OneLight

11 minutes ago, other one said:

Someone asked me last week if it was our job to watch over Israel.    I told him from what I read in the Bible, it's God himself that is doing that.   We are supposed to help where we can and will be blessed if we do, and cursed if we don't.   But Israels security is in God's hands.

Yes, it is!  I'm so glad for that too.  Biden would destroy Israel, as we know it, if he could.

3 hours ago, other one said:

Just remember when it comes, we are responsible for all this. 

Yup, that's what happens when one sticks their nose in other peoples business.  Glad to see Israel thumbing theirs at Biden and his team.

20 hours ago, Mr. M said:

I am in full agreement with this definition, and it is exactly how I was using the word influencer in the OP. If you could move past that ...

Reread the conversation we've been having.  It was the point where you stated "Influencers are mass marketers of mammon."  Then Eman_3 and I stated that they are more than "mass marketers of mammon" and you claimed in a following response that  "All of you are redefining Influencer in a way that contradicts the OP, which then justifies stating that blanket statements are wrong. " this is what I have been addressing, no more ... no less.  I haven't once addressed anything else, so what's there for me to get past?  For some reason, all this started because others can see how people can influence us either for good or for evil, not just for evil. 

Anyway, I'm done here so you can continue discussing what your OP is really about. 

17 hours ago, Mr. M said:

And yet, for the OP and forum discussion Scriptures were provided to define the use, as well as how the word is currently being applied on social media. You and others defined the word as broadly as possible so as to make the OP pointless. I failed to see the point, nonetheless, I have answered the concerns to allow further discussion.

Actually, the definition I use is the dictionary, not whatever or however I want to define it.  It's your post, do what you will, but don't expect everyone to accept or agree with your point when redefining a word.  I do know how this woke generation has been trying to change words to fit their agenda, which is why you can say "how the word is currently being applied on social media." and be correct ... they changed the meaning by replacing values, not adding to them.

From Dictionary.com

1 hour ago, Mr. M said:

All of you are redefining Influencer in a way that contradicts the OP, which then justifies stating that blanket statements are wrong. The OP begins with Jezebel, and then discusses Influencers as they are referred to in the modern parlance. Modern society does not define Influencers as "pretty much anyone sharing an opinion". They are some of the most successful Marketing stories out there. LSU gymnast Olivia Dunne made over $3 million dollars last year alone.

On line Influencers are big money makers, and they market themselves first, and then products they endorse. This is marketing 101 being applied to modern social media. I know of people who won't buy a book if it wasn't endorsed by Oprah. If you would read the OP and the follow-up post I made, it should be clear that we are not talking about the same thing. I have narrowly defined Influencer as the term being used in modern media, you all are redefining, and then finding fault with the OP using a broadened definition that includes children saying "I don't like broccoli". 

 

That is because the term "influencer" is not as narrowly defined as you define it.  If you want to say they influence others, that is correct, but you can't just redefine the meanings of words to defend a point.

2 minutes ago, The_Patriot21 said:

Well, you are indeed proving it. I said nothing about homosexuality I simply answered the question. 

The truth of the matter is I made a single, factual statement. You inferred things that weren't even hinted at in my post, and now your trying to make it like I was at least partially to blame.

While there are certainly times where I have been guilty of such, it is not this time. It seems to me your simply trying to prove your point and not actually caring about what I said, and as such the only out come is further division. So I'm out. Have a good evening.

We're going around in circles ... done.

29 minutes ago, The_Patriot21 said:

It's inferred. I made a comment and you brought homosexuality into it by asking if I was ok with it, even though I never said anything about it. You brought it up, the inference is that it's in response to what I said, I.e. I must be ok with it even though I provided no context to suggest that.

I see how this proves even more how divided we can be and why as inferring is assuming, which it appears we both did.  I assumed you were saying that there is no division when you stated "God can and will unite us. Nothing we do or do not do  can change His plan.". so I asked the question.  You assumed I was saying you are "ok with homosexuality in the church" just by asking.  This brings me back to the statement I made: " people don't pay close attention anymore, and that includes me at times. ", and I will add that this is also done by assuming and not asking for clarity.

29 minutes ago, The_Patriot21 said:

It's not a example of division it's an example of you failing to properly communicate online.

Really, finger pointing?  Even notice when you point a finger at someone, there are three more pointing back at you?

29 minutes ago, The_Patriot21 said:

Now with that said, it's easy to do online. It's often very easy to misunderstand others intent when one only has the written word, and it's even easier to read into it. It's something all of us, myself are guilty of. Have been, will be, again.

So if it's anything it's an example of why we should be careful of how and why we write what we do online.

I fully agree.  Online discussions are often done in a knee-jerking manner, not taking the time to fully take in what is posted, just reacting.  I could of asked you if you don't see division, but didn't.  You could of asked me if I was inferring you were OK with homosexuals, but you didn't.  You are correct ... which, again, is why we often see division even here.  Not caring enough to understand the truth behind what we read and responding without fully understanding what was read. 

There are those who influence in a  good way and there are those who influence in a bad way.  Grouping them all together is not right.  Blanket statements are almost always wrong.  It may take a little extra work on our part, but digging deeper into what someone is trying to "sell" is where we find the difference.   

1 minute ago, The_Patriot21 said:

Nope. Never said anything about that, all I said was at some point Jesus will unite His church. Which is true Jesus is coming back for His bride, and those that are not of His church will be left behind 

Where did you get that I'm ok with homosexuality in the church from that?

Do notice that I asked a question, not make a statement.  I never claimed you are "ok with homosexuality in the church" ... where in my post did you read that?

I think this conversation between us is a perfect example why the body is divided to an extent ... people don't pay close attention anymore, and that includes me at times.

14 minutes ago, The_Patriot21 said:

God can and will unite us. Nothing we do or do not do  can change His plan.

Question ... are you united with those who believe it's OK to have gay preachers, but still follow God according to their faith?  I bet your answer will be "NO, they are not true believers", but then we are actually saying that not everyone who claims to be a christian is a true christian; therefore, not part of His body.  That's an extreme example, I know ... which is why I chose it.  It's easy to see.

In the end, He will separate the sheep from the goats, but until then, there is a community of those who claim to be His with both true and false Christians.  I'm sure everyone will be surprised with who did and who did not make it, according to Matthew 7:21-23

Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.  Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’  And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Interesting topic where both sides are correct, to a point.  Yes, the body, though in Christ, is divided on what they believe and how they walk in their faith, but are one in Him.  It's a hard thing to wrap one's head around sometimes when we take a serious look around.  Even those of the time of Paul were divided to a point.  That is the issue we have by being human.  We follow what we believe, whether right or wrong.

1 hour ago, Starise said:

I agree. Is a forum the format for that? Just thinking out loud.

 

Ideally, one on one is the best means of discipleship, but when you are talking with someone miles, if not thousand of miles away, you take what you can get, even an online forum.

3 hours ago, Starise said:

So let's come back around.

That would be nice.   It has to start from the top and flow down.  Unless discipleship is front and center, it won't happen, no matter how bad some want it to.

1 hour ago, Starise said:

And this really was not the intent of my post, but maybe some see asking others how they see worthy opens things up in a negative way.

A negative way, you say?  I see the older days as a much more positive environment.  I guess it all depends on one's priorities and goals.

I'll let things alone as it seems one cannot see the positive from a time they know nothing about.

7 hours ago, FJK said:

But don't ignore that you can learn important things here.

Never said we couldn't. 

When I look through the thread at the time demographics of when each poster joined, I can see that just about every member who has experienced the change, and miss the "old days", are long time posters, unless fellowship is the main reason for being here.  Those who like how the site has evolved have not been here all that long, so they don't know the extend of change that has taken place.  To them, it's basically the same site it was when they joined.  They even express wonder as to why the fuss, which is understandable due to not having gone through the process.

As shown in Ecclesiastes 3:1-8, which shows us that everything has it's season, notice that there is a balance in life, which is His design.  It's when this life becomes unbalanced, one way or the other, that we notice something is not right.   If there is too much seriousness and not enough relaxation, we become unbalanced.  The same for the opposite ... too much fun and not enough seriousness, we also become unbalanced. 

This brings me back to my first paragraph above where some feel the unbalance and other don't.  It's time to get back to being balanced. 

/ joke mode on ...

That sure ain't me ...

/ joke mode off

I do know how to have a good time, no doubt, but that is not what this thread is about.  When I saw this thread, I took it as a serious inquiry, so I offered my 17 years experience of Worthy.  No matter what today's members think, it is not the same place I first joined.  Discipleship is all but gone.  I'm not even sure if it's around any more.

1 hour ago, Marathoner said:

Perish the thought, that others might enjoy the occasional light-hearted foray with those whom they are in fellowship with. Terrible thing. Ban the lot of them! 

 

Occasional?   It's the majority of what I have seen lately.  That said, there's nothing wrong with having a good time while maintaining focus on Who this site is supposed to be about, or has this also changed?  It seems that this site become member centered than Christ centered.  Take a good look at the front page and you can see where the focus is by looking at the post numbers in what forum: https://www.worthychristianforums.com/  Dig deeper to see which forums the majority of posts come from.  The numbers don't lie.

I do want to thank you all for making my point more obvious, and I am not saying this to be sarcastic. 

41 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

I do see `Spock` dropping in sometimes in discussions. 

I do also see as you said some silly threads, but then we do have a longer timeframe for comparison. 

Then it is up to us to post good threads that make people think and discuss God`s word, don`t you think?

Yes, and you are one of those who do.  Thank You, even though we do have differences of opinions about what scripture means from time to time..

47 minutes ago, Michael37 said:

I call them Nonsense Threads when they are just banter and fooling around. Some like that sort of fellowship, a few to the exclusion of most everything else.

Lots of examples here:

Community Center - Worthy Christian Forums

Yes, and the Community Center was a recent addition a few years back.  It was added as serious bible queries were not showing up on the front page as those type of threads were being responded to much quicker than the biblical queries were, forcing them out of sight.

What do I think of them?  As I said, Facebook on Worthy.  People use to gather in chat or PM each other when trying to connect.  The forums were dedicated to christian discussions, even when they were not always about scripture clarification itself.

10 minutes ago, Michael37 said:

What do you think of the many "nonsense threads" on Worthy?

What do you mean by "nonsense threads", as you put it.  I don't want to assume I understand your meaning.  That is the foundation of divisions here, assuming.  Can you give me an example, and I'll respond about what I think of it.

40 minutes ago, Marilyn C said:

Hi OneLight,

Interesting view. Now, you have been on Worthy longer than me But still I have been round a while. I remember you helped me when I was having a debate (in the debate section) with Shiloh. I had forgotten the format and you reminded me. Thanks again.

I also remember that there were a few strong `players` who knew how to `attack` a person without getting into trouble. I was `attacked by some and even a moderator behind the scenes but dear George stepped and I`m still here but the other, well gone. 

Now, I do see people getting help, as I move around and reply there. I do see encouraging music and song, I see people having good fun and fellowship. The reading of which makes me have a good laugh. 

And yet I also do wonder at the topics that get started, but think well, more people are getting bolder to start them. And I see Vine Abider and Starise and others start threads that lift us up to know the Lord more. 

I think your inner group have either passed away or moved on. The groups of relating ones keep changing but we continue as the Lord leads. 

regards, Marilyn.

 

Most have moved on.  I know of a few that have passed to the next life, but those numbers are far and few.  Question is, why would people who are solid and mature decide to "move on" as you put it?  Did they give up on Worthy all together?  Yup, you don't see them stopping by for a chat, do you?

I never insisted there was nothing good, just that it's been headed downhill for some time.  I know it's very unpopular to voice in a "negative" way as I did, but not all news is good news with encouragement.  Sometimes it needs to be stern for correction and warning.  With Jesus and the Apostles as an example, compare what their messages were and decide if it was all good news or warning, instructions and correction.  You will find that the majority of what we read is the latter, without neglecting the former. 

24 minutes ago, Michael37 said:

Scripture bickering, or Scripture picking? Your choice, @OneLight

There can be a difference, I agree, but when all one does is post scripture, tell me, where is the conversation that leads to understanding?  It's not there.  If you post a scripture and I post one in response, and this goes on and on, that is the childish game of one-upping each other, a game I refuse to play.   Do you want a conversation, or a game?  Your choice, @Michael37

46 minutes ago, Michael37 said:

Sure, but then . . .

Jas 1:2-4  Consider it pure joy, my brothers, when you encounter trials of many kinds,  (3)  because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance.  (4)  Allow perseverance to finish its work, so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.

What, you want to bicker back and forth using scripture without voicing an opinion of your own?  Tell me what you disagree with with my post and take your stand.  I can post scripture also, but refuse to use scripture as a weapon against another believer.  Doing so could lead to us both easily becoming childish trying to up on another by quoting scripture, which is misuse of scripture in my view.  Notice that the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God, is used against our enemies as a weapon, not other believers.

Scripture is to be taken to heart for a purpose, not a substitute for meaningful conversation. 

13 minutes ago, missmuffet said:

How about a poll for those who do not participate in Worthy any longer? Perhaps ways that Worthy can improve as a Christian website.

That won't happen.  See my post.