Lets Get Cfs Back To Friendly

Discussion in 'Important Things To Consider' started by Jeffin, Jun 12, 2013.

  1. I just mean that I try to be simplistic about my own ideas. There are the important centre beliefs as given above. I'm not sure say about the rapture but do not feel a conclusion either way would be significant compared to me truly (I'm not there yet...) finding Christ in the first place. Hope that makes some sense.
  2. Ummm..No...I don't understand you.

    Try again, please!
  3. I',m lost here.. I'm thinking the rich man where he was asked about the most important commandments. He gave 2 and Jesus said he was correct on that. I can't help (but maybe wrong) feel that what was said there was more important than working out exactly the end time schedule and beating one another over the head over which denomination has that right.
    Rusty likes this.
  4. Yup...Not into denominational loyalty breast beating myself. I find the divisions this sort of "club" mentality engenders just heaps rubbish on the whole concept of agape, IMO.
  5. At least we all agree on this topic. :D
    I also think we need more ladies here. ;)
    Rusty likes this.
  6. I find that Christian ladies have a low tolerance of disharmony...I don't know, but I would bet that the silent members, the inactive are mostly ladies.

  7. Same here. I think the ladies go silent when they see the debates and arguments. Anyway, we can strive to change all that and be respectful of others. It's start with us.

    Quick question. What do you all suggest we as staff can do take make this friendly atmosphere happen?
  8. I don't necessarily think women can't tolerate disharmony, as much as we can't tolerate people just talking over others and not listening to others' views. When I see healthy debates, I'm likely to chime in. When I see someone trying to bully others (not saying that is anyone here, I haven't been here long enough to have seen that lol) to his/her way of thinking, that's pretty much when I tune out.

    Jesus said to His followers to shake the dust from their feet, if their words and preachings weren't welcome in the villages they went through. In other words, Jesus suggested to them to not waste their time on people who have no desire to be open minded. BUT...His apostles planted seeds. So, maybe the seed didn't grow at that moment in some people's lives, but for others, maybe it did. We are all works in progress, afterall.

    That said...if you want me to see your point of view on any matter, talk to me with respect. If you choose not to, I will tune you out. haha :D
  9. Maybe when you see strife, for example, where someone is bullying people in threads, name calling ensues, etc...maybe just a quick posting of the rules inside of that particular thread to get the attention of everyone.

    Emotions run high when we are 'defending' our faith points of view. So, sometimes, just being human...a thread can go off the rails. I think if the moderators could just steer it back on course, it might make a world of difference.

    Again, haven't been on here to see where there is strife, but I'm assuming since this thread was created, there must be some occasional e-fighting going on.

    Love God with all your heart and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. We need to be mindful of that, always. :)
  10. Wegs: "bullying" and unhealthy debates with disrespect is what I call disharmony.
    wegs likes this.
  11. Jeff: As was discussed: a stronger sequestering system, a 3 warnings plan, and closer monitoring would help.

    Bullies will get away with things as long as they can because they see them selves as right, orthodox or even "lead by God" to be caustic.
    wegs likes this.
  12. I think that when there is someone that is always instigating strife, a warning to that person is in order. If they continue to instigate strife, maybe banning them for several days will help them to 'see the light'. I don't like the idea of banning discussions because one person cannot discuss that particular topic without over the top reactions to disagreement. It just robs everyone else of the blessing that they can get from the discussion. Closing the whole topic down can even encourage the troublemaker to continue his/her behavior. In my limited time here, I have seen that there are certain ones who like to 'ambush' people who post threads representing a viewpoint that they disagree with. It can be great discussion to discuss a point of disagreement, but those who cannot disagree without attacking others should be the ones bear the fruit of their actions, not everyone else that may be interested in the thread.
    wegs likes this.
  13. To the doctrinally entrenched, asking questions will always feel like "ambushing", especially if the questions are avoided, detoured or name calling ensues.

    I don't see this as a "one person" problem at all: there are many individuals who feel it is their duty to cast hell fire and brimstone on any thoughts that are not of their liking.
  14. Another thought. Banning an instigator for several days when they continue to cause problems will perhaps help them to ponder their own actions. We can get so convinced of our own rightness that we become blind to our own actions.

    Proverbs 21:2
    Every way of a man is right in his own eyes.
  15. hahaha ok, i agree then. :D
    Rusty likes this.
  16. I thinking banning teaches nothing; it only infuriates the dogged.
    Closing threads is like punishing an entire class of innocents because "Zeke" and his pals are hurling spit balls.

    As I suggested elsewhere: A private "room", monitored by a Mod (preferably a pastor) where belligerents and their targets are sequestered until some sort of results (good or bad) is reached off the main thread is in compliance with Scripture~~

  17. this reminds me of detention, back in school days. :p

  18. I pushed for this a while ago...it was horribly abused and didn't stop the arguments and debates. They still leaked out.
  19. Honestly, the best thing to do, would be to delete the offensive posts. If people just want to cause strife, or argue for the sake of arguing, they will tire of having their posts deleted. They can choose to post more positive comments, or leave. That way, if this site chooses to not ban, then the ownership of whether to leave or stay, is on the infractor. << is that a word? lol

    It might take more work from mods, but that would be a potentially viable option.
  20. Pushed or installed? You mean the private rooms or what?

Share This Page