I Think Some New Rules Need To Be In Place

[other one]

4 hours ago, Robert said:

If that is the case, then no one can be sure of their salvation because Scripture is just what one's "opinion" determines, eh? No part of Scripture can be said to be solid?

I'm sorry, but that's the worst case of "bovine-sourced fertilizer" I have ever heard. If you and others here truly believe that, then it's no wonder the Church is losing ground in the western hemisphere. The "Sword of the Spirit" is just opinion to you, and that truly angers me.

How many souls have been lost due to that kind of attitude?!!

I'm done with this thread, reading any replies from you, and if people here regard Scripture that lightly,  then I'm severely rethinking being on this forum.

 

Robert out.

 

Scripture is what one reads and understands is written in the Word.....    if you are going to force your view of what the Bible says then maybe it's good for you to be gone for I won't accept it any more than most others here wont.    And in my opinion no one can ever totally sure of thier salvation until the changeover.    And if I am not allowed my opinion then you should just leave unless George banns me from the site for I'm not planning to go.......     nor am I going accept your notions that I may be wrong without you convincing me so and telling me I'm wrong will never even get that discussion started.   And it won't most of the other people here.

[kwikphilly]

Quote

n discussion much opinion is expressed...IMHO:)                                       Yown

LOL....well,IMHO.......nah,just kidding!

LadyKay I believe the difference here at Worthy (missmuffet mentioned also)WE are A Christian Ministry,the secular world does not care if ,for eg: You are watching a movie that is blaspheming God with profanity,has graphic content etc.... we do......& to sit by idly & not tell you why it is not good for YOU to be filling your spirit with such things would be unloving,unkind,just wrong,,,,because we LOVE ONE ANOTHER                     With love-in Christ,Kwik

[LadyKay]

2 hours ago, kwikphilly said:

LOL....well,IMHO.......nah,just kidding!

LadyKay I believe the difference here at Worthy (missmuffet mentioned also)WE are A Christian Ministry,the secular world does not care if ,for eg: You are watching a movie that is blaspheming God with profanity,has graphic content etc.... we do......& to sit by idly & not tell you why it is not good for YOU to be filling your spirit with such things would be unloving,unkind,just wrong,,,,because we LOVE ONE ANOTHER                     With love-in Christ,Kwik

Okay I get it. Maybe my misunderstanding is why I was so upset. After all I thought well I will just answer "is I do" and that will be the end of that. But it never is. So I see now if someone believes that Christmas Trees are evil and they ask the question "Are Christmas Trees Evil" and I come back and say "no I like Christmas trees and I not think thy are evil." I should expect a good lashing from anyone one here who thinks that Christmas trees are evil.

I think it was a good ideal to post this. As it has gotten out into the open an issue that has been bothering me and now I know what is expected.

[kwikphilly]

Hi LadyKay

   Yep,I think it is a good Thread,at first I didn't understand what you were saying but now I believe I do,just know we love you......& yeah,sometimes the message gets lost in the delivery or to be even more blunt,the delivery stinks!!!!!I do think,however,,,it is because we have LOVE in our hearts.....we just sometimes do(self)get in the way of the Love of Christ                          Hope you found most replies encouraging as I see them,Love & Blessings-Kwik

[OldSchool2]

On ‎11‎/‎28‎/‎2016 at 8:56 AM, LadyKay said:

Okay here is what I have to say.   When a question post is posted. For example: Someone post the topic "Do You Like Christmas Trees".  And lets say the first person to reply says "No I do not like Christmas trees and this is the reason why........"  So the next person to respond should just state why they do or do not like Christmas trees. They should not tell the person who posted before them that they are wrong or debate the answer they have given....

It is already verboten on Worthy to debate the person instead of the topic, but if you can't debate what they said, IMO, you have taken the line of thought too far.

[StanJ]

On 28/11/2016 at 6:56 AM, LadyKay said:

Okay here is what I have to say.   When a question post is posted. For example: Someone post the topic "Do You Like Christmas Trees".  And lets say the first person to reply says "No I do not like Christmas trees and this is the reason why........"  So the next person to respond should just state why they do or do not like Christmas trees. They should not tell the person who posted before them that they are wrong or debate the answer they have given. They should just post their answer and their reason for giving it if they wish to give a reason. This is the way I see post that are  asking a clear question about how someone feels about something should be reply too. 

It is a different post then a post that is up for debate. For example: A debate post would be something like "Christmas Trees Are Evil" then the poster goes on to state why they think Christmas trees are evil. This poster is not asking you what you think nor are they asking you a question. They are posting a topic that they want to start a debate about. In such cases it is right to try to convince the other person that they are wrong. (good luck with that by the way) Or show them that you support their view point. 

So anyway, this is the way I see things should be. I do not know if you want to call them rules so much as maybe guidelines or posting advice. 

And no this post is not about Christmas trees. 

I agree LadyKay, but from what I know about this forum, this would not be practicle or enforceable, because of their limited staffing resources.  At the other end of the spectrum, I've been involved with forums that have way too many rules and it just becomes impossible to have a decent discussion.