Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Crazy Liz · 03-09-2007, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by praying

Do you really think this is about money?

I don't think it's about money per se. I think it is largely about wanting to be the biggest, which has the side effect of generating money.

Crazy Liz · 03-09-2007, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fragmentsofdreams

Someone gets his questions answered very quickly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by praying

Indeed!

At the same time, there's a public appeal to the Execs that hasn't even been acknowledged for 3 days. *sigh*

DougLDS · 03-09-2007, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ResidentMumbai

*Copies to My Pictures*

Thanks for the new profile pic material!

Maybe you'd like this one too.....

DougLDS · 03-09-2007, 09:17 AM

Think I would get in trouble if I used this over at CF?

sparklecat · 03-09-2007, 09:32 AM

Seebs, on your thread, are you looking for how people have been treated as outsiders at CF specifically, or in all cases? And should I exclude anything post-deconversion?

I must say, I'm having a wonderful time in the section of my archives I generally avoid to pull some relevant quotes out.

BigToe · 03-09-2007, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seebs

The thing is, Toe, while I agree that it's not always a problem, right now there is an issue where people are able to pretend that only "heretics" are being denied icons. This is a good way to help them think about this as an issue that affects "us", not just "them".

And that you acknowledge people are being unfairly denied icons makes you not in that camp. Some people have the us vs them thinking in regards to icons being changed, you've shown you don't follow the us vs them mentality towards those who have had their icons changed.

BigToe · 03-09-2007, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stumpjumper

My issue is that CF is and has been sending a mixed message and inquiries into whether or not someone is really a Christian is not something that a discussion forum should be doing.

It's clear to me that CF is saying that non-Nicene affirming members are not Christian and this is apparant in Frumanchu's ridiculous trichotomy of theological, soteriological, or covenental Christians.

He and many like him are saying that those people who reject the Nicene Creed are not Christian but of course only "theologically"

Give me a break. If we really went by theological statements to determine who is and is not Christian the CO section would be practically vacant simply because you could find ways to exclude just about everyone. Why is double or single procession (the filioque) any more of a Christological heresy than denying homoousios?

Most Baptists are Nestorians. Why are they allowed to freely spread their heresies in the CO section? What about those who deny regenerative Baptism, believe in a thousand year earthly reign of Christ ("whose Kingdom will have no end"), or the rapture heresy?

Why are they allowed to call themselves "theologically Christian"?

When they get this issue fixed, I'll ask for my cross back...

Because you qualify under someone's made up standards that don't really make that much sense doesn't make you one of the bad guys. Ignoring those who are hurt does. You certainly don't come off as ignoring the hurt SJ. Not even all those who enforce the random standards are the bad guys. The bad guys are the ones to deny any culpability in someone else's suffering.

Hallie · 03-09-2007, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dharma Bum

Maybe you'd like this one too.....

Hah! I like the one that says, "With liberty and justice for all*" and then "*void where prohibited, some restrictions may apply."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dharma Bum

Think I would get in trouble if I used this over at CF?

LOL, yes, indeed you would.

seebs · 03-09-2007, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by praying

Do you really think this is about money?

It's either about money or about "size of forum" as an end in and of itself. If it weren't, would we have had years of abortion ads?

Quote:

It won’t be fixed until enough active members agree that it is an issue, not the few posters from here or the few that chime in the DR but it has to be a concerted effort by the general membership, much like the civil rights movement. .Unfortunately Christianity being what it is, especially conservative Christianity, a very exclusive club, I don’t foresee most members standing up and saying that’s right the name needs to be changed to Nicene Christians (I would leave off only it is the language of exclusivity) or topically based as recommended in Stumpjumper’s thread or divided into 3 sections..

Of course not. But honestly, even the heresy trials won't stop. The irony of people who can't affirm the Nicene Creed without footnotes and "interpretations" yanking icons over doctrines they don't understand is a rich vein.

Quote:

Would this qualify as gossip?

I can't see how.

seebs · 03-09-2007, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sparklecat

Seebs, on your thread, are you looking for how people have been treated as outsiders at CF specifically, or in all cases? And should I exclude anything post-deconversion?

I must say, I'm having a wonderful time in the section of my archives I generally avoid to pull some relevant quotes out.

All cases.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-09-2007, 09:17 AM	#44
DougLDS Veteran Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: NOt here anymore Posts: 1,557	Think I would get in trouble if I used this over at CF?

03-09-2007, 09:32 AM	#45
sparklecat Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Scotland Posts: 1,677	Seebs, on your thread, are you looking for how people have been treated as outsiders at CF specifically, or in all cases? And should I exclude anything post-deconversion? I must say, I'm having a wonderful time in the section of my archives I generally avoid to pull some relevant quotes out.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.