Comments on Stan's announcement

[Guest]

They have been responding on this one Stan. Your new one can't be responded to either.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

Quote:

Understand that men join online communities for different reasons that women do.

What's the difference Stan man?

Women generally have more of a social reason for joining, whereas men are mainly interested in debating and arguing and seeing if they can "win," etc. Women are usually thinking more of how other people feel whereas men are usually thinking about people's ideas and teachings.

That's one difference anyway. But I don't know if that's what Stan had in mind.

Yep, there's such a vas deferens between the two!

[Guest]

I think we all join for the same reason.

[Tom Wetmore]

Amazing! Notice how quickly some of the ill behaved hijack even a thread on your announcements to totally ignore the idea behind your admonitions to play nicely!!!

[Guest]

Tom, are you trying to stir up trouble? How was your Christmas?

[pnattmbtc]

Men will still be more focussed on ideas and on discussing them, and women will still generally have a greater interest in communicating on a feeling level than men typically have. It seems to me it has to do with the hormones and the way men and women's brains are wired differently.

You're familiar with Myers-Briggs? While there be a greater ratio of T's to F's for men than women, that are still a lot of women T's and men F's, so your statement could be true in terms of a broad generality.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: John317

Women generally have more of a social reason for joining' date=' whereas men are mainly interested in debating and arguing and seeing if they can "win," etc. Women are usually thinking more of how other people feel whereas men are usually thinking about people's ideas and teachings.

That's one difference anyway. But I don't know if that's what Stan had in mind. [/quote']

Yep, there's such a vas deferens between the two!

Good one, Gerry! LOL

[teresaq]

That is rude.

Being real "Christ-like", huh?

i dont think he sees how he comes across. it may take some time before he does. until then..... :(

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

Mind the moderator...

In this Christian community, I believe the following Scripture has a certain bearing:

"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." Heb 13:7

i believe this is misapplied.

the apostles were sent of God and tried to institute only like-minded individuals over the "flock". i dont think we should apply that thought to just any situation...

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

To his credit, he did apologize later...

[teresaq]

Yeah! Later for that touchy feely stuff!

But on the other hand, I've seen some women on here that would rather argue than eat.

would you say posts like this are part of the problem, or part of the solution?

if the posts of any poster were collected and analyzed what would be the overall "tone" of that persons posts?

[Guest]

To his credit, he did apologize later...

Thank you Pam, some people just like to stir the pot. I just ignore them most of the time.

[Stewart (SDA)]

"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." Heb 13:7

I believe this is misapplied.

the apostles were sent of God and tried to institute only like-minded individuals over the "flock". i dont think we

should apply that thought to just any situation...

Fair enough Teresaq.

Perhaps I have misapplied that Scripture.

I do agree that it should not be applied to any situation.

And yet, it does apply to our “time”, just as much as it applied to the time of the apostles, doesn’t it?

What we are part of here is a fellowship – a Christian fellowship -- and the moderators (if I understand this correctly) fill the role of elders. These have the power to express reproof AND to impose discipline.

This is on keeping with God’s design; it is right to obey them. Not only because of the power they wield, but also “for conscience sake” [i.e. because it is right].

The elders that rule well, should be accorded “double honor” (1Tim 5:17). But authority is to be respected and obeyed, regardless of whether they make good or bad decisions. We are not simply to offer lip-service to them. None of this means that we should share their beliefs, or place their word above the word of God, but rather “obey them” as far as possible, and “submit”.

So my thinking is that if we are asked to settle down, or cease doing something, then we ought to do precisely that.

________________________

"It is an extremely delicate thing to tell people of their faults. The reprover is likely to find that in those reproved, pride and stubbornness assert themselves, and the will is arrayed in defiance and opposition. But for all this, advice should be given, and faults should be laid bare. Let the young cultivate a teachable spirit, that they may be benefited by the efforts of those who seek to help them.

"You may feel that you are doing your best, and that you have been reproved for very trifling matters, and you may be impatient that any one should feel it his duty to reprove you for such small matters; but this is the injunction given by the apostle: "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for this is unprofitable for you." These specific directions would not have been given, unless there were those who needed reproof and counsel." (YI, August 31, 1893)

________

Stewart

[Guest]

Amen

[Twilight]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." Heb 13:7

I believe this is misapplied.

the apostles were sent of God and tried to institute only like-minded individuals over the "flock". i dont think we

should apply that thought to just any situation...

Fair enough Teresaq.

Perhaps I have misapplied that Scripture.

I do agree that it should not be applied to any situation.

And yet, it does apply to our “time”, just as much as it applied to the time of the apostles, doesn’t it?

What we are part of here is a fellowship – a Christian fellowship -- and the moderators (if I understand this correctly) fill the role of elders. These have the power to express reproof AND to impose discipline.

This is on keeping with God’s design; it is right to obey them. Not only because of the power they wield, but also “for conscience sake” [i.e. because it is right].

The elders that rule well, should be accorded “double honor” (1Tim 5:17). But authority is to be respected and obeyed, regardless of whether they make good or bad decisions. We are not simply to offer lip-service to them. None of this means that we should share their beliefs, or place their word above the word of God, but rather “obey them” as far as possible, and “submit”.

So my thinking is that if we are asked to settle down, or cease doing something, then we ought to do precisely that.

________________________

"It is an extremely delicate thing to tell people of their faults. The reprover is likely to find that in those reproved, pride and stubbornness assert themselves, and the will is arrayed in defiance and opposition. But for all this, advice should be given, and faults should be laid bare. Let the young cultivate a teachable spirit, that they may be benefited by the efforts of those who seek to help them.

"You may feel that you are doing your best, and that you have been reproved for very trifling matters, and you may be impatient that any one should feel it his duty to reprove you for such small matters; but this is the injunction given by the apostle: "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for this is unprofitable for you." These specific directions would not have been given, unless there were those who needed reproof and counsel." (YI, August 31, 1893)

________

Stewart

Amen...

[Guest]

Hey Mark, how's the weather over there across the pond?

[Gerr]

Quote:

Yep, there's such a vas deferens between the two!

Good one, Gerry! LOL

I see you were wide awake to catch that one!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

LOL I thought it was pretty clever!

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

"Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you." Heb 13:7

I believe this is misapplied.

the apostles were sent of God and tried to institute only like-minded individuals over the "flock". i dont think we

should apply that thought to just any situation...

Fair enough Teresaq.

Perhaps I have misapplied that Scripture.

I do agree that it should not be applied to any situation.

And yet, it does apply to our “time”, just as much as it applied to the time of the apostles, doesn’t it?

What we are part of here is a fellowship – a Christian fellowship -- and the moderators (if I understand this correctly) fill the role of elders. .

i think this is extremely dangerous thinking, personally. extremely dangerous, and reminds me of a church that got more and more power hungry and abusive for several centuries!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I don't think the moderators are supposed to be fulfilling the role of elders on the forum. And you'd have to ask *them*, but I don't think they see themselves as being "elders" either.

[Stewart (SDA)]

Originally Posted By: Stewart (SDA)

What we are part of here is a fellowship – a Christian fellowship -- and the moderators (if I understand this correctly) fill the role of elders....

I think this is extremely dangerous thinking, personally. extremely dangerous, and reminds me of a church that got more and more power hungry and abusive for several centuries!

Okay. I am certainly willing to hear more Teresa; please could you magnify your thought for me?

Stewart.

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: teresaq(sda)

I think this is extremely dangerous thinking' date=' personally. extremely dangerous, and reminds me of a church that got more and more power hungry and abusive for several centuries! [/quote']

Okay. I am certainly willing to hear more Teresa; please could you magnify your thought for me?

Stewart.

were the mods selected and appointed by God? are any operating from serious dysfunctions, which most all of us have in some form, for starters.

or can just anybody be appointed and then they automatically and always represent God?

[Stewart (SDA)]

>>Were the mods selected and appointed by God?

I am sorry teresaq, this I do not know.

>>Are any operating from serious dysfunctions, which most all of us have in some form...

Perhaps I have some naivete here, but I am not aware of serious dysfunction among them.

>>or can just anybody be appointed and then they automatically and always represent God?

No.

I am sorry that I do not understand your protest as clearly as I would like teresaq.

But even if we were to treat this forum as a common secular venture, it still has within it "powers that be". And the admonition of Scripture is "let every soul be subject unto the higher powers" (Rom 13:1).

In whatever sphere we operate, “we are to recognize human government as an ordinance of Divine appointment, and teach obedience to it as a sacred duty, within its legitimate sphere. But [of course] when its claims conflict with the claims of God, we must obey God rather than men. (AA 69)

The office of moderator is ordained of God, and that office and the authority attached to it are to be respected. In total, that is really all I am trying to say.

"What are the rules of conduct for the forum?

Play well with others.

Pay attention to the requests of the Administrators and the Moderators..."

SC

[teresaq]

The office of moderator is ordained of God, and that office and the authority attached to it are to be respected. In total, that is really all I am trying to say.

i was merely responding to your trying to apply biblical instruction for elders to moderators.

i see no where where this site was set up to be a ministry of any sort. if it were it would be a .org, not a .com.

"man" set this up, with the best of intentions i would believe, but we can not say that God set it up, nor ordained the choice of the moderators.

now when it comes to the rules, yes i believe we should all follow the rules to the best of our ability. the complaint by not a few is that the rules are not respected, are applied with prejudice at times, and... more than that, i believe we should follow a higher authority whether the rules cover the behavior Christ would have of us or not.

now when you say we should "obey" the mod. does that mean if a mod misrepresents someone members should accept that misrepresentation and misrepresent that person, also?

[Guest]

Makes perfect sense to me Stewart.