New Religion forum rules - effective now.

[Kate Shaw]

I would like to discuss religion without fighting about it--but that does not seem possible anymore.

And I would like to discuss religion without the chorus of atheists jumping in to tell everybody in the discussion that we are stupid.

Unfortunately that does not seem possible either.

To me it seems akin to the poisonous, pointless, paranoid desire to obliterate Sarah Palin -- and it may be coming from the same place...but silencing people by shouting them down is never an effective technique.

A man convinced against his will/is of the same opinion still.

[backhoe]

I would like to discuss religion without fighting about it--but that does not seem possible anymore.

And I would like to discuss religion without the chorus of atheists jumping in to tell everybody in the discussion that we are stupid.

Unfortunately that does not seem possible either.

To me it seems akin to the poisonous, pointless, paranoid desire to obliterate Sarah Palin -- and it may be coming from the same place...but silencing people by shouting them down is never an effective technique.

A man convinced against his will/is of the same opinion still.

Indeed.

[D. Johnson]

And I would like to discuss religion without the chorus of atheists jumping in to tell everybody in the discussion that we are stupid.

Indeed.

[RedDog]

For many of us, religion "rules" went right out the window (or IN the window depending on your point of view) on 09-11-01.

[Kate Shaw]

Defining Islam as a Religion is the difficulty in that case.

[StephenBoissoin]

I have read through this and here are my two cents:

Know your topic or at least introduce a clear well thought out premise.

One of the problems that I see on here and have for years is that many Christians discuss that which that have never even researched beyond the parameters of their specific view point or denominational cloning. If a Christian wishes to discuss the broader topics then take some time to research the views/interpretations and greater implications that surround them. Be open to hearing different viewpoints and learning about them without feeling threatened or attacked. In fact, invite and welcome this from the get go.

If you find that you haven't researched the other viewpoints just openly admit it and bow out until you have or at least remain humble and inquisitive until you have and can respond intelligently and especially factually.

JB, you stated that "it always ends up talking about end times." In some cases, how one understands the eschatological concepts of the bible in relation of today will dictate how they understand and communicate their views about a variety of Christian themes. How one views 'end times' came have a major impact on their overall Christian world view.

Have a thread where atheists and agnostics or theists of other stripes can openly comment or rebut etc.

In the end, a moderator or original poster should respectfully guide all back to the original intent of the thread. If someone feels that their comments do pertain to the original theme and they are being accused of hi-jacking or going down a rabbit trail, simply admit it and apologize with a smile or explain how your comments relate.

Posters must also be open to learning more about their posted views and must be open to having their original intent critiqued. Embrace differing opinion as an opportunity instead of an attack. On occasion, I have learned much here via a few respectful and well researched posters.

[Connie Fournier]

For many of us, religion "rules" went right out the window (or IN the window depending on your point of view) on 09-11-01.

That doesn't mean you have to jump in to a religious discussion and deliberately insult people (not saying that's you did because I haven't read it all).

You wouldn't do that in real life, why not have the same kind of respect for people in an online setting?

[RedDog]

For many of us, religion "rules" went right out the window (or IN the window depending on your point of view) on 09-11-01.

That doesn't mean you have to jump in to a religious discussion and deliberately insult people (not saying that's you did because I haven't read it all).

You wouldn't do that in real life, why not have the same kind of respect for people in an online setting?

Very good point, and yes, I've crossed the line here a few times unfortunately.

[Kate Shaw]

I have mentioned before that I do not jump into discussions about curling (for example) to opine that curling is stupid, tedious, not a real sport and anybody who watches or plays it must be an idiot. And I have wondered why so many people feel constrained to jump into religious discussions with the same kind of opinions. Here I differ from Stephen in that I do not believe atheists and agnostics have anything to contribute to a debate on a doctrinal point, any more than I would have anything to contribute about curling to a curling thread save my dislike of it and my belief that it is not a sport.

[Freedom Onion]

I have mentioned before that I do not jump into discussions about curling (for example) to opine that curling is stupid, tedious, not a real sport and anybody who watches or plays it must be an idiot. And I have wondered why so many people feel constrained to jump into religious discussions with the same kind of opinions. Here I differ from Stephen in that I do not believe atheists and agnostics have anything to contribute to a debate on a doctrinal point, any more than I would have anything to contribute about curling to a curling thread save my dislike of it and my belief that it is not a sport.

The religious discussions of today (literally, not metaphorically) seem quite civil as I remarked on in one of them. I'm not saying you don't have a valid point, but it does seem that your voice is being heard about the situation. I'll wager if we collectively keep the word "abortion" out of religious threads we should be fine, that seems to be the hot button that brings out everyone's knives and axes.

[WestViking]

Members need not agree to remain civil and respectful toward one another.

[Hailey]

I have mentioned before that I do not jump into discussions about curling (for example) to opine that curling is stupid, tedious, not a real sport and anybody who watches or plays it must be an idiot. And I have wondered why so many people feel constrained to jump into religious discussions with the same kind of opinions. Here I differ from Stephen in that I do not believe atheists and agnostics have anything to contribute to a debate on a doctrinal point, any more than I would have anything to contribute about curling to a curling thread save my dislike of it and my belief that it is not a sport.

I am sorry that you are feeling that way Kate. Genuine I am.

You raise a good point though perhaps when people start threads on skiing or baseball people should post negative things about those sports ad nauseum and remind them about how their focus should be on the middle east or masturbating.

I think that Stephen as a protestant minister comes from a different angle though. He probably has more interest in seeing them convert. My sense is that you just want atheists and agnostics to leave you alone.

[Freedom Onion]

Members need not agree to remain civil and respectful toward one another.

Because it's in the forum rules and is moderated.

[Kate Shaw]

I have mentioned before that I do not jump into discussions about curling (for example) to opine that curling is stupid, tedious, not a real sport and anybody who watches or plays it must be an idiot. And I have wondered why so many people feel constrained to jump into religious discussions with the same kind of opinions. Here I differ from Stephen in that I do not believe atheists and agnostics have anything to contribute to a debate on a doctrinal point, any more than I would have anything to contribute about curling to a curling thread save my dislike of it and my belief that it is not a sport.

I am sorry that you are feeling that way Kate. Genuine I am.

You raise a good point though perhaps when people start threads on skiing or baseball people should post negative things about those sports ad nauseum and remind them about how their focus should be on the middle east or masturbating.

I think that Stephen as a protestant minister comes from a different angle though. He probably has more interest in seeing them convert. My sense is that you just want atheists and agnostics to leave you alone.

Only when we are discussing doctrinal points -- for example, in the current thread about whether Jesus was or was not celibate (a hypothetical question at best), the atheists and agnostics have already jumped aboard to argue that He isn't even real. If they would refrain from doing this, I would be content. Perhaps the atheists and agnostics also feel constrained in the movies to point out loudly that Superman can't really fly and Doctor Who is an actor?

[braveheart]

I would like to discuss religion without fighting about it--but that does not seem possible anymore.

And I would like to discuss religion without the chorus of atheists jumping in to tell everybody in the discussion that we are stupid.

Unfortunately that does not seem possible either.

To me it seems akin to the poisonous, pointless, paranoid desire to obliterate Sarah Palin -- and it may be coming from the same place...but silencing people by shouting them down is never an effective technique.

A man convinced against his will/is of the same opinion still.

When they want to shout you down they prove two things:

1 they have no legitinate argument
2. they are bullies.