubt it. I pray for those
though who are still willing to try.

I believe there will be a harvest coming into this forum, one that we tried to prevent.
The demon of relativism has crept in here and I am pretty sure it is not only not going to go away,
but going to give birth soon to babies unless the rest of you who do not want that, start speaking
up and stop allowing only two or three to do the speaking for you because you fear you will offend.

The line is being drawn in the sand.

The offense is already occurred, but it isn't the loud offense that you think it is. It is the quiet creeping
offense that has come in unawares and stolen your goods.

[Jim47]

Do you want Relativism to rule this forum?





Please define relativism. :) then I'll respond if I don't lose my subscription. :doh:

[IamRedeemed]

Please define relativism. :) then I'll respond if I don't lose my subscription. :doh:

Thank you.
Any of these will work from dictionary.com

rel·a·tiv·ism (rěl'ə-tĭ-vĭz'əm)

–noun Philosophy . any theory holding that criteria of judgment are relative, varying with individuals and their environments. (unabridged)


n. Philosophy
A theory, especially in ethics or aesthetics, that conceptions of truth and moral values
are not absolute but are relative to the persons or groups holding them.
(American Heritage Dictionary)


The doctrine that no ideas or beliefs are universally true but that all are, instead, “relative” — that is, their validity depends on the circumstances in which they are applied.
(American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition)

In other words as I said in another post, "2+2 is up to you"."You" being the individual that decides for themselves regardless of any absolutes whether or not 2+2 = 4.

[Jim47]

I'm not trying to be difficult but I hate dictionary definations like this.

Could you explain in your own words with reguards to the real questions at hand which I believe are the rules?

Then I will try to give an honest answer.

[JimfromOhio]

By nature (old nature), we ALL use relativism. Therefore, "relativism" is NOT the issue.

When we rely on our own old nature, we do not know what is right and wrong and relativism takes over. Often when we don't find anything in the Bible, we use relativism.

With our new nature, our conscience is able to react to that ethical system. When a Christian who is saved by the conviction of the Holy Spirit, this Christian is living in a new Creature with holy conscience rather than sinful conscience. 1 Timothy 1:5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

I believe we are having problem with not using GRACE in our lives in this forum. Grace is about loving other people that we have the freedom to do so but at the same time, respect how they practice their beliefs. In Romans 14:5 "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." 1 Corinthians 10:28-29 "both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake, the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience?"

[NewGuy101]

By nature (old nature), we ALL use relativism. Therefore, "relativism" is NOT the issue.

When we rely on our own old nature, we do not know what is right and wrong and relativism takes over. Often when we don't find anything in the Bible, we use relativism.

With our new nature, our conscience is able to react to that ethical system. When a Christian who is saved by the conviction of the Holy Spirit, this Christian is living in a new Creature with holy conscience rather than sinful conscience. 1 Timothy 1:5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

I believe we are having problem with not using GRACE in our lives in this forum. Grace is about loving other people that we have the freedom to do so but at the same time, respect how they practice their beliefs. In Romans 14:5 "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." 1 Corinthians 10:28-29 "both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake, the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience?"
By old nature you mean as degenerate individuals? Or the same term that van til uses "natural man."

I also think that you are enphasing Grace too much insted of seeying the mater of the problem. Grace does not imply invating those who pervert the Gospel among us if they are doing more harm than good.

[MrJim]

By nature (old nature), we ALL use relativism. Therefore, "relativism" is NOT the issue.

When we rely on our own old nature, we do not know what is right and wrong and relativism takes over. Often when we don't find anything in the Bible, we use relativism.

With our new nature, our conscience is able to react to that ethical system. When a Christian who is saved by the conviction of the Holy Spirit, this Christian is living in a new Creature with holy conscience rather than sinful conscience. 1 Timothy 1:5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

I believe we are having problem with not using GRACE in our lives in this forum. Grace is about loving other people that we have the freedom to do so but at the same time, respect how they practice their beliefs. In Romans 14:5 "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." 1 Corinthians 10:28-29 "both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake, the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience?"

^once again :thumbsup:

[JimfromOhio]

By old nature you mean as degenerate individuals? Or the same term that van til uses "natural man."

I also think that you are enphasing Grace too much insted of seeying the mater of the problem. Grace does not imply invating those who pervert the Gospel among us if they are doing more harm than good.

Flesh often makes a Christian look on the superficial level of "perversion" rather than the source.

We all need to look at this point of view:
I love everything that God has created but hated what Satan has corrupted.

We are living in a corrupted world and we will always face tribulations of "perverted" attempts around here.

Grace abounds continously in our lives from God regardless and people around here are focusing on their flesh to get rid of perverted people around here. Only God can do that as long as we apply GRACE in our lives and God will do what needs to be done.

[MrJim]

I'm not trying to be difficult but I hate dictionary definations like this.


http://bestsmileys.com/lol/5.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/lol/5.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/lol/5.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/lol/5.gifhttp://bestsmileys.com/lol/5.gif



I know you'll hate this but:

def·i·ni·tion

I don't think you hate dictionary definitions, just dictionaries :P...just bustin' on ya dude

[Jim47]

By nature (old nature), we ALL use relativism. Therefore, "relativism" is NOT the issue.

When we rely on our own old nature, we do not know what is right and wrong and relativism takes over. Often when we don't find anything in the Bible, we use relativism.

With our new nature, our conscience is able to react to that ethical system. When a Christian who is saved by the conviction of the Holy Spirit, this Christian is living in a new Creature with holy conscience rather than sinful conscience. 1 Timothy 1:5 The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

I believe we are having problem with not using GRACE in our lives in this forum. Grace is about loving other people that we have the freedom to do so but at the same time, respect how they practice their beliefs. In Romans 14:5 "One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind." 1 Corinthians 10:28-29 "both for the sake of the man who told you and for conscience' sake, the other man's conscience, I mean, not yours. For why should my freedom be judged by another's conscience?"








Given this definition I would have to say that I am "not"

Thanks for the post Jim, great explaination.


My beliefs fall completely within scripture. You can check out the basics of what I believe at this link, just click on english if you want to read it in english. Of course, that is a condeneced version. :)

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?2601&collectionID=783

[Jim47]

http://bestsmileys.com/lol/5.gif



I know you'll hate this but:

def·i·ni·tion

I don't think you hate dictionary definitions, just dictionaries :P...just bustin' on ya dude



:scratch: How did you know?

[IamRedeemed]

You didn't see the "layman's terms" in my own words at the bottom of the post?

Here they are again.

My personal definition of "relativism"

I said, "In other words as I said in another post, "2+2 is up to you"."You" being the individual that decides for themselves regardless of any absolutes whether or not 2+2 = 4"

And no, I am not referring to the "rules", my question was direct and I meant exactly what I asked and what I elaborated in my post to Newguy. Post #3.

Will you please answer, and stop trying to do the Ronald Reagan? lol :P



I'm not trying to be difficult but I hate dictionary definations like this.

Could you explain in your own words with reguards to the real questions at hand which I believe are the rules?

Then I will try to give an honest answer.

[IamRedeemed]

Thanks JFO, but n/a to this particular question.
I wasn't looking for a relative answer.
but at least you have the right name. :P

[Jim47]

You didn't see the "layman's terms" in my own words at the bottom of the post?

Here they are again.

My personal definition of "relativism"

I said, "In other words as I said in another post, "2+2 is up to you"."You" being the individual that decides for themselves regardless of any absolutes whether or not 2+2 = 4"

And no, I am not referring to the "rules", my question was direct and I meant exactly what I asked and what I elaborated in my post to Newguy. Post #3.

Will you please answer, and stop trying to do the Ronald Reagan? lol :P







LOL, Answer what? :P

[Latreia]

CaDan could explain it quite competently.
He wrote the book.

[Latreia]

But this kind approach to Christianity, in effect, neutralizes Biblical morality:

"In popular culture people often describe themselves as "morally relativist," meaning that they are accepting of other people's values and agree that there is no one "right" way of doing some things.

However, this actually has little to do with the philosophical idea of relativism; relativism does not necessarily imply tolerance, just as moral objectivism does not imply intolerance."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_relativism

[IamRedeemed]

ROFL!! You forgot the question already?:P ^_^^_^^_^

The question is:
Do you want Relativism to be the beast that rules this forum?










LOL, Answer what? :P

[IamRedeemed]

Indeed it does! Thanks for the posts and link :-)


But this kind approach to Christianity, in effect, neutralizes Biblical morality:

[Simon_Templar]

Do you want Relativism to rule this forum?

Please answer YES or NO. Please do not interject suppositions and accusations of the people you think
are being unloving, legalistic, prejudice or whatever else. Please stick to the question.

Just YES or NO.

Do you want this forum to be ruled by Relativism?

Edit to add: The members of this forum need to know which God it is going to serve
so that they can decide whether to be for or against being associated as a member of this forum.
No sense in the soldiers fighting for something the general doesn't believe in as he
will just lead them into slaughter.


personally I find it somewhat humorous that anyone could accuse a WELS Lutheran of being relativistic.
WELS is easily one of the most conservative church groups in the country. Lets put it this way.. as a matter of policy most WELS people will not even pray with Christians from other denominations, including most other Lutherans, because they tend to view almost every other denomination as apostate. In fact, I'm willing to bet that 99% of WELS members would consider you to be a Liberal.

Secondly, I've heard alot of talk about the relativism in this forum.. but to be honest, I'm not sure where I've really seen any actually taking place. Perhaps before we start indicting people of relativism... we could provide some specific examples of where said relativism has actually occured?

[Latreia]

Well, Simon Templar, for one I see it as the great liberal shibboleth to flatten all adherence to Biblical precepts by conservative Christians to accept any
and every individual as a Christian regardless of their faithfulness to the Scriptures.

They say that Jesus never meant to not be all inclusive of acceptance of all who say they want to be Christians, just not the way that conservative Christians or any orthodox denomination believes.

Non-conservatives can just get along little doggie and mingle with the herds.

We lambs would rather stand within our Savior's flock. See?

Just that simple.

Please, please, no applause......


:holy:

[Jim47]

ROFL!! You forgot the question already?:P ^_^^_^^_^

The question is:
Do you want Relativism to be the beast that rules this forum?





No, don't believe in it.

Thanks for the laugh, this has been a most trying day. It seems that I made a big mistake and I now I have to try and figure out how to fix it :scratch:

[Tonks]

When did conservative Christianity become some sort of shorthand for "moral precepts" etc...from a theological standpoint that is a bit wide of the mark.

[PreachersWife2004]

But the thought process was never to "accept" anyone and everyone.

it was to welcome any and everyone, but not as members.

Obviously, to be a member you have to agree with the tenants set forth in the stickie. And that's fine. A lot of forums have that requirement.

The thought process was that CC was being SO restrictive in the rules that it was making governing the forum a nightmare. At least that's what I got out of the whole thing.

In my day to day life I talk and interact with a lot of people who do not believe as I do. We may even have discussions where they disagree with me. Now, I'm at liberty to say "go away, I don't want to socialize with you because you disagree with me" and then call the cops on him or I can say "you know, I disagree with you and here is why" and then lovingly explain the word of God. With the last part (latter part?) even if he goes away completely [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth]ed off at me and hates me, the word has still been planted - and then it's up to the holy spirit to do the rest. With the former, all I've done is shun someone and there is no chance for the word to be planted.

Trust me, I know all about fellowship principles. As has been stated here, WELS has one of the most, if not THE most, conservative stances on fellowship. We practice closed communion. But we open our churches to even those that disagree with us, and we interact with them in love, and sometimes that love does include rebuking or correcting them, and yes, it sometimes does involve removing them from the church. But there's a lot of things that have to happen for a removing, and simply disagreement (unless it's in the middle of a sermon) isn't enough to do it.

I understand the need and the want for a safe haven to post. My biggest fear after 7-7-7 was that my TCL forum was going to be overrun because we didn't have the right power to mod correctly. I've been pretty wrong on that - our forum is going strong and we've had a lot of great conversations with people who don't believe as we do. I think the same thing can happen in CC as well.

[Latreia]

When did conservative Christianity become some sort of shorthand for "moral precepts" etc...from a theological standpoint that is a bit wide of the mark.

Not the way I see it, Dumpling.

:kiss:

[IamRedeemed]

I do not determine where people stand by the labels they wear. I determine what they
believe by what they say with their own mouths and the stands that they take.

So all of that WELS stuff, means absolutely nothing to me.



personally I find it somewhat humorous that anyone could accuse a WELS Lutheran of being relativistic. <snipped for brevity>

[Nadiine]

personally I find it somewhat humorous that anyone could accuse a WELS Lutheran of being relativistic.

Why is that? I've seen alot of people on this forum claim one thing yet show something else.


WELS is easily one of the most conservative church groups in the country. Lets put it this way.. as a matter of policy most WELS people will not even pray with Christians from other denominations, including most other Lutherans, because they tend to view almost every other denomination as apostate. In fact, I'm willing to bet that 99% of WELS members would consider you to be a Liberal.

Well, doesn't that show you that he may not actually adhere to the WELS Lutheran format???
If he's fine with what goes against WELS on denominations or whatever else, then why can't he also go against them with relativism?? :scratch:
I think this comment may have undone your case here?

Maybe he IS actually alot more liberal than WELS -- and even us here (for all we know).

Secondly, I've heard alot of talk about the relativism in this forum.. but to be honest, I'm not sure where I've really seen any actually taking place. Perhaps before we start indicting people of relativism... we could provide some specific examples of where said relativism has actually occured?
No one has said it has occurred, they are relating it to the recent show up's of liberals here to either join or start fellowshipping regularly in the forum.
And the DIRECTION he wants to see this forum go. If the leader(s) want open liberalism to be united with, shouldn't that be of concern to members here?
It deeply concerns me.

The last few weeks, conservatives such as myself and others are being intimidated w/ rude comments & sarcastic smiley faces used when we dont comply to the fellowship that some want [demand] here.

And also, how it may relate to a possible bias of liberals or liberalism in staff decisions who LEAN a certain way. If the staff is partial to liberalism and liberals who frequent here, do they belong moderating in a conservative forum or guiding it? People have a right to know that. (not that he'd come out & tell us tho)

[PreachersWife2004]

I will vouch for Jim being a solid doctrinal WELS Lutheran.

People here may not know what WELS is, or what our doctrine is, but it certainly isn't relativism.

[PreachersWife2004]

Nadiine, I see your point, but who were the liberals that joined?

To my knowledge, there are no liberals currently serving as members here. There are people here who don't agree with some of what has been posted as of late, but that doesn't make them non-Conservatives and it certainly doesn't make them liberals.

As I've stated before, I understand the want and need for a haven. I even understand keeping people out of the haven. But I think there's some really broad paint strokes being applied here that are adding to the "liberals are here to take over" theory.

There's been a lot more lurking around here - that much I've noticed. I've never bothered to "check" these people out though, so I can't say what their religious leaning in off the bat. And I'm betting there's some liberals who are lurking and maybe even posting that could just pass on by and mind their own business.

I'm just trying to see where you're coming from a little more clearly, Nadiine. I don't see this liberal attack - I see a forum that is up in arms trying to defend itself against what it perceives to be an attack.

:hug:

[Nadiine]

I will vouch for Jim being a solid doctrinal WELS Lutheran.

People here may not know what WELS is, or what our doctrine is, but it certainly isn't relativism.
The problem is, IAR isn't asking if WELS is relative... she's asking if JIM is.

Everyone keeps pointing to the church - the OP is asking him personally for his worldview and direction he's seeking to take this forum.
I think he should answer for himself when he gets the chance. I realize he's busy. But it should have been a simple answer and he seems to be having trouble saying yes or no. :doh:

This would have been a 2 post thread if it were asked of myself.

post #1
IAR: NADIINE, ARE YOU RELATIVISTIC?

post #2
NADIINE: ABSOLUTELY NOT.


[Thread Closed]

[NewGuy101]

This thread is turning into the official ad homenim thread. Although Jim's perspective of conservatism is highly suspicious to me personally, I know he isn't a liberal. Secondly we must recognize although an individual might be a part of a church or denomination that doesn't imply he adheres to their doctrine. I go to a calvary chapel and I'm fully reformed. Contradicts much? Yes. But that's because I cannot find a reformed church I like yet and I have a ton of friends in Calvary.

Finally the most important point of all. WHO CARES what Jim wants. Sure he has godlike powers here and much influence among the leadership. But I don't approve of the leadership in the first place; here or on the theology forum. CF as a whole is a postmodern hole that perverts the Gospel and the leadership whether it wants to or not must follow protocol and support this websites relativism. We can only enforce/create rules for CCC to make it a heaven for CCs.

[PreachersWife2004]

Well I just must be weird then, because the reason I am a WELS member is because I hold to the doctrines of the WELS church. If there was any doctrine that I disagreed with, I wouldn't be a member there.

And Jim isn't having problems answering the question - he already did. He said no. If IAR wants the thread closed then, she needs to ask to have it closed.

[Nadiine]

This thread is turning into the official ad homenim thread. Although Jim's perspective of conservatism is highly suspicious to me personally, I know he isn't a liberal. Secondly we must recognize although an individual might be a part of a church or denomination that doesn't imply he adheres to their doctrine. I go to a calvary chapel and I'm fully reformed. Contradicts much? Yes. But that's because I cannot find a reformed church I like yet and I have a ton of friends in Calvary.
:thumbsup: :amen:
I have no clue about his beliefs -- but I definitely put some stock into your statement that he isn't liberal.

Finally the most important point of all. WHO CARES what Jim wants. Sure he has godlike powers here and much influence among the leadership. But I don't approve of the leadership in the first place; here or on the theology forum. CF as a whole is a postmodern hole that perverts the Gospel and the leadership whether it wants to or not must follow protocol and support this websites relativism. We can only enforce/create rules for CCC to make it a heaven for CCs.
:thumbsup: Well said.
& :amen: to the postmodern mudslide

[IamRedeemed]

.

[Nadiine]

:hug: :hug: IAR :hug: :hug:

God bless you sweety.

I'll be the very first to say that I did this :eek: :eek: :eek: when I saw the initial post to REMOVE CURRENT RESTRICTIONS we have here now. As if that's the HELP?????????????????????????? :swoon: :help: :help:

That is what led me to wonder what's up in his worldview to open the floodgates more to this forum when that IS the problem -
I doubt Jesus' answer to the "us vs them" problem is to just step aside and open the door to the Sheep's pen to let everyone trample on in & stick us all in one big happy pen.
He is the door - and He shuts it to those who HARM the sheep - as well as OPENS the door to those who convert and come in. (I'd also note that we are not opposed to "sinners" who visit!!! sinners are not "wolves" or false teachers necessarily -there's a huge difference).

Anyways, I agree w/ Newguy in that, Jim isn't the entire group here. Yes he has clout & power... no doubt about that, but it's run by a majority who vote in polls.
(hopefully if not tampered with or abused) --

What is already written & standing in CC, should stay in place (wiki/guideline/rules), but I did like Tishri's suggestion that the TCL uses (still dont know what that means) :scratch:

Anyhoo, I do hear you and hold concerns myself as to the swaying power in the 'powers that be'...
so does Newguy from the way I understand his post.

So..... I'll wait it out & see how this all goes & where it leads. I simply hold many reservations for now.

[Latreia]

Um...but isn't the leadership elsewhere the reason why each of the forums/congregations formed their own sections under their own leadership because the relativism had taken over the rest of the site and some of those that clamored for their own sections did so wanted to serve God and be governed by God's standards?
Isn't that why the CC was born?

I agree that the thread has gotten off topic and from the beginning I saw a lot of the same type of thing political heads use to avoid direct or tough questions.

And I agree with your last statement. The problem is that hasn't been done in unity by its members. When one member decides they want to open the flood gates because they have a "friend" who isn't "that way" (one who pushes their alternate agenda) it does defy the entire concept of the board and open the flood gates of troubles because we set the standard, created a precedence for those who do have an agenda to follow. I don't know why it is so hard to see this in the full scope of things and why a particular group has to be singled out.
We just happen to be the only ones with the guts to speak out apparently. Is that our fault?

And what cracks me up and not in a good way is how we have been pre-judged or and I don't know which is worse honestly, misjudged.

We are being told by a select few that we weren't being loving because we will not accept non-conservative beliefs being pushed here, or won't accept the name tags and the vitriol that comes our way because we choose to adhere to God's standards. It wasn't about people, it was about the ideals and all of the agendas that go with it. The two cannot walk together unless they are agreed.

That same few formed a new club , that is guess what? CLOSED OFF to the likes of us-some even named from both groups male and female) and it has the gall to be in a "ministry" section:mad:
It is full of vitriol posts and venomous comments, holier than thou statements, like the people in that group are the epitome of Christianity.

What do you think Jesus would call that? I have a pretty good idea, don't you?

Those who are not members that come here, (not sure if you have noticed), the majority of the time just come to see what they can do to stir up a little strife. For those who saw that report thread with the info from IIDB
can see that even by ex members who are the friends of those who are the enemies of "Conservative" set out with an agenda when they came here, went back over there and said teeheehee I really got their goat! I'm glad too, they got on my last nerve."

(not exact quote, but the jist) and these are the people beating us over the head with the "love" Scriptures)
:scratch:

If that doesn't prove some agendas I don't know what will. And it certainly isn't the same "Christianity" that is being touted by them here in this forum when they attempt to correct and smack in line others though is it? No.

Give it a break! Some of you talk (well talk isn't the right word, more like boast) about how well you do with unbelievers, but cannot do the same with your own brethren that you say you apply with unbelievers? I don't get it. And then have the gall to stand there and preach down to us about love? You have no idea where I have come from, what valleys the Lord has picked me up out of. How do you know who I have compassion for and who I don't? Just because I posted against Christian homosexuality, in the Christian Homosexuality thread?

You don't know me.

What if I told you I used to nurse those dying of disease and was with many of them when they died? What if I told you I was in 5 foster homes as a child? One of which they made me their personal slave? What if I told you I had to live in a brothel because I was homeless and was there for a week? And that thank God I had a bad fall and banged up my knees so was out of commission for 4 of those days? What if I told you that I sold some pot to give my kids a Christmas? What if I told you I was raped? What if I told you I was a bartender once? What if I told you I was a fornicator? What if I told you I had two abortions? What if I told you I was beaten by an alcoholic husband and delivered a baby 3 weeks early because of it? What if I told you I tried to commit suicide when I was 15? That wouldn't even begin to cover it all. Would you believe me? Would you still judge me the way you do? Don't even tell me who I have compassion for or don't or who I love or don't. Don't judge a person by where they are, because you have no idea from where they came or what they had to endure to get there. Now. I dare anyone to tell me that Jesus doesn't exist and that He isn't able to deliver!
I've done more than steal a spool of thread when I was 3 years old (true story) I didn't get here by a finger "poof" If you have a problem, chances are I have been there, and praise the Lord, He brought me through and He can you too.

I follow Jesus because I love Him. I owe Him my life.
His Word? It is LIFE to those that find it......It was the fullness of His Word that snatched me from the grip of the enemy, not the watered down malnutrition version that is being offered by many today. Thank God for those that preached the whole truth into my life and withheld not the hard parts. God help those that didn't take the time to Disciple me when I first received Jesus Christ into my life. They could have helped me avoid a lot of the pain I endured if they had only been obedient. Jesus is my life. From the pit to the throne He called me His own, not because of who I am or what I've done, but because of who He is and what He has done.

God bless



If anyone reading this does not recognize Truth and Sacrifice without complete respect and compassion, we shall know you by that fruit.

This Christian spared herself nothing; but gave of herself, her heart, her faith and of her very life to serve her Lord.

She has carried her cross for years, then, because she knew her Savior claimed her,
she was willing, and has, placed herself on the cross for the sake of others.

She has surrendered all.

Forgive us, Lord, for we yet know not what we do.

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[Latreia]

THE LIVING VESSEL OF CHRISThttp://www1.foru.ms/attachment.php?attachmentid=108337

[IamRedeemed]

Thanks for the hugs Nadiine.... Love you sis :hug:

Oh, I'm sorry Newguy, most of my post had nothing to do with you at all or in respect to your post. :hug::hug::hug:

When I began talking about those who are judging and misjudging us, a righteous anger came over me and I thought of a couple of serious rebukes that Jesus gave the pharisees, and decided to pour out what is in my heart and tell all. I don't know about you folks, but if I was seeking help or counsel, I'd much rather go and talk to someone who knows first hand how I feel than I would a tinkling cymbal or a sounding brass. At least now people know why I am passionate about the Lord and how it is anything but superficial, but indeed genuine, and IS motivated by love. Love protects (not themselves, but others), love tries to save others from the wide gate that leads to not only misery, but if left unchecked eternal separation from the one who is the author of Love, who is Love, who is the God of the heavens and the earth. Love will motivate you to become the hated that some might find the one who is able to give them life and real love. THAT is real love and real servantship.
Love doesn't brag and boast constantly about its accomplishments, but gives when no one is looking.

Pharisees prayed in public, they boasted of their righteous works, they wore extra long tassels as a sign that they were holy, they made sure they were seen giving big offerings etc etc etc.

There's an old saying, "Integrity is what you do when no one is looking."

But the Word says, "So that your deeds of charity may be in secret; and your Father Who sees in secret will reward you openly."
Matthew 6:4 Amplified

[IamRedeemed]

Oh this is beautiful...... Whoever painted that I can tell....has been there.
How beautiful. Thank you. It says so much more than words.......:cry:

God bless :hug:


THE LIVING VESSEL OF CHRISThttp://www1.foru.ms/attachment.php?attachmentid=108337

[Nadiine]

Pharisees prayed in public, they boasted of their righteous works, they wore extra long tassels as a sign that they were holy, they made sure they were seen giving big offerings etc etc etc.

There's an old saying, "Integrity is what you do when no one is looking."

But the Word says, "So that your deeds of charity may be in secret; and your Father Who sees in secret will reward you openly."
Matthew 6:4 Amplified

BEEEEEEEEEEEEENGO! I said this before about people who attack others for using judgment/discernment about sincerety (their skepticism of the person's claim or statements) --
other's are "JUDGING" the person is SINCERE in their statements, apologies and HUGS and kisses and flattery -- when they cannot possibly know if it's not being used for a manipulative purpose. How does anyone actually KNOW?
Sure, we are to give the benefit of a doubt, but even the highest holiest men of Israel were FAKING it.

They seemed holy. They seemed Godly...they gave prayers & alms.... but their FRUIT was rancid (whitewashed tombs). That's what I see all over this board.
Claims, hugs, kisses, flattery, amen's.... but the fruit that pours out afterward is contrary to my bible in what is displayed elsewhere (towards those that don't agree w/ them & who they disagree with).

They divide from me, I divide from them - there's a reason for both and I'm happy and at peace in that.

[Albion]

Call me dim, but I can't follow this discussion about groups plotting, what they represent, about the conspirators shutting off others, and so on.

Would anyone care to address this in point-blank terms?

From my recollections, the forum has never worked properly because many members substitute their own definition of "Conservative Christian" for the one the forum has constructed. As for Relativists, Liberals, and some of the alleged infiltrators, I have a lot of difficulty knowing who is being referenced.

[Nadiine]

As for Relativists, Liberals, and some of the alleged infiltrators, I have a lot of difficulty knowing who is being referenced.
Well that would be mainly for the reason that rules exist here and we are forced to be more vague than we would otherwise be.
(I at least speak for myself - when I'm vague, there's a reason for that here) ;) :cool:

[IamRedeemed]

Yes, what Nadiine said. It wasn't meant to be clear to anyone who reads it, but those who were involved on either side know exactly what it means. It is no mystery to us. If people aren't a part of the problem or a part of the solution, then they really don't need to know all of the fine details. :sigh: jmo


Call me dim, but I can't follow this discussion about groups plotting, what they represent, about the conspirators shutting off others, and so on.

Would anyone care to address this in point-blank terms?

From my recollections, the forum has never worked properly because many members substitute their own definition of "Conservative Christian" for the one the forum has constructed. As for Relativists, Liberals, and some of the alleged infiltrators, I have a lot of difficulty knowing who is being referenced.

Well that would be mainly for the reason that rules exist here and we are forced to be more vague than we would otherwise be.
(I at least speak for myself - when I'm vague, there's a reason for that here) ;) :cool:

[Albion]

Well that would be mainly for the reason that rules exist here and we are forced to be more vague than we would otherwise be.
(I at least speak for myself - when I'm vague, there's a reason for that here)

Yes, I understand that concern, but then nothing is likely to be settled, I'm thinking. Not only is there no naming of names (which is OK), but I can't even tell what the supposed offenses are. Has there been a liberal post posted? What makes it such? What does Relativism mean in this context? What happened to the Fundy-CC divide? Is that what all these other words are pointing to? Oh well. Thanks for answering me.

[PreachersWife2004]

You know what? I had a bunch posted here, but then I realized it's like hitting a brick wall with you guys.

Go on with your "we're being attacked" rhetoric. If you ARE being attacked, it's not by the liberals - they're off having fun in their own forum. As long as you guys are paranoid enough to think that people are really interested in "taking over" a small section on a so-called Christian site, then you're going to have these problems, because you are going to be suspect of EVERY NEW MEMBER that signs their name to that roster. God help them for it, too.

[Albion]

But can you identify what is being called Liberal or Relativistic here by those doing the calling? SOMETHING has caused all this upset in them.

[Tonks]

Not the way I see it, Dumpling.

:kiss:

I was just saying that it is a bit more than that...that's all.

[PreachersWife2004]

Let me ask you something, IAR...What is the difference between this:

That same few formed a new club , that is guess what? CLOSED OFF to the likes of us-some even named from both groups male and female)

And what some here in the CC have been doing as well? In several places people named Father Rick and Belinda and basically said they shouldn't be allowed to post here, among other names.

[Nadiine]

Let me ask you something, IAR...What is the difference between this:

And what some here in the CC have been doing as well? In several places people named Father Rick and Belinda and basically said they shouldn't be allowed to post here, among other names.
I never said that (not that U said I did)... my input on this is that the copy of an IIDB post from 1 of them was all I (& some of us) needed for my confirmation on who not to trust!

Anybody that wants to fellowship with someone is welcome to, just don't attack or intimidate ME for refusing to open myself up to them in friendship when they go elsewhere and stab me (and other Christians) in the back.

Anybody can claim they agree with a wiki - when they actually know they disagree with things - that's not for me to judge. But I DO judge FRUIT and I've seen all I need to see from the posts here.
You guys can see it all & decide they're your best friends (or no doubt may even AGREE with what they do & say). I don't personally give a poop - I'm safer way over here and I"m not responsible for you or the results of your choices.

I (and others here) just refuse to be forced thru intimidation tactics by a few as if I'm "unloving" and "mean" becuz I see who I need to divide from (which is biblical).

[Father Rick]

Just for the record...

I don't think I've ever posted at IIDB. I have gone over there to try to see what everyone was talking about, but never even found all the discussion about CF and figured it probably wasn't worth my time anyway. I don't think I even created an account (if I did it was years ago and I honestly don't remember.)

[Nadiine]

Just for the record...

I don't think I've ever posted at IIDB. I have gone over there to try to see what everyone was talking about, but never even found all the discussion about CF and figured it probably wasn't worth my time anyway. I don't think I even created an account (if I did it was years ago and I honestly don't remember.)
To my knowledge, I've seen no post evidence of that either - and I wasn't referring to you in that post.

I don't know who's who over there or what names they go under. I only know what I saw when someone posted it.

[IamRedeemed]

The difference is that we are not militant sinners pushing a militant system of relativism for one. We never said they couldn't come here, ask questions, debate in the given forum so I would say that is the difference #2 .

But since we stand as the accused and not the accusers, I might like to direct the question back to you and ask you what you think the difference is between what the accusers have accused us of and what they are currently doing?

You don't find that remotely hypocritical?

PS...Anything said to Belinda was in direct result of her own statements. Fr Rick wasn't part of that. Also, the only reason I did address Belinda's statements was because I thought it was up for a vote and I couldn't understand why she would want to be a member of a group whose members she loathed. I feel it was a reasonable concern for members here to have. But again, the only reason I brought it up is because she invited our opinions and asked us to ask her questions, so since I had been infrequent for 2-3 weeks I didn't know if the rules for membership changed, and I thought it was a discussion type thing before a vote.... as soon as I realized it wasn't, I apologized for the misunderstanding and told her I guess in that case a welcome was in order and I welcomed her.

Nothing deserving of a burning at the stake... :scratch:


Let me ask you something, IAR...What is the difference between this:



And what some here in the CC have been doing as well? In several places people named Father Rick and Belinda and basically said they shouldn't be allowed to post here, among other names.

[PreachersWife2004]

I registered there yesterday after PGP posted a link to his stuff, and while I was waiting to be activated, I perused the site. It's a pain to navigate, aside from the subjects and content of the site. I can honestly say I won't be back there anytime soon. It was pretty bad, and I hadn't even made it to the CF threads. Nor do I have any desire to.

[Letalis]

I post there occasionally.

[IamRedeemed]

I can also vouch that I have never seen your name
mentioned in any of that stuff.


Just for the record...

I don't think I've ever posted at IIDB. I have gone over there to try to see what everyone was talking about, but never even found all the discussion about CF and figured it probably wasn't worth my time anyway. I don't think I even created an account (if I did it was years ago and I honestly don't remember.)

[IamRedeemed]

Yes, we are being and were being attacked and yes you are right again, it isn't coming from the liberals in regards to these particular things. If you were to observe the available information, I believe you would be able to see the picture more clearly.

Peace


You know what? I had a bunch posted here, but then I realized it's like hitting a brick wall with you guys.

Go on with your "we're being attacked" rhetoric. If you ARE being attacked, it's not by the liberals - they're off having fun in their own forum. As long as you guys are paranoid enough to think that people are really interested in "taking over" a small section on a so-called Christian site, then you're going to have these problems, because you are going to be suspect of EVERY NEW MEMBER that signs their name to that roster. God help them for it, too.

[Rochir]

... but their FRUIT was rancid

I'd switch my fruit vendor ASAP!:sorry:

[PreachersWife2004]

IAR, I don't think there's a difference.

Does me being a member there mean I agree with it? Not necessarily. I stated over there once or twice that I would welcome respectful posting from anyone. The one name I named was Nadiine as an example that I wouldn't mind her coming over and posting.

You are, of course, well within your rights to say that you don't want particular people posting here - in TCL even if there isn't a ban enacted we just put said person on ignore -it works quite well actually.

Maybe using the ignore button doesn't work well for you - I know that I really do hate using it myself and had it employed for one poster but then took him off because he got banned. It seems silly that Christians would even need an ignore button for their own, but we're not all perfect.

[Letalis]

I have to say the ignore feature is woefully lacking.

[Simon_Templar]

Well, Simon Templar, for one I see it as the great liberal shibboleth to flatten all adherence to Biblical precepts by conservative Christians to accept any
and every individual as a Christian regardless of their faithfulness to the Scriptures.

They say that Jesus never meant to not be all inclusive of acceptance of all who say they want to be Christians, just not the way that conservative Christians or any orthodox denomination believes.

Non-conservatives can just get along little doggie and mingle with the herds.

We lambs would rather stand within our Savior's flock. See?

Just that simple.

Please, please, no applause......


:holy:
and you see this taking place in CC??

[PreachersWife2004]

I have to say the ignore feature is woefully lacking.

To me, it's like a little teaser. It shows that the ignored one posted, but sorry, you can't read it. How many times did I click the "Read this post" box anyway? Heh. Yeah, not good with the ignore button.

[Simon_Templar]

Why is that? I've seen alot of people on this forum claim one thing yet show something else.


Well, doesn't that show you that he may not actually adhere to the WELS Lutheran format???
If he's fine with what goes against WELS on denominations or whatever else, then why can't he also go against them with relativism?? :scratch:
I think this comment may have undone your case here?

Maybe he IS actually alot more liberal than WELS -- and even us here (for all we know).


No one has said it has occurred, they are relating it to the recent show up's of liberals here to either join or start fellowshipping regularly in the forum.
And the DIRECTION he wants to see this forum go. If the leader(s) want open liberalism to be united with, shouldn't that be of concern to members here?
It deeply concerns me.

The last few weeks, conservatives such as myself and others are being intimidated w/ rude comments & sarcastic smiley faces used when we dont comply to the fellowship that some want [demand] here.

And also, how it may relate to a possible bias of liberals or liberalism in staff decisions who LEAN a certain way. If the staff is partial to liberalism and liberals who frequent here, do they belong moderating in a conservative forum or guiding it? People have a right to know that. (not that he'd come out & tell us tho)
the point is, none of these so called liberals have actually done anything "liberal" here. There has been no push towards relativism...

If you guys can show me some actual liberalness, or relativism here I'll be more than happy to express my opinion against it.
I am, however, not terribly interested in hysterical alarmism, which is what appears to be going on, in my opinion.

[IamRedeemed]

Then why aren't you fighting for what is right, instead of fighting for a side?

Personally in listening to you, I think you have a lot of misinformation and are missing a lot of information.
So, I really think you should stop fighting so much because you are not helping.
Maybe you should take some time to become more acquainted with the facts as they
are available if you want to at least find out if what you are fighting for is valid or
if it is a matter of the perception of whoever is planting bees in your bonnet.

No one has ever said nor do I believe they will ever say that certain people
or groups of people cannot post here.





IAR, I don't think there's a difference.

Does me being a member there mean I agree with it? Not necessarily. I stated over there once or twice that I would welcome respectful posting from anyone. The one name I named was Nadiine as an example that I wouldn't mind her coming over and posting.

You are, of course, well within your rights to say that you don't want particular people posting here - in TCL even if there isn't a ban enacted we just put said person on ignore -it works quite well actually.

Maybe using the ignore button doesn't work well for you - I know that I really do hate using it myself and had it employed for one poster but then took him off because he got banned. It seems silly that Christians would even need an ignore button for their own, but we're not all perfect.

[PreachersWife2004]

No one is planting bees in my bonnet, and I don't appreciate the insinuation that I don't know what I'm talking about or that I can't think for myself.

I saw plainly several people complaining that Belinda and Father Rick (amongst others) were allowed to post here. In all of Time's public appeals, he has demanded that Belinda and Father Rick take their followers and leave CC.

I can read. I can think for myself. I can make astute decisions and judgments all by myself. I'm smart that way. Don't think for one moment that I am blindly following anyone, because I am my own leader aside from God.

[IamRedeemed]

If you are not part of the problem or part of the solution or if you are partially informed, misinformed or uninformed, please, for the sake of peace, out of courtesy, step out of this thread until you become well informed. As you are only causing more problems as those of us who have already been over and over and over and over these issues do not feel like rehashing them for the sake of those who were on hiatus while we were here day in day out in the trenches. We also do not want to have to constantly defend ourselves against false accusations and erroneous concepts over and over and over again as well, so please.....make it stop.

[Simon_Templar]

BEEEEEEEEEEEEENGO! I said this before about people who attack others for using judgment/discernment about sincerety (their skepticism of the person's claim or statements) --
other's are "JUDGING" the person is SINCERE in their statements, apologies and HUGS and kisses and flattery -- when they cannot possibly know if it's not being used for a manipulative purpose. How does anyone actually KNOW?
Sure, we are to give the benefit of a doubt, but even the highest holiest men of Israel were FAKING it.

They seemed holy. They seemed Godly...they gave prayers & alms.... but their FRUIT was rancid (whitewashed tombs). That's what I see all over this board.
Claims, hugs, kisses, flattery, amen's.... but the fruit that pours out afterward is contrary to my bible in what is displayed elsewhere (towards those that don't agree w/ them & who they disagree with).

They divide from me, I divide from them - there's a reason for both and I'm happy and at peace in that.
I have no problem judging behavior, and I don't fall back on the tripe of saying "don't be judgemental blah blah blah"... the point is by what standard are you judging, are you judging fairly, are you judging rightly.

I simply don't think you guys are judging rightly. You have given no evidence, no real reason, other than a bunch of personal subjective feelings and impressions. I'm sorry, but thats not conservative.. thats liberal.

If you actually have some objective evidence to support your judgements, I'd love to see it. Until then I'm not interested in hearing more accusations.

[PreachersWife2004]

If you are not part of the problem or part of the solution or if you are partially informed, misinformed or uninformed, please, for the sake of peace, out of courtesy, step out of this thread until you become well informed. As you are only causing more problems as those of us who have already been over and over and over and over these issues do not feel like rehashing them for the sake of those who were on hiatus while we were here day in day out in the trenches. We also do not want to defend ourselves against false accusations and erroneous concepts over and over and over again as well, so please.....make it stop.




Then I ask the same of you, too, because you really aren't helping things either, are you?

[Letalis]

I had no problems with Fr. Rick and Belinda posting here, in fact I thought they would be valuable additions to CC. It wasn't until they started posting gossip about someone else's marital life that I questioned their involvement here.

[Latreia]

MEMO TO SELF:

Beware of those who minimize the malice of an atheist chat board and those who constantly reprimand everything a true conservative Sister or Brother posts.

Adding to my Ignore list. I have to do one on manual.

Tee Hee.

[Nadiine]

the point is, none of these so called liberals have actually done anything "liberal" here. There has been no push towards relativism...

If you guys can show me some actual liberalness, or relativism here I'll be more than happy to express my opinion against it.
I am, however, not terribly interested in hysterical alarmism, which is what appears to be going on, in my opinion.
That's your opinion, I don't share it.

The issue is those who are members WHO SUPPORT AND UNITE WITH THE LIBERALS who then use the intimidation to force others (ie. me) to have to join in unity/ fellowships w/ them when we choose to divide from a predominance of liberal fellowship.

How was intimidation done? Thru corrective replies, thru posting that we should "show love to others" (insinuating that if you don't unite or fellowship w/ all, you're an unloving person & that's unchristianlike), thru smiley faces used negatively to show disdain to your position, etc.

The more numbers you have embracing the liberals as 'friends' the more people like myself are shown disdain for not doing what the others are doing.

We have 2 (there were 3) who joined this forum and left WWMC's roster to come here and their posts have been supporting liberals/liberalism here, condoning rude behaviour of such, etc.
I was even corrected for doing something wrong when I pointed out a flaming post they made!
I WAS MADE TO BE THE WRONG PERSON while 2 people embraced the offender. I was told, "have you asked him what he does for a living"? what the heck is that???! :doh: :swoon:
Did HE ask the guy he flamed what he did for a living before he went on the rampage?

This all affects the mood in this forum and I won't tolerate being corrected for supporting fairness (while the offenders & troublemakers are openly embraced for bad behaviour) or intimidated to unite with who my bible says to beware of.

Jim has offered to have the rules opened up for even more inclusion - I don't see how that promotes a "conservative" labeled section.

And it's my opinion that the reason you haven't seen alot of them showing up than already have, is becuz we spoke up about what we were seeing as a pattern of who was posting here or starting to join and it caused it to become a central focus.
So it may have stopped what may have been on the way - it's very possible.

[PreachersWife2004]

And you should probably ask Latreia to leave the thread, too, as she is obviously not helping any either.

Fact is, you guys don't want help. You want yes-people to agree that you're under attack and oh goodness, we're under attack because we're such STRONG Christians, that must be it. You only want input from people who agree with this crazy assertion that the liberals are coming and you're their number one target.

I'm curious as to what you will say to Simon_Templar for his post. I agree with it wholeheartedly and it is what I have been saying the whole time.

[Simon_Templar]

If you are not part of the problem or part of the solution or if you are partially informed, misinformed or uninformed, please, for the sake of peace, out of courtesy, step out of this thread until you become well informed. As you are only causing more problems as those of us who have already been over and over and over and over these issues do not feel like rehashing them for the sake of those who were on hiatus while we were here day in day out in the trenches. We also do not want to have to constantly defend ourselves against false accusations and erroneous concepts over and over and over again as well, so please.....make it stop.



On behalf of all of us partially informed and mis-informed, I would request that you stoop for a moment to our level, and enlighten us.

What basis do you have for your claims? Why are you accusing these people?

I want real evidence. Not vague accusations, not impressions, not feelings.. actual quotes showing that your claims are justified.

I haven't been on hiatus, I've been here through all of this, and I haven't seen SQUAT that justifies the claims you guys are making.


I understand not wanting to defend yourself against false accusations. However, at this point it appears that you guys are the ones making the accusations and not substantiating them.

[Simon_Templar]

MEMO TO SELF:

Beware of those who minimize the malice of an atheist chat board and those who constantly reprimand everything a true conservative Sister or Brother posts.

Adding to my Ignore list. I have to do one on manual.

Tee Hee.
sure, ignore anyone who questions you. Yet again, more liberal behavior

[IamRedeemed]

Actually I qualify on both counts as I stand as one of the accused
(of the erroneous accusations that is) and I am here to help bring solution.

Then I ask the same of you, too, because you really aren't helping things either, are you?

[IamRedeemed]

Again, I am asking please.......make it stop.

sure, ignore anyone who questions you. Yet again, more liberal behavior

[Father Rick]

I had no problems with Fr. Rick and Belinda posting here, in fact I thought they would be valuable additions to CC. It wasn't until they started posting gossip about someone else's marital life that I questioned their involvement here.
Letalis...

First, I only posted a message from someone who wanted people to know she was alive and not dead-- after she contacted me and asked me to let people know she was still alive because she didn't want people to be grieving over her "death".

I didn't post gossip-- I do know things about that marital situation, but I've never mentioned nor even slightly implied what I know-- nor will I (as that WOULD be gossip). Rather, I corrected a misunderstanding held by many of the members here.

[IamRedeemed]

Again, I am asking you please.......these erroneous types of accusations and misjudgments
that have no substantiated merit are only serving to stir up strife. All of the basis of my claims
are in this forum over and over. You don't need permission to seek the truth of all of these matters.
We are not going to rehash them again just to save you the bother.

Please make it stop.


On behalf of all of us partially informed and mis-informed, I would request that you stoop for a moment to our level, and enlighten us.

What basis do you have for your claims? Why are you accusing these people?

I want real evidence. Not vague accusations, not impressions, not feelings.. actual quotes showing that your claims are justified.

I haven't been on hiatus, I've been here through all of this, and I haven't seen SQUAT that justifies the claims you guys are making.


I understand not wanting to defend yourself against false accusations. However, at this point it appears that you guys are the ones making the accusations and not substantiating them.

[woobadooba]

I wonder if you guys really know what it means to be persecuted.

When you get it from both sides that's when you know it's really bad!

[IamRedeemed]

On Cheri's behalf, I can tell you that in her own words, she didn't see it that way, she felt you did something other than what you discussed with her that you would do when you asked for her okay, but nevertheless that situation is not what this thread is about.

Please make it stop.


Letalis...

First, I only posted a message from someone who wanted people to know she was alive and not dead-- after she contacted me and asked me to let people know she was still alive because she didn't want people to be grieving over her "death".

I didn't post gossip-- I do know things about that marital situation, but I've never mentioned nor even slightly implied what I know-- nor will I (as that WOULD be gossip). Rather, I corrected a misunderstanding held by many of the members here.

[IamRedeemed]

nm

[Letalis]

Letalis...

First, I only posted a message from someone who wanted people to know she was alive and not dead-- after she contacted me and asked me to let people know she was still alive because she didn't want people to be grieving over her "death".

I didn't post gossip-- I do know things about that marital situation, but I've never mentioned nor even slightly implied what I know-- nor will I (as that WOULD be gossip). Rather, I corrected a misunderstanding held by many of the members here.
Correcting a misunderstanding regarding another's marital life, and involving someone you bumped heads with on more than one occasion. Can you see the difference between a wife clarifying a misunderstanding, and you, certainly not on the best terms with Time, involving a matter you had no business with, choosing to "clarify"?

You mean he was devastated at the blow to his pride. I haven't seen any posts asking for advice on how to win her back. If he were truly devastated, he'd be doing everything he could to get her back. Another reason why it seemed she had died.

- BelindaP

http://foru.ms/showpost.php?p=40037066&postcount=20

[Latreia]

Gossip is gossip, you can cover it with self-righteousness, but it still shows.

[Simon_Templar]

Gossip is gossip, you can cover it with self-righteousness, but it still shows.
look whos talking


I've had as much of this as I can take

[Latreia]

look whos talking


I've had as much of this as I can take

Yes, and look who is jumping to false conclusions based on attitudes that are based on bias and ill-will.

But I can forgive you because I know that you have been misled and deceived and by the experts.

I am really hurt, because I jumped to this thread to enjoy the kind of clarity I have found in your posts on different subjects.

Cream pie hits me right in the face.

OK, then.

:sigh:

[IamRedeemed]

Make it STOP!



look whos talking


I've had as much of this as I can take

[IamRedeemed]

If you have been redeemed by the blood of Christ, and we have been redeemed by the blood of Christ, if you love His Word and His ways, and we love His Word and His ways, WE ARE NOT your enemies.

You need a better pair of glasses!

So, please stop referring to us, your brethren as your enemies and stop attempting to cover up your apparent loathing for us, by encouraging each other with the Scripture that says to "pray for our enemies"

Instead ask yourself why you hate your brethren so much? What within yourself causes you to loathe those of us who love ALL the Lord's Word and ALL of His ways?

Again, I repeat:

WE ARE YOUR BRETHREN

We are not your enemies so again I am asking.....

PLEASE MAKE IT STOP!

[Father Rick]

On Cheri's behalf, I can tell you that in her own words, she didn't see it that way, she felt you did something other than what you discussed with her that you would do when you asked for her okay, but nevertheless that situation is not what this thread is about.

Please make it stop.


Correcting a misunderstanding regarding another's marital life, and involving someone you bumped heads with on more than one occasion. Can you see the difference between a wife clarifying a misunderstanding, and you, certainly not on the best terms with Time, involving a matter you had no business with, choosing to "clarify"?

Cheri sent me a pm, introducing herself, and stating that she wished she could post it herself but that she felt if she did so that it would be taken as just being out of spite.

She and I later discussed it... that she was hurt by seeing the discussion of her "death" and saw others hurting as a result of it. She repeatedly said that she wanted people to know what happened. So I asked her if it was ok for me to post the info from her-- knowing that I am stronger emotionally than someone going through such events at the moment, so if people get mad at me I can take the heat so she didn't have to.

Her statement to me was "do what you have to do to make this all stop". So, on her behalf I posted the info she had given me, in basically the same way she had given it to me.

But only dealing with the one issue that had been openly discussed here in CC-- her "death". I brought up no other issues at all.


Would the info have been better received coming from someone else? Probably. But there was no one else... I was the one she approached. And she later came in and confirmed publicly that this is what transpired...

[Latreia]

It's kind of unstoppable. So let's leave this thread and find another one, OK?

And if it won't stop there, we will go to another thread and another, until the confrontations fizzle out.

Fizzle, isn't that a cute word, I mean it's kinda like Giggle......tee hee....

:help:

[Nadiine]

Well, I'm not inclined right now to jump back into the fray - mostly becuz the fruit speaks for itself. I don't need to continue when it's already manifested itself.

But it is my prayer that us as believers start praying to the Lord for added wisdom and discernment to spot what is false, and stop just accepting the flattery that people are giving us and just accepting everyone & everything without any question or reservation.
Most anyone here that showed skepticism here got attacked pretty heavily for it.

In my years of ministry, we actually have a reputation with the seculars that we're gullible & stupid. That makes me SICK. But they do often use us to play against one another without us even knowing it.

in today's postmodern church, we're programmed not to even recognize that we HAVE an enemy - (other than "legalists" and the "intolerant") let alone beware of them to not yoke with them.

[Letalis]

Would the info have been better received coming from someone else? Probably. But there was no one else... I was the one she approached. And she later came in and confirmed publicly that this is what transpired...
It probably would have. It also probably wouldn't have been so inappropriate.

[Nadiine]

Cheri sent me a pm, introducing herself, and stating that she wished she could post it herself but that she felt if she did so that it would be taken as just being out of spite.

Would the info have been better received coming from someone else? Probably. But there was no one else... I was the one she approached. And she later came in and confirmed publicly that this is what transpired...
I don't even know to accept that as factual...
I've gotten a pm that this is'nt even the case as to how it started.

Listen, why not drop this - becuz I cant' know if this is even TRUE or not. He said she said...
Your other posts on a tangent against Time were the fruit.
He was banned and all of a sudden here came your explanations & accusations threads when he was silenced.

the Cheri incident is only more support for what I already saw - against Time. Then you stood by as everybody judged him harshly and how played they felt....
you didn't once stop to interject all the bad judgments that went against him...
that's FRUIT too. (if you were trying to be so neutral & just lend a girl a helping hand).

Sorry, this doesn't float w/ me.

[rmw8855]

Yes, what Nadiine said. It wasn't meant to be clear to anyone who reads it, but those who were involved on either side know exactly what it means. It is no mystery to us. If people aren't a part of the problem or a part of the solution, then they really don't need to know all of the fine details. :sigh: jmo

The problem is that we are ALL involved. Alot of the threads regardless of their original purpose seem to keep coming back to this subject.

I have been here every day for several weeks and I have watched it unfold. And I still don't know who "they" are. I know who has taken which side, but right now all I see is brothers & sisters fighting each other. If we are going to keep discussing the problem then it calmly needs to be laid out (relativism shown here ... liberal attacks here ... etc.), so that we can all discuss the issue based on a common understanding of the facts.

If you truly feel that this problem is none of our business then it should be discussed by PM's & leave us out of it.

I have tried very hard not to criticize anyone because I love you all, but either let it go or put all of the cards out on the table for everyone to see.

[Father Rick]

It probably would have. It also probably wouldn't have been so inappropriate.
Letalis...

If you go back and look at that thread, you (as staff) will see the moderated posts hidden in it. When I first made the OP, it was unapproved, with a note that it may not be appropriate and may cause people to be upset. You can also see the date/time stamps that show the thread was started a couple of days before everyone else sees. (I actually signed in under my sock to see the difference... what nonstaff see is very different from what we see on that. I'm assuming that is due to the unapproved/approved status)

You will see my note there, that I completely understood that... that I was just trying to relay the info from Cheri.

That is how I left things. Quite frankly, I trusted the staff here to exercise judgement as well... and if it was truly deemed inappropriate then they would just leave it unapproved. And that's how it sat for a day or two...

I honestly figured that staff had decided to just leave it unapproved... and didn't think about it again. I completely understand that we are all human, and that sometimes things that are intended one way get perceived completely differently than we meant them. If staff had left it unapproved, I wouldn't have complained at all.

But... it was approved... and then all the fuss began. I'm not blaming anyone... it is what it is.

I tried to explain in the thread that I was just trying to relay the info from Cheri, etc. but I could see it wasn't going anywhere... which is why I went into the report thread and told staff they could just go ahead and close it.

That's all there was to it. There was nothing else at all on my part (as to motives, etc.). I didn't discuss others things about them. I didn't talk about their marriage. I only relayed the info from her, in basically the same way she presented it to me, that she was not dead.

[IAmTimezSock]

No Nadiine he isnt telling the truth

Im sorry but im not putting up with this crap any more

Ban this nic if you want but the truth ic coming out


Frick boy, The truth is you misled Cheri. You misled her badly and she then asked for you to just tell trekki that she was alive... use this for what you want but you used a woman not too long out of the hospital, who suffered from coma and amnesiaAND the after effects of it. and you did it because you dont like me andONLY then because i asked you to answer questions

[Letalis]

That's all there was to it. There was nothing else at all on my part (as to motives, etc.). I didn't discuss others things about them. I didn't talk about their marriage. I only relayed the info from her, in basically the same way she presented it to me, that she was not dead.
Fr. Rick, assuming you had no nefarious intent (and I have no idea what your intent is or was), you couldn't see that there might be a conflict of interest there? You and Time had several arguments, then you post about his wife? It seems to me you had very poor judgement in this situation.

Either way, there were others involved that tried to use your thread to their advantage, to try and "prove" Time was a liar and whatever else. The blame doesn't lay squarely on you, but you played a part.

[Simon_Templar]

Yes, and look who is jumping to false conclusions based on attitudes that are based on bias and ill-will.

But I can forgive you because I know that you have been misled and deceived and by the experts.

I am really hurt, because I jumped to this thread to enjoy the kind of clarity I have found in your posts on different subjects.

Cream pie hits me right in the face.

OK, then.

:sigh:
I'm sorry if I mis-spoke.

I have been truly angered by what I see going on. I believe that people are propagating a grave injustice in the name of conservatism and "standing for truth". On top of that I think there has been a lot of hypocrisy put forward as well, and all toghether, it has really made me angry.

I've gotten to the point where I've simply had enough and I'm done even listening.

However, I did speak to you in anger and even if my understanding was right (which it may not have been) my attitude and intent were wrong.

I ask your forgiveness.

[Father Rick]

Sorry... contrary to what Time is once again violating a ban to come on here and say...

Cheri did originally ask me to share with Lady Trekki... then later, we discussed posting the info here publicly.

I can provide the documentation of this for staff if needed.

[IAmTimezSock]

Sorry... contrary to what Time is once again violating a ban to come on here and say...

Cheri did originally ask me to share with Lady Trekki... then later, we discussed posting the info here publicly.

I can provide the documentation of this for staff if needed.


I got your documentaiton

RICK WHEN did you come to me??????


this was a misunderstanding with another poster and you make me to be a liar

get out of CC you are not wanted or welcomed here period

you wanna ban me i suggest cleaning up your own act first... Get out of my forum

[Miss Shelby]

No Nadiine he isnt telling the truth

Im sorry but im not putting up with this crap any more

Ban this nic if you want but the truth ic coming out


Frick boy, The truth is you misled Cheri. You misled her badly and she then asked for you to just tell trekki that she was alive... use this for what you want but you used a woman not too long out of the hospital, who suffered from coma and amnesiaAND the after effects of it. and you did it because you dont like me andONLY then because i asked you to answer questions
hey time :wave:

[Nadiine]

Fr. Rick, assuming you had no nefarious intent (and I have no idea what your intent is or was), you couldn't see that there might be a conflict of interest there? You and Time had several arguments, then you post about his wife? It seems to me you had very poor judgement in this situation.

Either way, there were others involved that tried to use your thread to their advantage, to try and "prove" Time was a liar and whatever else. The blame doesn't lay squarely on you, but you played a part.
the fact that he didn't BOTHER to ask people not to wrongly JUDGE T2BC is the proof Letalis.

IF he were being fair and neutral, that would have been said when the posters were forming hostile judgments against him - THEY BELIEVED IT ALL yet had no information from Time that HE WAS BANNED WHEN THE MISUNDERSTANDING HAPPENED AND COULDN'T OPENLY CORRECT IT.
& if he thought he wasn't going to even be able to post here again, why would he have to BOTHER correcting it when he was kicked out?

Frick should have stepped in to STOP judgments made against Time, but instead, fanned the flames to chide along w/ it.

[IAmTimezSock]

Hey Shelby

Cant say im lying eh? lolol

FRICK GO, AND GO NOW,

if you dont im going to make sure people ask you some very hard quesitons i have info on publicly

[Nadiine]

Sorry... contrary to what Time is once again violating a ban to come on here and say...

Cheri did originally ask me to share with Lady Trekki... then later, we discussed posting the info here publicly.

I can provide the documentation of this for staff if needed.
I'd like you to sit by while people ROPE YOU UP FOR A LYNCHING...
you've been able to post all your defenses frick...
This has been the entire problem from the start of your accusations in your conveniently timed posts

[Simon_Templar]

No Nadiine he isnt telling the truth

Im sorry but im not putting up with this crap any more

Ban this nic if you want but the truth ic coming out


Frick boy, The truth is you misled Cheri. You misled her badly and she then asked for you to just tell trekki that she was alive... use this for what you want but you used a woman not too long out of the hospital, who suffered from coma and amnesiaAND the after effects of it. and you did it because you dont like me andONLY then because i asked you to answer questions
I know Fr. Rick, and have known him for more than two years. He is human as we all are, but he is not malicious, nor is he a liar. He is a good, honest, man of God.

He may have not had good judgement in posting that thread. He may even have allowed his personal views to creep in and color what he posted. I would not be surprised if he thinks you are a liar and malicious based on his experience with you (just from what I've seen of it) It is possible that he allowed his opinion of you to color what he posted.. I don't presume to speak for him.

However, I do not believe for a minute that he deliberately misrepresented what your wife said to him, nor that he deliberately took advantage of her situation.

[IamRedeemed]

If you have been watching everyday and all, then I really don't know why you say you don't know what has gone on here or who "they" are but the nice thing is that what you said proves my point in a report that not everyone is going to know what it is about unless they were directly part of the problem or part of the solution.

I agree with you that brothers and sisters are fighting.
I am sure we don't agree why, and I will leave it at that. But you are right THIS particular issue does not directly involve any liberal group here at Foru.ms

The cards have been on the table, over and over where was your input then? Why suddenly are people coming out of the woodwork? Where were you when some of us were being falsely accused based on a personal experience that had nothing to do with anyone here and happened to that person years and years ago? (in essence we were being given a black eye
for something other people did who were never here)

Where were you when the entire forum was called to the carpet based on an erroneous concept?

I and a few others stuck up for all of you, where were you when we needed you?

So, please don't come in here, having said you watched everything and didn't speak up and then demand
that we offer you an explanation now.






The problem is that we are ALL involved. Alot of the threads regardless of their original purpose seem to keep coming back to this subject.

I have been here every day for several weeks and I have watched it unfold. And I still don't know who "they" are. I know who has taken which side, but right now all I see is brothers & sisters fighting each other. If we are going to keep discussing the problem then it calmly needs to be laid out (relativism shown here ... liberal attacks here ... etc.), so that we can all discuss the issue based on a common understanding of the facts.

If you truly feel that this problem is none of our business then it should be discussed by PM's & leave us out of it.

I have tried very hard not to criticize anyone because I love you all, but either let it go or put all of the cards out on the table for everyone to see.

[Nadiine]

this thread will most likely get locked up - I'll step back for now with one word:

FRUIT :idea:

[Simon_Templar]

I got your documentaiton

RICK WHEN did you come to me??????


this was a misunderstanding with another poster and you make me to be a liar

get out of CC you are not wanted or welcomed here period

you wanna ban me i suggest cleaning up your own act first... Get out of my forum
Fr Rick is a friend of mine, and I welcome his presence here. If he is not welcome, then neither am I.

[Latreia]

I'm sorry if I mis-spoke.

I have been truly angered by what I see going on. I believe that people are propagating a grave injustice in the name of conservatism and "standing for truth". On top of that I think there has been a lot of hypocrisy put forward as well, and all toghether, it has really made me angry.

I've gotten to the point where I've simply had enough and I'm done even listening.

However, I did speak to you in anger and even if my understanding was right (which it may not have been) my attitude and intent were wrong.

I ask your forgiveness.

Started to rep you in private. But you deserve to be praised and embraced in the public thread.

You cannot imagine how I appreciate one voice of compassion for me. I owe you so much more than mere forgiveness, which you have already met with your brotherly kindness.

It means even more because I really do appreciate so many of your posts.

Be at peace, and rejoice for His Hand upon your shoulder.

:groupray:

[Letalis]

Time, this is not "your" forum. Fr. Rick is a member here too.

[Father Rick]

Fr. Rick, assuming you had no nefarious intent (and I have no idea what your intent is or was), you couldn't see that there might be a conflict of interest there? You and Time had several arguments, then you post about his wife? It seems to me you had very poor judgement in this situation.

Either way, there were others involved that tried to use your thread to their advantage, to try and "prove" Time was a liar and whatever else. The blame doesn't lay squarely on you, but you played a part.I hear what you're saying.

I was in a position where there were multiple people who were either a) "hurt" or b) "grieving" (their words) due to misinformation.

I was given the correct information by the very person who the information was about... and that person told me they wanted people to know (for their own good and for the good of the others). Speaking specifically of the situation they said "do whatever you have to do to make it stop".

What would you do?

It was a no win situation for me. Posting the info would make some mad. I knew that. Yet others were hurt because the info wasn't posted. There was no good choice.

So... when stuck in that kind of situation, my ethic is to let truth reveal what is false. If people will be hurt either way--- at least let it be due to truth.

[Latreia]

It seems that only a select few here seem to be entitled to be hurt. Notedly, the most conservative here are always the hurters, regardless of what they open up their hearts about, and the opposition here are allowed to play the persecution and hurt cards, relentlessly.

Those who parade their "hurt" in thread after relentless thread show the least compassion to anybody else.

From my personal experience, staff is playing favorites, simply by selecting whom they are tough on and whom they plead for.

If staff cannot control their own prejudices, how do they expect respect and submission from members?

[Cheri67]

I cant believe this at all...

So many wrongs in all this and it just keeps gettin worse.

I read the thread by Father Rick, and yes I came to him about it, and yes I wanted people to not grieve over something false or misled..whatever the case. THAT case has been cleared up. Now, I will say the approach of F Ricks thread caught me a lil unawares myself, I figured it woulda been handled a lil differently. People know now, yadda yadda...

I pry shoulda come in here and done it myself..but yanno what, Im gonna be honest ..this is the most harsh, attacking forum on CF imho..

And I dont really give a pink pickled pigs tail who cares about my opinion or hurts, or Times..

Hence the root of all most issues here, NOT CARING ABOUT OTHERS..

Step down..step off...

God bless

[rmw8855]

If you have been watching everyday and all, then I really don't know why you say you don't know what has gone on here or who "they" are but the nice thing is that what you said proves my point in a report that not everyone is going to know what it is about unless they were directly part of the problem or part of the solution.

I agree with you that brothers and sisters are fighting.
I am sure we don't agree why, and I will leave it at that. But you are right THIS particular issue does not directly involve any liberal group here at Foru.ms

The cards have been on the table, over and over where was your input then? Why suddenly are people coming out of the woodwork? Where were you when some of us were being falsely accused based on a personal experience that had nothing to do with anyone here and happened to that person years and years ago? (in essence we were being given a black eye
for something other people did who were never here)

Where were you when the entire forum was called to the carpet based on an erroneous concept?

I and a few others stuck up for all of you, where were you when we needed you?

So, please don't come in here, having said you watched everything and didn't speak up and then demand
that we offer you an explanation now.




I have been here and I have participated when I felt necessary. I refuse to jump on a band wagon just because someone I like & respect sees a problem. I need to see it for myself. I will fight when I feel there is a need. All I have ever seen is us fighting with each other. I have seen poor judgement on both sides. I have seen a lack of love on both sides (I am not talking about standing strongly for what is right - I am talking about insults, judgments, & rudeness).

Where was I? Trying to not fan the flames. Trying to support my brothers & sisters in prayer and by PM.

I did not demand an explanation, I said either put it all on the table so we can discuss this based on the same understanding or if you feel this discussion is none of my business then take it to PM.

[Nadiine]

Those who parade their "hurt" in thread after relentless thread show the least compassion to anybody else.


Thank you for noticing that. That's exactly what happens.

Note to self:
I need a smiley that plays a violin (I'll even use it on myself) :|

[Letalis]

I hear what you're saying.

I was in a position where there were multiple people who were either a) "hurt" or b) "grieving" (their words) due to misinformation.

I was given the correct information by the very person who the information was about... and that person told me they wanted people to know (for their own good and for the good of the others). Speaking specifically of the situation they said "do whatever you have to do to make it stop".

What would you do?

It was a no win situation for me. Posting the info would make some mad. I knew that. Yet others were hurt because the info wasn't posted. There was no good choice.

So... when stuck in that kind of situation, my ethic is to let truth reveal what is false. If people will be hurt either way--- at least let it be due to truth.
Fr. Rick, I understand that hindsight is 20/20, but I don't believe for a moment that this was your only option.

You could have told Time's wife that, given your history, you might not be the best one to relay such information, and instead suggested someone else who might be more "neutral." You could have also reassured her that she had nothing to fear by posting here (and she really doesn't, the reason your thread was received poorly was because of the messenger). You could have gone privately to clear up the matter with those who were misled.

If you had to create the thread, you could have worded it with a less accusatory tone and more informatively.

"She is NOT dead as Time told everyone."

"She was very saddened and hurt by the fact that Time used a made up story of her death to justify some of his actions and garner sympathy for himself."

These are accusations, not informative posts. It would have been much better received had you modified your choice of words only slightly!

[Letalis]

By the way, the irony is not lost on me that you are here imploring us not to misjudge your motivations, while the first thing you did was attribute nefarious motives to Time.

"Time used a made up story of her death to justify some of his actions and garner sympathy for himself."

[Nadiine]

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[IamRedeemed]

No one asked you to jump on a bandwagon. But now you are on one though and if you are on it against me, then you are on the wrong one. You said you watched it all come down, so why do you say you don't know what is going on? And demand we rehash it for you? You, numbered as a member here were erroneously attacked as well in yet another thread started by the same Op that started this war.

Suprise! It wasn't me! :eek:

People shouldn't judge other people based on their friend's determinations, because their friends may have gotten their erroneous idea from something that resides within themselves and not from anything the person actually did or didn't do.

You say you didn't come in because you didn't want to fan flames and now you are here having said that you don't know what the problem is and have chosen to war against me and begin fanning flames though?

Um and yes, when you stomp in somewhere and say either do this or do that then you are making demands.

The information is available in these threads, besides that, if you were watching all along, why is it that you don't know? See how this goes around and around, not making any sense in a what appears to be a contradicting way from one of your statements to the next?

There is no neutral safety corner you can go to if you are going to call anyone out. There is no such thing as a hit and run in a forum. It just unfortunately doesn't work that way.



I have been here and I have participated when I felt necessary. I refuse to jump on a band wagon just because someone I like & respect sees a problem. I need to see it for myself. I will fight when I feel there is a need. All I have ever seen is us fighting with each other. I have seen poor judgement on both sides. I have seen a lack of love on both sides (I am not talking about standing strongly for what is right - I am talking about insults, judgments, & rudeness).

Where was I? Trying to not fan the flames. Trying to support my brothers & sisters in prayer and by PM.

I did not demand an explanation, I said either put it all on the table so we can discuss this based on the same understanding or if you feel this discussion is none of my business then take it to PM.

[BelindaP]

How about if everyone starts using 'I' statements instead of 'you' statements? That would help the tone of things remarkably.

This is such a mess, and I just wish it would go away. :sigh:

[Nadiine]

How about if everyone starts using 'I' statements instead of 'you' statements? That would help the tone of things remarkably.

This is such a mess, and I just wish it would go away. :sigh:
you want to correct us on OUR TONE after your IIDB statement????????????
ROFL
:swoon: :swoon: :swoon: :swoon: :swoon: :swoon: :swoon:

[Latreia]

ROFLMHO! Looks like nobody is going to go away. The whole gang, or should I say, gangs, are staying for the celebration.

How about a deal for everybody. If staff goes out of this thread, we all leave.

Good deal?

:idea: :idea: :idea: :idea:


:groupray:

[No Swansong]

I will vouch for Jim being a solid doctrinal WELS Lutheran.

People here may not know what WELS is, or what our doctrine is, but it certainly isn't relativism.
I am quite familiar with WELS and I think it is a fairly easy question to answer. Actually it is a simple yes or no answer. Why hasn't he? (unless I missed his answer in which case I withdraw my objection here.)

[No Swansong]

look whos talking


I've had as much of this as I can take
Yes, I agree but from both sides.

[Nadiine]

I am quite familiar with WELS and I think it is a fairly easy question to answer. Actually it is a simple yes or no answer. Why hasn't he? (unless I missed his answer in which case I withdraw my objection here.)
Yes that was my issue - people go to churches they don't agree with everything in.
The question is to JIM, not about his church affiliation.

But PW said he answered it already; I couldn't find the post, got lazy & gave up.

[Latreia]

:sigh:

(Falls back on the couch with a grunt)

Anybody wanta watch a Laurel and Hardy movie?

:sorry:

[synger]

He answered it over 100 posts ago. #23.

Are we done yet?

[Latreia]

No, don't believe in it.

Thanks for the laugh, this has been a most trying day. It seems that I made a big mistake and I now I have to try and figure out how to fix it :scratch:

I missed it.

:scratch:

[Auntie]

I cant believe this at all...

So many wrongs in all this and it just keeps gettin worse.

I read the thread by Father Rick, and yes I came to him about it, and yes I wanted people to not grieve over something false or misled..whatever the case. THAT case has been cleared up. Now, I will say the approach of F Ricks thread caught me a lil unawares myself, I figured it woulda been handled a lil differently. People know now, yadda yadda...

I pry shoulda come in here and done it myself..but yanno what, Im gonna be honest ..this is the most harsh, attacking forum on CF imho..

And I dont really give a pink pickled pigs tail who cares about my opinion or hurts, or Times..

Hence the root of all most issues here, NOT CARING ABOUT OTHERS..

Step down..step off...

God bless


(((((((Cheri)))))))

:hug: :hug:

[No Swansong]

I missed it.

:scratch:
So did I so I hope that means we can assume that all reports, objections etc will be handled in the same manner in the future.

Good.

[Latreia]

Optimists, can't live with 'em and can't live without 'em.

;)

[Nadiine]

I cant believe this at all...

So many wrongs in all this and it just keeps gettin worse.

I read the thread by Father Rick, and yes I came to him about it, and yes I wanted people to not grieve over something false or misled..whatever the case. THAT case has been cleared up. Now, I will say the approach of F Ricks thread caught me a lil unawares myself, I figured it woulda been handled a lil differently. People know now, yadda yadda...

I pry shoulda come in here and done it myself..but yanno what, Im gonna be honest ..this is the most harsh, attacking forum on CF imho..

And I dont really give a pink pickled pigs tail who cares about my opinion or hurts, or Times..

Hence the root of all most issues here, NOT CARING ABOUT OTHERS..

Step down..step off...

God bless
I can understand what you're seeing and why it looks that way.
But the problem is, Erwin has put this entire forum into mass chaos in denominational sections - we're forced to self - govern and when everybody is having an identity issue about the section, this stuff errupts.

There's other underlying issues as well, and some of them do need to be "outed" and brought into the open so the cancer doesn't keep spilling over everywhere else.
Some of it necessary to try to fix things... or establish something. So yes it's not pretty... when churches & other places go thru struggles, the struggles aren't visible like they are on a public forum like this.

Sorry you came in when it all hit the fan. :sigh:

[Tonks]

I all of these various threads I have yet to see any sort of solution proposed regarding some of the "problems..." I just see lots and lots of complaining.

Anyone have anything?

[synger]

Truthfully, I haven't seen any clear outlining of the problems, either, though there seem to have been a couple of attempts. They tend to blow up into pesonal flame-fests, though, so nothing has come of them.

[Simon_Templar]

Started to rep you in private. But you deserve to be praised and embraced in the public thread.

You cannot imagine how I appreciate one voice of compassion for me. I owe you so much more than mere forgiveness, which you have already met with your brotherly kindness.

It means even more because I really do appreciate so many of your posts.

Be at peace, and rejoice for His Hand upon your shoulder.

:groupray:

:hug:

[Albion]

Truthfully, I haven't seen any clear outlining of the problems, either, though there seem to have been a couple of attempts. They tend to blow up into pesonal flame-fests, though, so nothing has come of them.

I'd settle for just a couple of examples of "Liberal" or "Revisionist" posts so we could judge for ourselves.