dialogue about dialogue

[China Cat Sunflower]

Hello everyone! Banning prophets are we? Chris

[cyberpi]

The problems with Silas, Niranjan, and this paxcalibur guy were not within Silas, Niranjan, or the Paganprophet. The words to chastise, vilify, decivilize, and institutionalize or hospitalize them in the name of justifying oneself is really nauseating to me.

Was the paxcalibur guy truly banned? Why is the Okie telling it like it is with a private forum but that paxcalibur's visions are not allowed here? I'm lost on that one... show of hands, who here was offended by Paganprophet?

Niranjan: Having read of Niranjan's last threads, the guy was the only one to wish anyone a Happy Mother's Day on CR, and it was to Muslimwoman. That was after several long threads where he ranted against Islam with her. Ignore the content... how is it that MuslimWoman earns his respect and succeeds in helping break through a barrier? Yet when he speaks against the UK and Imperialism, which a large number of people on this planet do, he gets stoked, banned, and then vilified with no chance to respond?

Before being told by a member here to, "shut up", to take his ego and ignorance elsewhere, and that he was a prejudiced monster, and then worse, Niranjan expressed a couple of things that revealed a different person than what you have all judged him as. In response to Tao's disclosure that he was a victim of sexual assault as a child, Niranjan reveals the same here, with forgiveness. He says:

Originally Posted by Niranjan

That is my point Tao. Get rid of the plant by the roots, instead of trimming them .

Similarly , instead of merely arresting these paedophiles , and filling the prisons with them, go to the root of the problem as I suggested , and make sure that none of them are created in the first place.

Dealing with the tree by the roots is in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam from different angles... it is a deep concept. While Niranjan railed against religion, he revealed to me that he understands the underlying concept from somewhere whether he knows it or not. Here he indicates: hate the sin, not the sinner. Do you not realize that Niranjan has what many people here lack? Yet you banned him and vilify him claiming that he was 'unproductive' or 'uncivil'. Shame on this website for banning him. Shame on its members.

I was surprised that juantoo3 was impressing upon Niranjan, because here it was considered tinkling brass, sounding cymbols, and wasted energy when I rebuked Quahom1 for a prejudiced generalization where he states that we all know that speaking of Jesus (pbuh) on Arab land that people listen then have you arrested, and/or killed... in comparison to the USA and Israel. My rebuke followed. That is all that is required... you don't have to ban anyone. Quahom1 probably did not realize his own biases and is going to think twice before EVER making a statement like that again. Did he get angry and close the thread? Yeah, but I bet I would be gone if I called him a prejudiced monster.

I recognize that I am the minority here with my viewpoint. I think I can safely claim to be the most outspokenly against banning the individuals who have been condemned. I understand that people want to enforce some kind of standard on their neighbor, but right now I just see a website owner wanting to retain full control of content by his judgment of a generalized word 'civility', opposition to whatever is deemed as soliciting a viewpoint, banning them without mercy, and without the public scrutiny of the judgment. I surely have been raising Brian's hairs. What I am speaking out against is something that is far beyond anyone here and this website. It is the status quo not just across internet forums but in countries edging ever closer to a police state with a polarized government and public. If I were on a different forum the results would probably be the same... some more than others. Old world terms like 'civility' are being applied to a recent invention known as the internet, and I personally consider it a sham. I consider it important to be able to say words that may knowingly raise the hairs on someone's back.

I encourage people to set a standard. In my viewpoint, for example, Muslimwoman has set a standard here at CR in her dialogue with Niranjan. It did not require rules or banning anyone. But it did require hearing, patience, forgiveness, honesty, and not condemning (banning) the person. She knew he had hatred of Islam. I feel bad encouraging her in PM to let up.

I was thinking of methods of dialogue that I have used with my children. I often ask, "Do you like it when XYZ does ABC to you?" No. "Then why are you doing ABC to XYZ?" I have used that so many times that I instinctively see where people break it. From there the discussion might be whether ABC given is the same as ABC received... and I could be wrong. If I used that with people here though, I bet that I would find many breaking the golden rule. What is claimed to be uncivil in others is often within your own language.

That prophet of a religion I follow is also noted as stating that Law is a matter of Faith, Mercy, and Judgment. But like many forums, here I find that Faith is not placed into any community to help define what standards like this word 'civility' mean that is placed into a CoC, I see very little Mercy for someone being condemned for allegedly being uncivil with no rebuke or chance to ask forgiveness, and rebuking is not only condemned but there is a desire to ban in secret so that people like me can't judge and can not lay down words either for or against it. 0_for_3 in my book, which I see all over the world. This is very common, but it is rule by the chip on the shoulder... cross me and I'll ban you. That is what the CoC is. Personally, if someone comes at me in person railing against me, my religion, or my country... shame on me if I ban them from my presence. Shame on me for not having the patience, honesty, and forgiveness. Shame on me for placing value on words over people.

But, this is not my website and I am done with the subject, so I will kindly step off the soap box and would prefer to not mention it again. I had an agenda to try to show something between judging with words versus condemning, and I'm done with it.

[cyberpi]

In an attempt to try to counter the negative for those who might react to what I see and rebuke, l should also say that this is in my opinion a well intentioned website with many well intentioned people and that equally reflects on the owner and the people who contribute. I simply do not see that good dialogue is a result of rules of dialogue and for banning the 3 individuals that I have witnessed in the time that I was here. That to me has been a real loss. I suggest that a dialogue about dialogue would have been appropriate with those who were deemed to be deficient, but my hats off to the many of those here who do dialogue and share interesting viewpoints with people of different or opposing viewpoints.

[Tao_Equus]

Cyberpi,

I can see that you neither seek nor require any ally to support your views but you do find one here in me. Personally i find the banning I have seen to be unwarranted and ill judged for just the same reasons as you stated. That said I also respect the genuine effort of even-handedness of both the thread host and moderators. I can see both your argument and theirs to be equally valid. For my part, if this was up to me, I would give merit not so much to what someone posted but to their intent and their willingness to engage in fluid debate. I notice that some C&P'rs seem to be tolerated even though they rarely respond to questions that are posed to them in response. This to me is much more worthy of banning than ill considered yet passionate genuine debate.
I am, when all is said and done, glad that it is not me that makes these decisions. And I respect what i believe to be the genuine effort of even handedness I see here.


TE

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Cyberpi.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I was surprised that juantoo3 was impressing upon Niranjan, because here it was considered tinkling brass, sounding cymbols, and wasted energy when I rebuked Quahom1 for a prejudiced generalization...

While I can appreciate what you have been trying to put forth in this matter (disregarding for the moment that you still seem to fail to understand the practical necessities presented to you by a litany of others besides myself), I do feel that taking what I said out of context (again) to make or further your point is unworthy of your abilities. I said what I said at that time in that context to mean there was an argument (very off topic) that I had no desire to enter. My answer was specifically to the OP, and it was addressed to Prober, not you, not having anything to do with whatever you were arguing with any others. To imply something else is incorrect. There was no motive behind what I said, and it is only by chance that my post fell behind yours.

But In Time Everything will Measure Equivocally, and Praise Unto The Zadokkim!

Originally Posted by cyberpi

In an attempt to try to counter the negative for those who might react to what I see and rebuke, l should also say that this is in my opinion a well intentioned website with many well intentioned people and that equally reflects on the owner and the people who contribute. I simply do not see that good dialogue is a result of rules of dialogue and for banning the 3 individuals that I have witnessed in the time that I was here. That to me has been a real loss. I suggest that a dialogue about dialogue would have been appropriate with those who were deemed to be deficient, but my hats off to the many of those here who do dialogue and share interesting viewpoints with people of different or opposing viewpoints.

Whether or not you include me in this, thank you for your support.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

What I am speaking out against is something that is far beyond anyone here and this website. It is the status quo not just across internet forums but in countries edging ever closer to a police state with a polarized government and public.

I think this is a very valid concern, but it's worth remembering that the internet itself is so huge and empowering that just because someone is unable to participate in one website, does not mean they can't be involved in others. If a state applies restrictions, people don't have the same equivalent freedom to move, but that doesn't apply to internet for most of us.

Civility, I think is an essential requirement of interfaith dialogue. Because of the nature of the subject matter, things are always going to get rocky sometimes, or people will post in the heat of the moment and regret it, and that's always going to be taken into account. There needs to be a general acceptance I think that making one or two mistakes doesn't a bad person make.

However, I absolutely draw the line at people who want to turn CR into their own personal marketing channel. It serves the interests of a minority, and the internet allows these people to set up their own marketing in their own space, under their own rules.

A community such as at CR is a social gathering, with all the varying dynamics. But as with all social situations, there is a line of acceptance in terms of what should be tolerable for the overall group, and what should not be allowable.

If I'm in a pub or restaurant, and someone starts shouting at the clients and won't calm down and generally acts disruptive, I expect that they will be ejected from the premises - else I'll be the one to leave and not return. If the behaviour is tolerated, how many people will care to visit such a place? Who will be motivated most to visit it if aggressive behaviour is openly accpeted?

I apply a similar thinking to CR - most people don't need moderater attention because they can already accept basic norms of social behaviour. If not, I will usually try and work it out with them, but there comes a point when it needs stating that enough is enough.

It's never an easy call to make, but to be honest, the only reason such objections to these decisions is made is because - despite seeing people as trouble-makers from the start - I gave them tolerance enough to try and adapt to the basic acceptable norms that CR runs on. As a forum admin, I should remove trouble-makers the moment they appear, but it's precisely because I am trying to be so tolerant in what is allowed that such situations develop long enough that the resulting decisions come under scrunity.

A point about Bobby's writing column - I knew him from other sites a long time ago, and thought that a series of writing columns on CR offering different faith positions would be interesting to run. He writes from a moderate Christian perspective I find interesting, and think stories such as Big Buddy have a wide appeal.

I have tried to get others to write for this - you may remember pseudonymous who also turned up and began writing prolifically, and was provided a column as a channel for that - but he disappeared almost as quickly and there seemed little point in having an empty column on the site, so his threads were moved out into the general forums. He had a unique non-committal approach to spirituality and went through his own prophetic experiences, but he didn't come to CR to force them on us as a marketing practice. He simply wanted to share some of the extreme experiences he had felt in his life.

Others have suggested writing columns, but nothing's come of it, and I'm tempted to start one myself - I try to run CR from a neutral position, and it's rare that I push any of my own opinions here. I will sometimes try to add to a discussion to move it one way or another, especially where I beleive a discussion is lacking balance. Maybe that's why a column seems a good idea - the ability to share my own views and experiences without impinging on the general neutrality of the site. Something I'd like to do, but maybe don't have the time to post regularly enough on at present.

On that note - there's a software upgrade coming to the forums over the summer that should allow people to have their own blog sections on the forums. It'll be interesting to see what happens with this, and whether it proves useful for people.

Another point on the issue of suitability for CR - sometimes people will have complaints raised against them simply for their different opinions and how they express them. I remember some time ago people raised complaints about you, cyberpi, especially regarding your activity on the Islam board. I made the judgement call that you were a constructive member and no action was required.

I'll admit - I don't like the decisions I make being called into question or scrutiny, and on a personal level it I don't like it. But as a forum admin, I figure it's my responsility to allow such questions to be raised, and to be accountable for them. Ultimately, CR is only as strong as the community it develops. My priority therefore has to be to try and look after the majority interest community as I see it, to allow it to continue to grow and stregthen.

2c.

[Faithfulservant]

I love blogs! yay!!

Cyberpi you are deep and I respect and appreciate you I love you and I long for you to join the Kingdom of God. We will see I too have this thing, though that I cannot tolerate what I deem unjust . I get myself into trouble because I refuse to let up until a wrong has been righted or that someone sees the wrongness of an act. I believe its a gift from G-d because G-d is Just and Right and one day I will be judging for His names sake so I think its an early lesson in mercy and understanding. I am learning how to lose a battle win a soul to Christ. G-d has the ultimate control and His will be done.

Silas and I are guilty of the exact same thing. He is just not as subtle as I am. I AM here to bring people to Jesus Christ..probably not a surprise to most! I have been commanded to go throughout the world and spread the gospel by my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ... that is and should be the most important thing in my life. I had long discourses with Silas about how to evangelize on this forum and he did good for awhile but then he would get emotional and more direct which is a symptom of spiritual immaturity..A wise man guards his tongue. But goodness he is so much better than when he first showed up here.. Im sure Brian knows that hes been here under many names. If you look back at all the names hes posted on you would see just how much hes grown. I anticipate great things as he is refined by the Spirit of G-d.

Its interesting because in all the years Ive been posting here I thought that I was doing wrong because I was entertaining apostacy..that was my own immaturity. Recently I received a word from the Lord through someone that rang true in my soul.. this is my ministry and the word was for battle with the enemy which has already seen victory. This realization also made something that I thought was a put-down become a truth and with it an acceptance that G-d will use His people wherever they are..including posting on forums on the internet

I am an ambassador for the Kingdom of G-d. Apply within.

Praise Him for He is worthy to receive all Glory Honor and Power for He created ALL things and by His will they exist and were created.

[Tao_Equus]

Faithfulservant,

With respect, I find much of your post above to be the product of warped ego that your particular faith fosters.
For example:

I believe its a gift from G-d because G-d is Just and Right and one day I will be judging for His names sake so I think its an early lesson in mercy and understanding.

Just where do you get off on this? You presume to think you will by your actions now be a part of judgement in the future? Have you any idea how megalomaniac that statement is? I dont give a flying monkey about whether you throw in the proviso's of " mercy and understanding" to try and make it sound to yourself that its good. It is not. By presuming this faculty of judgement in the future you live it here and now. If I could be offended by any of your delusions then this would make me livid. How arrogant. How presumptuous. How far into your own ego can you go?

I have been commanded to go throughout the world and spread the gospel by my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ...

Now that is simply not a fact. The actual fact is that you follow the narrow ideas of Russel and Barbour who themselves could not agree with each other for more than a few years. Every single end of time prediction made by them and their successors has patently failed to materialise. It is the commandment of the Cult you belong to to go out and evangelise not God or Jesus.

You have openly expressed here now that which we all knew anyway, that you are proselytising for the Watchtower. At least you have the decency to take the trouble to write with your own words rather than posting pastes and links. None the less I feel you arrogantly disregard the spirit of this forum in your admission and it is thus a statement that you have no respect for the views of others. You make me hope there will indeed one day be a 'judgement day'.

TE

[juantoo3]

Good Friend Tao!

Faithful is not JW, nor is she likely to overtly agree with the JW's mission. She is expressing her Southern Bible Belt Texas branch of Fundamentalist Christianity, if I am not mistaken of the Baptist variety. Faithful may very well hold devout beliefs, but cut and paste is not one of them. She is ready, willing and fully able to express herself as she sees fit.

While I may not agree with all she says, nevertheless I do respect her right to say what she believes. And for Cyberpi's benefit, I respect her right because she is civil in presenting her beliefs.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Faithful!

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

But goodness he (*Silas) is so much better than when he first showed up here.. Im sure Brian knows that hes been here under many names. If you look back at all the names hes posted on you would see just how much hes grown. I anticipate great things as he is refined by the Spirit of G-d.

If one goes back and looks (cyberpi?) they would see I have said to more than one person that it is not what one believes that gets them into trouble around here, it is how they present themselves. Did I not say Silas would be welcomed back if he would simply be civil in his approach? Of course, I am wondering if there is a bad precedent being set, starting with Taijasi / Andrew, of using multiple sock puppets? I will leave the final decision on that matter to Brian, but I'm reasonably certain this is not behavior we wish to encourage.

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

Its interesting because in all the years Ive been posting here I thought that I was doing wrong because I was entertaining apostacy..that was my own immaturity. Recently I received a word from the Lord through someone that rang true in my soul.. this is my ministry and the word was for battle with the enemy which has already seen victory. This realization also made something that I thought was a put-down become a truth and with it an acceptance that G-d will use His people wherever they are..including posting on forums on the internet

Lay it on her, Lord! Hallelujah!

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

I am an ambassador for the Kingdom of G-d.

As are many here, some of whom don't even realize.

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

Praise Him for He is worthy to receive all Glory Honor and Power for He created ALL things and by His will they exist and were created.

Amen, Christians and non-Christians alike!

[ardenz]

Faithfulservant,

Excuse me for not knowing the history of some of the previous posters, ie Silas, and maybe I am interpreting your post out of context:

I AM here to bring people to Jesus Christ..probably not a surprise to most! I have been commanded to go throughout the world and spread the gospel by my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ...

but who here are you addressing your mission to?

this is my ministry and the word was for battle with the enemy which has already seen victory

I am sorry if this is taken out of context, but does this refer to some previous post or poster, or some people who may be here now? I do wonder how a "battle with the enemy" can be related to an internet forum on comparative religions.

[Tao_Equus]

My sincere apologies Faithfulservant for thinking you a JW. However unless I am gravely misinterpreting that which I highlighted I stand by the cut of my post. I am ready to stand corrected in that eventuality.

TE

[Dor]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Faithfulservant,

The actual fact is that you follow the narrow ideas of Russel and Barbour who themselves could not agree with each other for more than a few years.

Sorry but I am rolling on the floor right now.
I would bet Mee would even laugh at this one.

[Faithfulservant]

Originally Posted by Tao_Equus

Faithfulservant,

With respect, I find much of your post above to be the product of warped ego that your particular faith fosters.
For example:
Just where do you get off on this? You presume to think you will by your actions now be a part of judgement in the future? Have you any idea how megalomaniac that statement is? I dont give a flying monkey about whether you throw in the proviso's of " mercy and understanding" to try and make it sound to yourself that its good. It is not. By presuming this faculty of judgement in the future you live it here and now. If I could be offended by any of your delusions then this would make me livid. How arrogant. How presumptuous. How far into your own ego can you go?

Now that is simply not a fact. The actual fact is that you follow the narrow ideas of Russel and Barbour who themselves could not agree with each other for more than a few years. Every single end of time prediction made by them and their successors has patently failed to materialise. It is the commandment of the Cult you belong to to go out and evangelise not God or Jesus.

You have openly expressed here now that which we all knew anyway, that you are proselytising for the Watchtower. At least you have the decency to take the trouble to write with your own words rather than posting pastes and links. None the less I feel you arrogantly disregard the spirit of this forum in your admission and it is thus a statement that you have no respect for the views of others. You make me hope there will indeed one day be a 'judgement day'.

TE

I do not actually hold myself to a denomination.. I am one person in the body of Christ. I am not JW.. I attend Calvary Chapel Fort Worth.

Trust me when I say that I am humbled at the mere thought that I would judge this world when I have been wrong so much of my life. It scares the hell out of me. I dont even CARE about that.. so being accused of having an ego is funny to me.

1Co 6:3 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

This is in the context of us not allowing the judgement of others to sway us from our carrying our cross.. which ironically is the issue right as we speak.. lol I will take that as a confirmation.


Acts 1:8 But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."

Mttw 4:9 Then He said to them, "Follow Me, and I will make you fishers of men."

Mtthew 10:38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me.

I am not going to lie and decieve you as to why I post here.. I live this life preparing for the eternity that waits after and I want everyone I meet to be with me when I go.. This is my life.. telling you about how much God loves you that He would send His only Son here to pay the price for your sins so that you could partake in His mercy and be with Him forever. Yeah thats the good news!

Or would you actually rather I lie to you? I dont lie very well. Seriously.

[Faithfulservant]

Originally Posted by ardenz

Faithfulservant,

Excuse me for not knowing the history of some of the previous posters, ie Silas, and maybe I am interpreting your post out of context:
but who here are you addressing your mission to?
I am sorry if this is taken out of context, but does this refer to some previous post or poster, or some people who may be here now? I do wonder how a "battle with the enemy" can be related to an internet forum on comparative religions.

Whoever would hear the gospel is who I would "address" this mission to.

This is spiritual warfare even though we walk in the flesh we do not war according to the flesh. A mistake for me has been to triviallize the importance of this comparative religion forum I wont do it again. My enemy is here and he seeks to stop what good I try to do here by trying to trip me up using scripture against me... he throws snares in my path by using my emotions against me... may seem odd to an unbeliever but someone who believes would bear witness to this.