An Open Letter to Ted Wilson Re GC Sponsored Censorship under SSNet.or

[Gail]

Gunnar ©

You've copyrighted your name?

[Inga]

By the way, thanks much for your friendly notes, Stan, Naomi & Gail.

It's not because I don't like it here that I don't show up more often. I'm up to my proverbial eyeballs in things that need to be done most of the time. Maybe you can come over to see us @ Sabbath School Net some time.

CoAspen, I do wonder whether we might have met. We lived in Glenwood Springs from about '98 to '04. My hubby commuted to Vail or Aspen daily, depending on the job. And I have fond memories of wonderful hikes in the Aspen area, both with my hubby and friends and with another group of friends without him.

You live pretty close to heaven up there.

[doug yowell]

Quote:

However, I do not know what your very first word, "It," is in reference to?

Seems we had a Pres that went down that road!!!

"I did not have censorship with that man!!"

[Windsor]

I used to be a member of the original official Adventist forum called Adventists Online run by webmaster Ralph Blodgett. It quickly became overrun with lots of outspoken people who had mostly negative things to say about the Adventist church. The higher ups subsequently decided to shut down the forum as a result in order to quell any further damage to the church's reputation (though many claimed they were just trying to censor things). I'm not sure what kind of censorship is going on at the forum under discussion, but I'm guessing they are simply keeping a whole lot of people of the Atoday "if it's traditional SDA, it's wrong" variety under check.

[TreeOfLife]

ToL ©

Why Do We Fear Another New Birth Experience?

That is, by Means of an Uncensored Adventist Forum

I used to be a member of the original official Adventist forum called Adventists Online run by webmaster Ralph Blodgett. It quickly became overrun with lots of outspoken people who had mostly negative things to say about the Adventist church. The higher ups subsequently decided to shut down the forum as a result in order to quell any further damage to the church's reputation (though many claimed they were just trying to censor things). I'm not sure what kind of censorship is going on at the forum under discussion, but I'm guessing they are simply keeping a whole lot of people of the Atoday "if it's traditional SDA, it's wrong" variety under check.

Thanks Windsor!

For someone like me who has no firsthand experience from Adventists Online that's valuable history to learn from. Thanks!

It has become obvious to me, from my own firsthand experiences of being part of the Seventh-day Adventist society since birth, that giving priority to "the church's reputation," that is, over and above being willing to examine and correct our own church teaching by means of an ongoing dialog with a focus upon the Holy Scriptures, is the typical way for most any administrative body to handle things. It is being done that way because it is considered the most expedient way to handle things. The basis for such decisions is typically a fear of losing members. That is, such people as are considered customers. That is, such people as means money to the administration. In other words, the yardstick used for measuring results is money.

To me such expedient measures are most certainly a very shortsighted thing to do. Yes, the results, in the short run, will be loss of reputation, loss of trust, loss of membership, and loss of money. This is no doubt true.

A very good example of such an experience within our own SDA past is that which is known as the Great Disappointment of 1844...

Remember how some two thirds of that Advent movement fell away following the experience of October 22, 1844! That is an experience that most SDAs do not wish to repeat, is it?

Yet, aren't we forgetting the rest of the story? Isn't the rest of the story the very beginning of the Seventh-day Adventist Church?

Isn't this "Great Disappointment" very much a "new birth" experience? Wasn't that Great Disappointment very much like the short term pain that mother and child both experience at the time of delivery?!! Wasn't the long term result a tremendous joy for all of us who value all those blessings that comes in consequence of being a Seventh-day Adventist?

May I suggest that perhaps the experience of the Adventists Online forum is a very clear symptom of a need for yet another new birth experience for our church as a whole?

Maybe we need exactly such a forum as Adventist Online was? Maybe we need to be willing to reexamine our traditional teachings and doctrines and to confess to ourselves that certain things within our teachings has been turning in the wrong direction? Maybe we need to face ourselves as a church body as well as individual members of that body?

Maybe we should accept, even welcome, such a sifting of our people, of our church, as can only be accomplished by going through a period of facing the facts as they really are?!

As sad as it certainly would be, maybe we should still welcome a situation similar to that Great Disappointment when two thirds of its followers fell away due to a lack of willingness to look a little deeper into the Holy Scriptures themselves.

My experience at SSNet.org is that the real reason behind most of my posts being censored is none other than an unwillingness to look deeper into the Holy Scriptures wherever such a deeper look reveals anything that is different than traditional modern day Adventist teachings. Not being willing to face that fact, such censoring is being justified by looking for and finding such errors of form as can justify a trashed post based upon such things as are being labeled "Moderation..."

I believe it is time for each of us to begin to accept one another as we are without censoring each others posts. I believe it is time that we begin to listen to the still small voice as perceivable through the "small people," that is, the laymen within our church. Not the majority! Not by means of voting! But by means of intently looking for, and listening for, such treasures of truth as may have been discovered by most anyone within our church. That is, regardless of their prior training... Remember Ellen White! What training did she have?!! Yet, she was willing to be that channel which God was calling her to be. And where would we be today as a church if we did not have her writings?

Thus, in conclusion, We must not fear a repeat of the Adventists Online experience. To the extent that each of us do our best to tune our ears to that still small voice of God, I believe the blessings in the long run would be far beyond our dreams...

Consider it! Selah!

Gunnar ©

ToL ©

[CoAspen]

Say What??????????????????????

[phkrause]

I used to be a member of the original official Adventist forum called Adventists Online run by webmaster Ralph Blodgett. It quickly became overrun with lots of outspoken people who had mostly negative things to say about the Adventist church. The higher ups subsequently decided to shut down the forum as a result in order to quell any further damage to the church's reputation (though many claimed they were just trying to censor things). I'm not sure what kind of censorship is going on at the forum under discussion, but I'm guessing they are simply keeping a whole lot of people of the Atoday "if it's traditional SDA, it's wrong" variety under check.

I was also a member of the Adventist Online forum, almost from its inseption and don't recall any such problems. From what I understand one of the reason's for the closing down of that forum, was the health of Ralph. I believe he died shortly after the forum closed down. I think that Stan could say more to that than I can. I know that there were a number other reasons, money being one, another was no one else wanted to do the work, but like I said, Stan would have a better idea. All I remember was that it was a really good forum.

[doug yowell]

ToL©

I can see it now, Dale Ratzlaff,Doug Batchelor, Desmond Ford,and Vance Farrell standing arm in arm and exclaiming,"We are brothers!"

[TreeOfLife]

ToL ©

Towards an ever better dialogue experience for each and all...

For the sake of clarity - and for the sake of "a good dialogue experience..." - to all, and to Inga in particular, I wish to submit the following:

I very much agree with these words of Inga:

...to ensure a good dialogue experience for all our readers...

[LynnDel]

If the discussion here is an example of what had to be pruned from the ssnet blog, I approve their actions. Most readers tend to skim over long and repetitive rants, and when one writer tends to produce that kind of output, they tend to not read output by that writer, a type of personal "censorship" of which I am guilty already in this thread.

[TreeOfLife]

ToL ©

On the Beauty of Lynn's Point...

If the discussion here is an example of what had to be pruned from the ssnet blog, I approve their actions. Most readers tend to skim over long and repetitive rants, and when one writer tends to produce that kind of output, they tend to not read output by that writer, a type of personal "censorship" of which I am guilty already in this thread.

Thanks Lynn Del!

The beauty of, as you say, "personal censorship" is that each reader retains his or her right to pick and choose that which is valuable to him or her. No one is being victimized by such practise. Quite to the contrary!

No doubt you are aware of the adage "One man's treasure is another man's trash..." or vice versa.

The problem with "mothering" and "censorship" is that that which would be very real and valuable treasures for some of the readers is being removed - or stolen - by a few on the basis of what's valuable to those few alone. Indeed, those censors usually believe that they constitute the majority and that they possess a right to represent the majority. But that is no help! Indeed, that is the very basis for mob actions, such as, for instance, the crucifixion of Christ. Why do we need to repeat that mistake in the midst of Adventism?

Thanks for bringing up an important point!

God bless,

Gunnar ©

ToL ©

[Tom Wetmore]

MODERATOR NOTE:

This is sounding a lot like an obsessive personal vendetta, IMHO.

This topic is now locked temporarily while further action is contemplated.