Dealing respectfully with those who HAVE found God...

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

I have railed in the past about the disrespect that many here show to each other. It's to no avail. Some people here (Christian or not) get off on trotting out their self-righteousness by rebuking others for their beliefs (or lack thereof).

I confess that I have probably "disrespected" many many people here. For that I apologize. There is no excuse for disrespecting anyone here. Spirituality is a very personal thing; and people take different paths. Some choose to follow other spiritual leaders; and some blaze their own trail. My idea of religious liberty is that everyone can believe as they choose (albeit it should be an informed choice rather than a blind roll of the dice or a legacy inheritance from one's anscestors).

Does any of that make sense?

Much like the vast majority of professed Christian and non-Christian, it does seem that most of us on the forum (not to exclude anyone) are more interested about ourselves as opposed to getting a point across that would be valid for building up others, who are made to reflect the image of God.

Would "Let it drop", be a misnomer here?

"There is an appointed time for everything. And there is a time for every event under heaven—

A time to give birth and a time to die;

A time to plant and a time to uproot what is planted.

A time to kill and a time to heal;

A time to tear down and a time to build up.

A time to weep and a time to laugh;

A time to mourn and a time to dance.

A time to throw stones and a time to gather stones;

A time to embrace and a time to shun embracing.

A time to search and a time to give up as lost;

A time to keep and a time to throw away.

A time to tear apart and a time to sew together;

A time to be silent and a time to speak.

A time to love and a time to hate;

A time for war and a time for peace."Eccl 3:1-8 NASB

Anyone care for a cup of Solomon's Wisdom here?

God cares!

[JoeMo]

Quote:

Dealing respectfully with those who HAVE found God...

how to deal with those who have not found God ...

My proposed answer to both questions is the same - accept people where they are; engage in a meaningful dialogue, if possible. If things get hostile or argumentative - drop it. Winning a battle is meaningless if you don't win the war. Most people here - regardless of belief - are here because they have given serious though to their spirituality and have deep convictions. The fact that we are all here exposing our baggage, opinions, and concerns - taking a risk of ridcule or rebuke - deserves respect. Ridicule and/or rebuke should not even enter into the conversation.

That being said, ridicule/rebuke to one person may simply be considered meaningful engagement/challenge by others. We should consider each person as an individual; and some people are just more sensitive than others.

[doug yowell]

From what I've witness on this forum - the Pagans hold a pretty high standard. One of which the Christians might want to imitate. So - who is it that actually holds a high standard?

I noted the standard not the action. Most pagans here are more subtle in their disrespecting of God and by implication those who believe in such a ridiculous idea. The pagan has no objective moral duty to respect those who hold religious beliefs. It is my observation that the very concept of respect springs from the Eternal Source of all goodness. Unbelievers simply acknowledge that respect is a human virtue that they appreciate. I respect them for recognizing this and trying to act in accordance with that recognition. Yet, many (not all) seem oblivious to the real messages that they are sending.I think this is what Pam and Bonnie have been trying to refer to,they can correct me. I tend to excuse this (Father forgive them for they don't know what they're doing)". Christians, on the other hand, have a Spirit within them that is reminding them of their duty to represent the God they desire to model. Since we too are still wrestling with or broken tendencies, our struggle is harder than that of the unbeliever. I have seen disrespectful attitudes from both sides. Some are just more blatant than others.The non-Christians hold no higher ground, they're just more cerebral about it.

[bonnie]

I noted the standard not the action. Most pagans here are more subtle in their disrespecting of God and by implication those who believe in such a ridiculous idea. The pagan has no objective moral duty to respect those who hold religious beliefs. It is my observation that the very concept of respect springs from the Eternal Source of all goodness. Unbelievers simply acknowledge that respect is a human virtue that they appreciate. I respect them for recognizing this and trying to act in accordance with that recognition. Yet, many (not all) seem oblivious to the real messages that they are sending.I think this is what Pam and Bonnie have been trying to refer to,they can correct me. I tend to excuse this (Father forgive them for they don't know what they're doing)". Christians, on the other hand, have a Spirit within them that is reminding them of their duty to represent the God they desire to model. Since we too are still wrestling with or broken tendencies, our struggle is harder than that of the unbeliever. I have seen disrespectful attitudes from both sides. Some are just more blatant than others.The non-Christians hold no higher ground, they're just more cerebral about it.

What I think is so odd from some circles is statements like this.......

My proposed answer to both questions is the same - accept people where they are; engage in a meaningful dialogue, if possible. If things get hostile or argumentative - drop it. Winning a battle is meaningless if you don't win the war. Most people here - regardless of belief - are here because they have given serious though to their spirituality and have deep convictions.

I think what we need is a approved list of those that can be ridiculed,mocked,judged and those off limits.

I think this is an interesting statement as well...If things get hostile or argumentative - drop it.

This topic has been silent for several days who and why is it pursued again?

Ernie knoll is the latest to be mocked.I am not a fan of his or put a lot of stock in what he says,however there are those that do and do so sincerely. Those that do would not receive this "christian" accept all where they are at" routine.Why not? Are they as important to God as those that profess a more liberal theology?

The same goes for those that believe they have a valid concern over Jesuits,that topic is usually good for several pages of mockery.Personally I know some very nice decent people that do have what they consider very valid concerns over Jesuits.Do they deserve your scorn because they believe differently than you? Reading the remarks concerning those that do,how anxious would you be to join the acceptance-non-judgmental crowd?

So much talk of respect and those that love to expound on that will to borrow a phrase,like to mock and ridicule in a "passive-aggressive" manner,wink wink.

Maybe those that are expert on respect could define those it should be shown to.

[JoeMo]

Quote:

What I think is so odd from some circles is statements like this.......

My proposed answer to both questions is the same - accept people where they are; engage in a meaningful dialogue, if possible. If things get hostile or argumentative - drop it. Winning a battle is meaningless if you don't win the war. Most people here - regardless of belief - are here because they have given serious though to their spirituality and have deep convictions.

Whatever Bonnie.

It was meant to be a serious post. The only response I have to your response could very easily be construed as hostile; so I'll just drop this thread...

[Woody]

Quote:

Dealing respectfully with those who HAVE found God...

how to deal with those who have not found God ...

My proposed answer to both questions is the same - accept people where they are; engage in a meaningful dialogue, if possible. If things get hostile or argumentative - drop it. Winning a battle is meaningless if you don't win the war. Most people here - regardless of belief - are here because they have given serious though to their spirituality and have deep convictions. The fact that we are all here exposing our baggage, opinions, and concerns - taking a risk of ridcule or rebuke - deserves respect. Ridicule and/or rebuke should not even enter into the conversation.

That being said, ridicule/rebuke to one person may simply be considered meaningful engagement/challenge by others. We should consider each person as an individual; and some people are just more sensitive than others.

Good One JoeMo

[bonnie]

Whatever Bonnie.

It was meant to be a serious post. The only response I have to your response could very easily be construed as hostile; so I'll just drop this thread...

That is your right.If you see questions and observations as hostile I have no objection.

Whether you choose to really drop it this time is up to you.

[debbym]

how to deal respectfully with someone if they believe in God according the the bible is what this thread is about.

holding up painful scenes from the bible for a predictable emotional response, to people who hold the scripture sacred... well i don't think that feels respectful.

is it respectful to take scriptures out of context and use them to tell a believer, i can't believe in such a God.

it comes across as a rebuke or a defiance of faith. is this a respectful act? respect also means to look again, you take a first glance you see the outside, you take a second glance to look deeper. re- again spect- look, or see

those who use these scriptures show no actual interest in understanding or learning the spiritual meaning of these scriptures that refers to death as in genocide. so it seems is not an interest in learning that prompts the postings, merely an act that dependably results in frustration and bad feelings.

if anyone wants to learn about how this kind of death and killing has a spiritual meaning then start the thread. If anyone doesn't understand the act of God in the flood, and would really like to understand, then start the thread. If it is merely an exercise to challenge and defy Christianity then well, what is the value. If you as an adult are upset over the flood story and can't believe in God because it... i am not sure anyone here can help you. well maybe there is someone here to help you.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Bonnie & Pam,

I've asked you for a specific example of what you are talking about, and what you would consider to be disrespect. You seem to run away from this issue fairly fast here. Please show us some specifics, so we can take into account what exactly do you find offensive and disrespectful, or hateful?

I'm a bit lost here. You are calling me a volture, and venomous. Can you show some specifics that you would consider to be disrespectful?

nobody called you a "volture" [sic] or "venomous"... I mentioned "vultures" but if one chooses to see oneself as such, that is up to the reader - "if the shoe fits"

Originally Posted By: bonnie

This topic has been silent for several days who and why is it pursued again?

apparently, because someone decided I needed more lecture on how awful it is as a Christian to want reciprocal respect from those who insist on bashing God.

Originally Posted By: joemo

You want to be respected and understood. IMO, statements like this (which I find demeaning and condescending)do not inspire a desire to respect and understand.

I never wrote that I wanted to be "respected and understood." Indeed, the ones who I respect already do that. My whole point of starting this thread was to deal with the issue of dealing respectfully with those who HAVE found God. Ridicule of one's beliefs is NOT respectful.

This thread was NOT:

a request to bring up the old Amalekite card... (that *really* gets old, folks)

a request to have woody spam my thread (and Woody was requested by adm not to post to anything involving my posts, but that didn't last long, did it?)

a request to post cartoons ridiculing Christianity

a request to "constantly agree with [my] views"

a request to show me how stupid I am that I can't distinguish between "criticism" and "respect"

a request to beatify members of C/A who are not Christian

Despite repeated attempts to clarify and explain, there are those who do not see the point of this thread. Trying to drive the thread into another side topic involving *my* abilities to discern the difference between "respect" and "criticism" is stupid and pointless.

This has turned into just another thread, where, if one is not amenable to bashing God, to being agreeable to any and all slams on Christianity and the Bible, to agreeing that Ellen White was a plagiarist and phony, to agreeing that women can act like a man, to agreeing that the SDA church leaders are evil, to agreeing that paganism holds a higher ground of respect for others, to agreeing that it's very okay to be gay, then stand by to be roasted, tarred and feathered by those C/A windbags who don't seem to have any other life than to cause controversy and chaos on this forum.

[joeb]

how to deal respectfully with someone if they believe in God according the the bible is what this thread is about.

holding up painful scenes from the bible for a predictable emotional response, to people who hold the scripture sacred... well i don't think that feels respectful.

is it respectful to take scriptures out of context and use them to tell a believer, i can't believe in such a God.

it comes across as a rebuke or a defiance of faith. is this a respectful act? respect also means to look again, you take a first glance you see the outside, you take a second glance to look deeper. re- again spect- look, or see

those who use these scriptures show no actual interest in understanding or learning the spiritual meaning of these scriptures that refers to death as in genocide. so it seems is not an interest in learning that prompts the postings, merely an act that dependably results in frustration and bad feelings.

if anyone wants to learn about how this kind of death and killing has a spiritual meaning then start the thread. If anyone doesn't understand the act of God in the flood, and would really like to understand, then start the thread. If it is merely an exercise to challenge and defy Christianity then well, what is the value. If you as an adult are upset over the flood story and can't believe in God because it... i am not sure anyone here can help you. well maybe there is someone here to help you.

Another term for what you're describing is passive-aggressive behavior. Things are so phrased that any objection can be met with: What? Me being mean or disrespectful? You're just way out of line. You're the mean one for saying anything to me about this....

[bonnie]

Another term for what you're describing is passive-aggressive behavior. Things are so phrased that any objection can be met with: What? Me being mean or disrespectful? You're just way out of line. You're the mean one for saying anything to me about this....

It is a art form by some people.Reluctance to come right out and say something but doing so in such a manner that you can step back with clean hands in the air and "Say who me"

rudywoofs did call it as passive-aggressive behavior early in this discussion.

[joeb]

Originally Posted By: joeb

Another term for what you're describing is passive-aggressive behavior. Things are so phrased that any objection can be met with: What? Me being mean or disrespectful? You're just way out of line. You're the mean one for saying anything to me about this....

It is a art form by some people.Reluctance to come right out and say something but doing so in such a manner that you can step back with clean hands in the air and "Say who me"

rudywoofs did call it as passive-aggressive behavior early in this discussion.

I guess I missed what rudywoofs said as I haven't read this entire thread.

[Bravus]

So... how *can* disagreement be phrased? Can't be rude, can't be polite either for fear of being called passive-aggressive.

Is it possible to disagree? Or is singing from the same hymn sheet the only allowable approach?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

What's wrong with giving those who believe in God the same respect that is preached to give to non-Christians? Why must passive-aggressive behavior be tolerated by Christians and be completely unacceptable by non-Christians? Why must someone disagree in a disagreeable manner?

Must Christians be doormats?

But here again, this isn't the topic of this thread.

[Bravus]

That doesn't really answer the question, though...

I *do* always try to be civil in all my posts.

But sometimes what I fully and honestly intend as polite disagreement gets read by others as hostile.

I can only be responsible for my own actions: and a number of times have apologised when I felt I had nothing to apologise for, because I think relationships are important.

[joeb]

So... how *can* disagreement be phrased? Can't be rude, can't be polite either for fear of being called passive-aggressive.

Is it possible to disagree? Or is singing from the same hymn sheet the only allowable approach?

Nice straw man, Bravus. You know as well as I do that respectful disagreement and passive-aggressive behavior are two distinctly different ways of behaving. One is done to annoy and then stand back and laugh, and the other is done to learn. It's easy to spot the differences.

[Bravus]

I'm not sure, though, that the writer and are reader necessarily always on the same page in terms of which is which.

The fact that accusations of 'trolling' appeared in response to perfectly sincere posts in the other thread is the most recent example.

[Bravus]

And calling my perfectly sincere query a 'straw man' is not hostile communication how?

[phkrause]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

So... how *can* disagreement be phrased? Can't be rude, can't be polite either for fear of being called passive-aggressive.

Is it possible to disagree? Or is singing from the same hymn sheet the only allowable approach?

Nice straw man, Bravus. You know as well as I do that respectful disagreement and passive-aggressive behavior are two distinctly different ways of behaving. One is done to annoy and then stand back and laugh, and the other is done to learn. It's easy to spot the differences.

Not sure I agree with your strawman comment! How is it that you can know what he meant? I thought his post was above reproach.

[phkrause]

And calling my perfectly sincere query a 'straw man' is not hostile communication how?

Excellent point

[bonnie]

That doesn't really answer the question, though...

I *do* always try to be civil in all my posts.

But sometimes what I fully and honestly intend as polite disagreement gets read by others as hostile.

I can only be responsible for my own actions: and a number of times have apologised when I felt I had nothing to apologise for, because I think relationships are important.

Can you tell me what was "civil" about the following.I haven't gone back to check all but I don't think I had any interaction with you at this point.

To what extent is the posting of this topic a pretext to dignify the posting of the phrase 'lesbian bondage'? bwink

What were you implying? That I may have a thing for "lesbian bondage" wink,wink"

I get a kick out of seeing those words in print? What was it?

More to the point what did you expect that would offer to the conversation?Certainly not a desire to see it stop or was it? If so then why not simply come out with that opinion or request without the "wink wink"

In personal terms it really isn't important.Your opinion of what I believe,what I read doesn't have the slightest impact on my life.

In general for what many claim on this forum it is a curiosity that they are to be concerned about respect

[joeb]

And calling my perfectly sincere query a 'straw man' is not hostile communication how?

So, you are telling me that you cannot tell the difference between passive-aggressive and respectful behavior, and that others can't either. Riiiight.... I'd have to believe we're both retarded to believe that.

My mother-in-law is one of the bitterest and most hateful people I've ever met, yet she acts as if she's always the aggreived party and its someone else always causing the problem after she's attacked them. Sort of like your response to me. Of course, though, you'll deny any possible attempt at bad behavior. That's the point of passive-aggressive behavior. Always claim the high ground....

She's even better at it than you are.

[Bravus]

In that particular post, that wasn't my point. My point was that perhaps it might be nice if the defenders of civility were to model some civility.

I have attacked no-one. I have, occasionally, defended someone.

I phrased my query politely, and no-one has responded to it yet with an answer, only a number of hostile direct attacks on me.

Perhaps scripture has some advice for this thread? Proverbs 18:24 "24 A man that hath friends must shew himself friendly: and there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother."

We are each responsible for our own behaviour: I am not responsible for the behaviour of those who agree with me on some issue, although I might have a word with them by PM if I think they cross a line.

But if someone is going to call for courtesy, the *least* that person needs to do is be courteous.

If someone is going to condemn personal attacks, the *least* that person can do is refrain from personal attacks.

And so on.

[M. T. Cross]

How to deal respectfully.....

It seems to me that the only way that it is accomplished is by saying "Yes you are right". I did not think that at the beginning of this thread, but now I do. Terms like "subtle disrespect" get bandied around. Terms like "critism vs. respect".

Maybe before we can figure out how its done, we need to define respect?

I think in the entire time I have been here I have posted 2 posts that where any disrespect was intended.

[phkrause]

In that particular post, that wasn't my point. My point was that perhaps it might be nice if the defenders of civility were to model some civility.

I have attacked no-one. I have, occasionally, defended someone.

I phrased my query politely, and no-one has responded to it yet with an answer, only a number of hostile direct attacks on me.

Perhaps scripture has some advice for this thread? Proverbs 18:24 "24 A man that hath friends must shew himself friendly: and there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother."

We are each responsible for our own behaviour: I am not responsible for the behaviour of those who agree with me on some issue, although I might have a word with them by PM if I think they cross a line.

But if someone is going to call for courtesy, the *least* that person needs to do is be courteous.

If someone is going to condemn personal attacks, the *least* that person can do is refrain from personal attacks.

And so on.