Condemnation

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

I'd like to answer that one...my two sons had a choice, either behave in a civil manner before the table and guests, or else we would have a little reminder conversation...and they would suffer the embarrassment of going to their room, while company was present.

Behave in a socially acceptable manner, and they were included right along in the conversations and company of the guests, as equals (albeit younger equals).

This is how children learn to "socialize" in the real world.

Very good, Q. However, I specifically desire an answer from cyberpi, as I think that answer will bear on his philosophy of no judgment.

So again I ask: How do your children behave at a dinner party? Are they mannered, or are they allowed to run wild and be unruly?

[Quahom1]

Ooops, sorry (guess I'll go to my room now...grmple grmble rzxxzzin frzzzn)


lol

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Very good, Q. However, I specifically desire an answer from cyberpi, as I think that answer will bear on his philosophy of no judgment.

I consider that judging (judgment) is with words. To the contrary, my philosophy is to rebuke, and to not katakrino. When someone made racist statements on this website, have I looked the other way? Did I call for the person to be banned? The philosophy throughout the Bible and the Qur'an is to NOT katakrino the voice of someone as they krino. krino for krino, katakrino for katakrino. Krino for katakrino is better! Katakrino for krino is an error that may bring wrath from above. Realize that David rightfully flinged a stone at Goliath and killed him; however, a word and a stone are polar opposites. It is the absence of words that will get people bodily hurt.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

So again I ask: How do your children behave at a dinner party? Are they mannered, or are they allowed to run wild and be unruly?

At a dinner party that I would attend if the children were present then the children receive attention from the adults. Generally they've got good reasons to be in a good mood. Our children behaved better in public than at home so if there is truly a problem in public then I think there is a problem not dealt with at home.

I find that judgmentalism goes a long way. A voice with reason is all that is needed. My voice commands respect in my family... to discipline I'd say sit down, they sit, and then after a timeout to calm down we'd have a talk. The conversation with children is more important than anything. When they were young they might look away in shame, not listen, and then it would become a lecture, but they caught on and actually enjoyed it. I ask questions and get them to commit to agreement. From there you have something to work with. Often what I found though is that any tension between the children or with Mom really stemmed from their tension at school with their peers or other life events. When school starts up you can see the extra stress. So if they are cranky and making mistakes with others the issue is not that they are cranky, but to find out what happened at school. Address those unspoken concerns of how to deal with the situations, becoming a mentor there and offering advice, then the rest sorts itself out on its own.

BUT, I think what you are trying to introduce is a different setting where the bandwidth can be clogged. Essentially at a movie theater, play, concert, lecture, meeting, there is a necessary ownership of the airwaves. A place where you can consider a voice as a weapon, right? A stone? Certainly NOT... but more of an annoyance or inconvenience. A priority needs to be given to one speaker. A standard decorum. That is an entirely different issue. If there is a heckler or someone using their cellphone in a concert then a bit of Katakrino of a voice for their Katakrino of other voices may become necessary. Call the bailef or the all important moderator, right? However, I have found that the brave soul who employs a bit of required judgmentalism and says, "Shhh, please, you are being rude" goes a long way... better than having security come in and haul someone off. I think that would be what you once called sounding brass and clanging cymbals, right? But, it is the polar opposite from punching a dolt in the face.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

There need be no more said to this issue.

I will continue to speak of it as long as I can post here. You think that a law or a standard of this web site was upheld with Silas? I would review the word hypocrite carefully because it is Silas who has one over you guys. I am NOT Silas' defender, neither am I a proponent of anything specific that Silas said, and though I would find far more reason to ban a moderator or two before Silas per that CoC, it would be a mistake... I am simply using this as an example to help display and hilite a difference in the Gospels between the Greek words Krino and Katakrino. A voice is condemned when it will not be heard. There is a jumbled mess through the centuries, especially in Paul's writings, between the words commonly translated as judge and as condemn. If you look back through the translation errors I hope you will find that the Gospels clearly delineate them. Whereas society has not.

Relative to defending action taken against Silas and this being a private site. Do as you will, but then this site is only the religion of the moderators and not of the book or of the world. Silas represents a common aspect of people who call themselves Christian and I found he was overall more polite than some moderators.

Here is an example that is less personal to the forum. You know the Christian Westboro Baptist Church, right? Pretty outspoken? Check out their statements on the murders at Virginia Tech: WBC comments on Virginia Tech Apalling? Disrespectful? Out of line? But if their message is only words, then I submit if anyone censors them, lifts a brick, persecutes them or punishes them, then whoever does has placed themselves beneath the WBC. Beneath them. I do not condone or agree with the WBC, but a person has got to place it into words for them. View them as children... if they are astray then it is on the people around to help lift them up. If they are rightful, then it is on the people around them to have listened to them. Either way, they are a voice that needs to be heard or spoken with... to not suffer them is the lack of forgiveness. Those people claim to be Christian and think they are rightful just as anyone here does. If they are like children, the Gospel teaches to suffer them and to forbid them not.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, cyberpi.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Generally they've got good reasons to be in a good mood.

This is a nice dodge, but it avoids the question. I wasn't concerned with a child's mood, they can be quite happy and still conduct themselves as heathens.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

BUT, I think what you are trying to introduce is a different setting where the bandwidth can be clogged.

Ah, the old "moving the goalposts" argument?

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Essentially at a movie theater, play, concert, lecture, meeting, there is a necessary ownership of the airwaves.

Yes, essentially.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I will continue to speak of it as long as I can post here.

You are welcome to continue speaking of it. I do hope you will not be offended when I ignore those conversations?

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Relative to defending action taken against Silas and this being a private site. Do as you will, but then this site is only the religion of the moderators and not of the book or of the world. Silas represents a common aspect of people who call themselves Christian and I found he was overall more polite than some moderators.

Ah, so I should just go to hell...and look forward to the trip, no less?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I consider that judging (judgment) is with words. To the contrary, my philosophy is to rebuke, and to not katakrino. When someone made racist statements on this website, have I looked the other way? Did I call for the person to be banned? The philosophy throughout the Bible and the Qur'an is to NOT katakrino the voice of someone as they krino. krino for krino, katakrino for katakrino. Krino for katakrino is better! Katakrino for krino is an error that may bring wrath from above. Realize that David rightfully flinged a stone at Goliath and killed him; however, a word and a stone are polar opposites. It is the absence of words that will get people bodily hurt.

At a dinner party that I would attend if the children were present then the children receive attention from the adults. Generally they've got good reasons to be in a good mood. Our children behaved better in public than at home so if there is truly a problem in public then I think there is a problem not dealt with at home.

I find that judgmentalism goes a long way. A voice with reason is all that is needed. My voice commands respect in my family... to discipline I'd say sit down, they sit, and then after a timeout to calm down we'd have a talk. The conversation with children is more important than anything. When they were young they might look away in shame, not listen, and then it would become a lecture, but they caught on and actually enjoyed it. I ask questions and get them to commit to agreement. From there you have something to work with. Often what I found though is that any tension between the children or with Mom really stemmed from their tension at school with their peers or other life events. When school starts up you can see the extra stress. So if they are cranky and making mistakes with others the issue is not that they are cranky, but to find out what happened at school. Address those unspoken concerns of how to deal with the situations, becoming a mentor there and offering advice, then the rest sorts itself out on its own.

BUT, I think what you are trying to introduce is a different setting where the bandwidth can be clogged. Essentially at a movie theater, play, concert, lecture, meeting, there is a necessary ownership of the airwaves. A place where you can consider a voice as a weapon, right? A stone? Certainly NOT... but more of an annoyance or inconvenience. A priority needs to be given to one speaker. A standard decorum. That is an entirely different issue. If there is a heckler or someone using their cellphone in a concert then a bit of Katakrino of a voice for their Katakrino of other voices may become necessary. Call the bailef or the all important moderator, right? However, I have found that the brave soul who employs a bit of required judgmentalism and says, "Shhh, please, you are being rude" goes a long way... better than having security come in and haul someone off. I think that would be what you once called sounding brass and clanging cymbals, right? But, it is the polar opposite from punching a dolt in the face.

I will continue to speak of it as long as I can post here. You think that a law or a standard of this web site was upheld with Silas? I would review the word hypocrite carefully because it is Silas who has one over you guys. I am NOT Silas' defender, neither am I a proponent of anything specific that Silas said, and though I would find far more reason to ban a moderator or two before Silas per that CoC, it would be a mistake... I am simply using this as an example to help display and hilite a difference in the Gospels between the Greek words Krino and Katakrino. A voice is condemned when it will not be heard. There is a jumbled mess through the centuries, especially in Paul's writings, between the words commonly translated as judge and as condemn. If you look back through the translation errors I hope you will find that the Gospels clearly delineate them. Whereas society has not.

Relative to defending action taken against Silas and this being a private site. Do as you will, but then this site is only the religion of the moderators and not of the book or of the world. Silas represents a common aspect of people who call themselves Christian and I found he was overall more polite than some moderators.

Here is an example that is less personal to the forum. You know the Christian Westboro Baptist Church, right? Pretty outspoken? Check out their statements on the murders at Virginia Tech: WBC comments on Virginia Tech Apalling? Disrespectful? Out of line? But if their message is only words, then I submit if anyone censors them, lifts a brick, persecutes them or punishes them, then whoever does has placed themselves beneath the WBC. Beneath them. I do not condone or agree with the WBC, but a person has got to place it into words for them. View them as children... if they are astray then it is on the people around to help lift them up. If they are rightful, then it is on the people around them to have listened to them. Either way, they are a voice that needs to be heard or spoken with... to not suffer them is the lack of forgiveness. Those people claim to be Christian and think they are rightful just as anyone here does. If they are like children, the Gospel teaches to suffer them and to forbid them not.

I "KNOW" the law of standard was upheld with Silas. I also know some people just can't answer in simple and straight up terms, or accept as fact that some people can't follow rules. I know the moderators here bend over backwards to accomodate members and keep this forum one of the top discussion forums in the world. But they have ALL members to consider, not just one or two...

What I am surpised at, is one of your caliber and education would stoop to snips and snide remarks, because you don't agree with the actions of those responsible for keeping this forum at such a high caliber as yourself. You have the right to express yourself, of course, up to a point. That goes for any society of the basest of civility.

Consider that moderators here have willingly given up certain of their rights, so you can enjoy the fullness of yours.

In short, give it a break will ya?...

There is more than "Cyberpi" to consider here at CR. There are almost 5000 others to be considered as well...and they all don't think as you do.

If you really have an issue with this "Silas" thing, take it up with the Administrator (I, Brian). His is the final word...not the moderators'

v/r

Joshua

aka, "thomas"

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

This is a nice dodge, but it avoids the question. I wasn't concerned with a child's mood, they can be quite happy and still conduct themselves as heathens.

You have no argument for corporal punishment with my children. Lets save your definition of a heathen, or pagan, gentile, infidel, or heretic, for another thread.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Ah, the old "moving the goalposts" argument?

I don't think God has moved any goalposts.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

You are welcome to continue speaking of it. I do hope you will not be offended when I ignore those conversations?

Ignore-ance is not what I advise, but if you could then we'd still have the company of Silas.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Ah, so I should just go to hell...and look forward to the trip, no less?

I'm not the one here promoting argumentum ad baculum. I hope you find heaven with Silas in it.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, cyberpi.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

You have no argument for corporal punishment with my children.

Now who is moving goalposts (again)? At no time have I mentioned corporal punishment.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I don't think God has moved any goalposts.

I am not speaking to G-d, I am speaking to you. Unless of course, you imagine yourself as G-d?

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Ignore-ance is not what I advise, but if you could then we'd still have the company of Silas.

There is a time for every purpose, under heaven.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I'm not the one here promoting argumentum ad baculum.

Not sure how you can say this, when I didn't start this thread. Who did start this thread, I wonder...?

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I hope you find heaven with Silas in it.

Surprize! I hope I find heaven with Silas in it too, and you, and many many others I have quarreled with in my lifetime.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

I "KNOW" the law of standard was upheld with Silas.

Not even close.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

I also know some people just can't answer in simple and straight up terms, or accept as fact that some people can't follow rules.

I found that Silas held to a higher standard than you have while I've been here.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

What I am surpised at, is one of your caliber and education would stoop to snips and snide remarks, because you don't agree with the actions of those responsible for keeping this forum at such a high caliber as yourself. You have the right to express yourself, of course, up to a point. That goes for any society of the basest of civility.

Where is there a snide remark? I'll tell you in no uncertain terms: I think you have been the worst offender of that CoC. I have no caliber because I'm not a bullet. Words will not hurt you, but if you they do then I think you are on the wrong side of God. If I have wisdom it ultimately came from God and I did not receive it by weeding out people who I deemed were lesser than me. That is just not the way it works. If I do, then I'll be on the wrong side of God.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

There is more than "Cyberpi" to consider here at CR. There are almost 5000 others to be considered as well...and they all don't think as you do.

Your 6,300 posts is a record that is safe by me, and probably by your next 5,000 customers. I'm not hogging the bandwidth but if anyone thinks I am then I am happy to leave.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

aka, "thomas"

What do you mean by this? Thomas, who posts on CR?

[Dor]

Cyperbi,
Thank you.
Yes the rules are never enforced evenly and the people who stir the most feelings in the authority are usually the ones gotten rid of.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Dor!

Originally Posted by Dor

Cyperbi,
Thank you.
Yes the rules are never enforced evenly and the people who stir the most feelings in the authority are usually the ones gotten rid of.

Do the police always catch every person who ever runs a red light?

[Dor]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Kindest Regards, Dor!



Do the police always catch every person who ever runs a red light?

Do the police always let their friends, fellow police officers and those in authority off?

Like I said those that stir the feelings of authority are the ones who have to go it is nothing new. Silas stirred feelings in the wrong person or persons Im not saying it was you, Q, Lunamoth, BB, Brian or who but he got feelings stirred in someone in power.

[Quahom1]

He broke the rules, over and over again. His departure had nothing to do with any "one's" feelings.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by Dor

Do the police always let their friends, fellow police officers and those in authority off?

Like I said those that stir the feelings of authority are the ones who have to go it is nothing new. Silas stirred feelings in the wrong person or persons Im not saying it was you, Q, Lunamoth, BB, Brian or who but he got feelings stirred in someone in power.

Silas was removed because his sole purpose at CR was to witness at the other members and condemn them, even after being warned that this was unacceptable behaviour.

Over the years I've removed a string of other aggressive Born Agains, New Age Prophets, Muslim spammers, and similar, whose sole aim was to use CR as their personal soapbox to raise themselves against others.

The overall policy on what we can tolerate has been uneven - finding a balance is tough - and I did try to allow Silas far more room than most because I'd rather there was least moderating, but it simply allowed everything to get out of control in that instance.

As for the staff at CR - I can assure you, I've had words and I'm hoping that people will feel that the playing field is more level these days.

Any complaints at all - forward them on to me.

Also - let's not try to allow this thread to get personal - let's keep to the general subject where possible.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Do the police always catch every person who ever runs a red light?

Silas was banned from the intersection because he honked his horn, used the wrong blinker, or put up a sign that someone did not like. Communication and running a red light where someone can get killed are polar opposites.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Now who is moving goalposts (again)? At no time have I mentioned corporal punishment.

I read that here, where you had said:

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I'm not going to tell you that you are wrong on this...but I don't have the time or aptitude to play psychologist to every individual either. It is my experience, here and in the world at large, that arrogance is like fire. Surrender to it and it only gets worse. It only responds to arrogance, like the schoolyard bully. One can continue coughing up their lunch money everyday and go hungry, or get enough cajones to punch the dolt in the face and put him in his place. Standing up for oneself, family, nation and religious belief against arrogant opposition, is most decidedly correct in my opinion. Spirit has not convicted me otherwise. In fact, spirit has led me to this in spite of the many sermons I have heard through the years to the contrary. Christians, or those followers of any legitimate faith, are *not* doormats to be walked all over by upstarts that think some amalgamation of everybody will solve the woes of the world. Where such people see heavenly bliss and Edenic paradise...I see Armaggedon and WWIII. That's prescient vision for ya!

I find interesting beliefs there, a small portion with which I agree, but the majority with which I don't. I submit that for something like arrogance, it takes judgment (communication), and not condemning (physical punishment).
Prior to that, here you said to CCS:

Originally Posted by juantoo3

You have had moments that border on arrogance, I am not telling you anything you don't already know.

As I read it, Silas was essentially banned for a few sentences like that because it is not de-personalized as: "Everyone has had their moments of arrogance." or "I think you have had some moments that border on arrogance." What would be your response if Silas or CCS had said the same thing about you?

So lets review Silas’ last threads. As I see it, Silas didn't even judge anyone as being arrogant. Essentially at worst he would strongly say things like, "You have do XYZ to be a Christian.", or "It is good to be saved, right FS?", or “God hates sinners”. Here is an example. It did not look intentional to me, but Lunamoth calls him out on it. But there are hundreds of posts where the moderators and other members cross that line and even get personal. In fact, I found a few lines in Brian's posts that followed in that thread were more appalling, "Perhaps WE can help you..." or, "Silas, if you are a human being..." Is that what CR is? What religion is that Brian?

Here is where I saw words reveal the philosophy of punishment more, and I find the quotations from Paul on the words about judgment are well placed, but then following that in your words, here I see:

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Lessons in common sense are wasted on intolerant bigots like Silas, he will never understand. He is too brainwashed.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Why aren't you a Christian? Because you sure don't act like one. You're a thief, a liar and a bigot.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Therefore, by your own admission, you will burn in your own hell. See you there!

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Who elected you my judge, jury and executioner?

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Put another way, it is none of your damn business. It is between me and G-d. Back off.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I am only giving back what he dishes out.

A bit personal? Name calling? Telling someone to burn in their own hell? I think Silas made a snide remark following your snide remark, but I did not see him respond in kind to your anger. I can see that Silas knows that words can not hurt him or cause him to get angry. I was impressed! I don't think he was trying to anger you, but I think you were trying to anger him. I am not saying that I agree with everything that Silas said, but what exactly were you trying to communicate? Your anger? I do not judge my own children that way and if I did I would rightfully lose their respect. I found that it was Silas who behaved as an adult. I think Silas tolerated the anger in some people’s words, but those people got angry because they could not tolerate his words. Silas demonstrated tolerance. Whoever banned him demonstrated an intolerance to him. To your credit juantoo3, I agree with FS in that it was uncharacteristic of you.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

I am not speaking to G-d, I am speaking to you. Unless of course, you imagine yourself as G-d?

If you want me to erect some goalposts for you or CR then I will. I ask that FS get in touch with Silas and invite him back to CR if he will. I ask that the moderators apologize to him for their behavior and invite him back to CR to share his beliefs. Those are my goalposts. Who here is a Christian?

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Not sure how you can say this, when I didn't start this thread. Who did start this thread, I wonder...?

The thread was intended to help distinguish a polar difference that I see between judge (communicate) and condemn (punish). I consider that argumentum ad baculum is what has been portrayed in your words and demonstrated by punishing Silas. Some members of CR wanted him to learn that something is true by their punishment: banning him. I find that the argument against Silas was false. So when I said that some moderators were wrong, then your reply was… “So I should just go to hell”. Were you expecting punishment if you were wrong? I am not the one applying argumentum ad baculum. If you reject things that I say as false, then reject them. If they are true, then take the words and learn from them… but I expect no punishment for anyone over words.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Surprize! I hope I find heaven with Silas in it too, and you, and many many others I have quarreled with in my lifetime.

That does come as a surprise to me since your words on that thread said that you would see him in hell.

I did not see where Silas banned (condemned), or persecuted anyone, but a few people dropped like Dennis Rodman and called foul over his words. I rebuked some of his beliefs but I was looking forward to further conversation with him. Lets just say that Silas did directly curse someone... in the religion of Christianity I find:

Matthew 5:43-45 You have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That you may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

[juantoo3]

Cyberpi,

Your position is duly noted. I take exception to being taken out of context, and the fact that my tirade was noted at that time by me to FaithfulServant that I *was deliberately* acting out of character, in frustration over a person who couldn't seem to get it across that his methods were improper regarding how we do things around here. The reasons and methods are clearly spelled out in the CoC. A great deal of your complaint is selective to your agenda, had you had this discussion at that time with Silas...perhaps, just perhaps...things might have gone differently. Further, it neglects the several times Silas was politely asked to conform to the CoC, both before and after my tirade.

As for Silas coming back, I have no issues *if* he can conduct himself appropriately. I would suggest you petition Brian about the matter if it is of that much concern to yourself. Considering it was only when Silas was under threat of removal that he even attempted to conform (which tells me he knew how, and just didn't care to as long as he could get away with it), if he cannot comply with our simple request, then perhaps it is as well he not return. His conduct is his choice...the consequences are not. Same as for everybody else...myself included. Were I to conduct myself on a regular basis in the manner I did that evening with Silas, I would expect to be asked to leave.