+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 101 to 138 of 138

Thread: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

  1. #101
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen Troxler View Post
    I I don't think we as humans are ever in a place to say that someone else is most definitely not a Christian. Even when someone is engaging in behaviors that we believe or know to be unChristian, we still do not know how God is working in that individual's life.
    I was planning to just bite my tongue and let everything just quietly go away, but....changed my mind. I'm not going to debate in any sort of way that gets this thread shut down. But just as you say that "Judgments made against others is one of the things that pushes my buttons", I say that the idea that people can do anything they want and still claim to be a follower of Christ pushes my buttons. It spits on the cross. Bring the accusation of proof texting, but Jesus' own words - "Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions. “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

    So lets use a name so no one can be accused of gossip or bullying.....Jim Jones claimed to be a Christian. So, was he? Or was he a person whose fruit we can identify, whose actions we saw, and one we can say that by those two things he would fit into the catagory of "“Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven." To say that he could have still possibly been a Christian would be ...??? What about the KKK? So many here want to discuss racial injustice (rightfully so). Many KKK members claim to be Christian and even use it as a defense for their actions. What would you say? Are they Christian? Do we have no right to judge their fruit or action simply because of a claim they make? Hmmm..here is one for you...What about the leadership and people of the Westboro Baptist Church? After all, they are all Christian right? Do we really not judge, or do we just not judge when it is close to home? If you can sincerely say that Jim Jones, members of the KKK, and leaders of Westboro Baptist church are still Christian even in the midst of their public "fruit" and actions, then all I can say is....well, nothing.
    Thanks Jim Chabot - "thanks" for this post

  2. #102
    Senior Member Tim Troxler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    The moment
    Posts
    875
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    I was planning to just bite my tongue and let everything just quietly go away, but....changed my mind. I'm not going to debate in any sort of way that gets this thread shut down. But just as you say that "Judgments made against others is one of the things that pushes my buttons", I say that the idea that people can do anything they want and still claim to be a follower of Christ pushes my buttons. It spits on the cross. Bring the accusation of proof texting, but Jesus' own words - "Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions. “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

    So lets use a name so no one can be accused of gossip or bullying.....Jim Jones claimed to be a Christian. So, was he? Or was he a person whose fruit we can identify, whose actions we saw, and one we can say that by those two things he would fit into the catagory of "“Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven." To say that he could have still possibly been a Christian would be ...??? What about the KKK? So many here want to discuss racial injustice (rightfully so). Many KKK members claim to be Christian and even use it as a defense for their actions. What would you say? Are they Christian? Do we have no right to judge their fruit or action simply because of a claim they make? Hmmm..here is one for you...What about the leadership and people of the Westboro Baptist Church? After all, they are all Christian right? Do we really not judge, or do we just not judge when it is close to home? If you can sincerely say that Jim Jones, members of the KKK, and leaders of Westboro Baptist church are still Christian even in the midst of their public "fruit" and actions, then all I can say is....well, nothing.
    I would ask what's the value in judging? Judging alone only declares your view is in opposition to theirs. It centers the conversation around alterity. Rather than defining Christianity through our own selves, judging reduces us to defining Christianity by not being like "them" or "him" or "her". It ironically moves the conversation away from objective truth, because judgements make the conversation quite personal in nature.

    In the cases you've described, the more valuable thing than saying "The KKK aren't like us" or "the WBC isn't Christian" is to stop with the rhetoric and act. The Christians who stand between the WBC protesters and their targets put their Christianity into practice. The Christians who help a black neighbor clean up racist graffiti put their Christianity into practice.

    What I've described puts judging in the context of right belief and right action. Right belief alone is legalism, as there's no heart to it.

    I invite you to reflect on the Mildred Bangs Wynkoop quote in my signature. If you don't know who she is, look her up. She's more Nazarene than most of us will ever be.
    "Neither holiness nor love is Christian without the other...Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination ends in nitpicking and divisiveness."

    This is a foundational quote for the Church of the Nazarene. All this to say, I find that a judgemental spirit does not match our core beliefs.
    "Neither holiness nor love is Christian without the other...Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination ends in nitpicking and divisiveness." - MBW

  3. #103
    Senior Member Karen Troxler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Duxbury, MA
    Posts
    378
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    I was planning to just bite my tongue and let everything just quietly go away, but....changed my mind. I'm not going to debate in any sort of way that gets this thread shut down. But just as you say that "Judgments made against others is one of the things that pushes my buttons", I say that the idea that people can do anything they want and still claim to be a follower of Christ pushes my buttons. It spits on the cross. Bring the accusation of proof texting, but Jesus' own words - "Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions. “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

    So lets use a name so no one can be accused of gossip or bullying.....Jim Jones claimed to be a Christian. So, was he? Or was he a person whose fruit we can identify, whose actions we saw, and one we can say that by those two things he would fit into the catagory of "“Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven." To say that he could have still possibly been a Christian would be ...??? What about the KKK? So many here want to discuss racial injustice (rightfully so). Many KKK members claim to be Christian and even use it as a defense for their actions. What would you say? Are they Christian? Do we have no right to judge their fruit or action simply because of a claim they make? Hmmm..here is one for you...What about the leadership and people of the Westboro Baptist Church? After all, they are all Christian right? Do we really not judge, or do we just not judge when it is close to home? If you can sincerely say that Jim Jones, members of the KKK, and leaders of Westboro Baptist church are still Christian even in the midst of their public "fruit" and actions, then all I can say is....well, nothing.
    No, I definitely wouldn't say that the examples you gave are Christians; and in fact, along with you would say they are anything but Christian. In that sense, I suppose you could say that I am inconsistent. I admit that I struggle with what the difference is. (As an aside, I think it is okay and even good to struggle with some issues. By doing so, at least we are open. IMO, when we stop questioning and stop struggling with anything at all and say everything is settled in our mind, we're in trouble.)

    Here's another example . . . you and I. We obviously disagree with one another on the matter of judging others. However, I would never think or say that you are not a Christian just because you think differently than I do; and I don't think that you would make that claim against me. I can see your heart that you love the Lord. In fact, it's your love for him that makes you want to defend him and the Cross. It's my love for him that makes me not want to condemn people who I believe that he loves. I put Jim Jones, Westboro Baptist people, and the KKK in a completely different category than I do you or even the other individual mentioned in the now deleted thread.

    Just so we're clear . . . I harbor no bad feelings towards you, and I appreciate your openness to discuss things. Disagreeing with one another doesn't mean that we aren't members of the same family/team.

    Edited to add: As usual, Tim said it so much better than I did!

  4. #104
    Senior Member Jim Chabot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Norton, MA Connor, ME
    Posts
    12,192
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    I was planning to just bite my tongue and let everything just quietly go away, but....changed my mind. I'm not going to debate in any sort of way that gets this thread shut down. But just as you say that "Judgments made against others is one of the things that pushes my buttons", I say that the idea that people can do anything they want and still claim to be a follower of Christ pushes my buttons. It spits on the cross. Bring the accusation of proof texting, but Jesus' own words - "Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions. “Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

    So lets use a name so no one can be accused of gossip or bullying.....Jim Jones claimed to be a Christian. So, was he? Or was he a person whose fruit we can identify, whose actions we saw, and one we can say that by those two things he would fit into the catagory of "“Not everyone who calls out to me, ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven." To say that he could have still possibly been a Christian would be ...??? What about the KKK? So many here want to discuss racial injustice (rightfully so). Many KKK members claim to be Christian and even use it as a defense for their actions. What would you say? Are they Christian? Do we have no right to judge their fruit or action simply because of a claim they make? Hmmm..here is one for you...What about the leadership and people of the Westboro Baptist Church? After all, they are all Christian right? Do we really not judge, or do we just not judge when it is close to home? If you can sincerely say that Jim Jones, members of the KKK, and leaders of Westboro Baptist church are still Christian even in the midst of their public "fruit" and actions, then all I can say is....well, nothing.
    I agree with you Jim, those who say that we shouldn't judge those who claim to be Christian are guilty of some bad or shallow theology on the nature of sin. Beyond that they are disobedient to the requirement that we judge. Paul was quite clear when he said that those who take pride in their openness and non judgmental attitude toward sin should be ashamed. I do think that we need to be careful however. Paul gives six sin categories by which we must judge and expel or disown as necessary. While I do believe that we must be obedient in judging those who claim the name of Christ and also live a life whereby one of these sins is exhibited, I'm also of the opinion that we must not judge those who's sin is outside of the listed parameters.

    I believe that we have reflected this in our Covenant of Christian Character. This covenant says that a Christian will be in conformance with it, those not in conformance do not exhibit evidence of their salvation and should be considered as an unbeliever. While I'm in agreement with the methodology behind our Covenant, which coupled with the Agreed Statement insures that our members are believers, I'm somewhat concerned that we have listed sinful acts that are rightfully outside of the list contemplated by Scripture. Even with that said, it can be said that to be a Nazarene is to judge according to the Agreed Statement and the Covenant of Christian Character.
    -Jim

    To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.

    Garrison Keillor
    Thanks Jim Bentley, Kevin Wright - "thanks" for this post

  5. #105
    Senior Member Lucas Finch's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Victor, MT
    Posts
    4,436
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Chabot View Post
    I agree with you Jim, those who say that we shouldn't judge those who claim to be Christian are guilty of some bad or shallow theology on the nature of sin.
    My issue would be that there is so much more context involved than simply what a person thinks he or she knows about another person. In my not-so-humble opinion, Jim B. failed to take context into consideration, even to the point of quoting a person entirely out of context (in my not-so-humble opinion.)

    But . . . as I write that, and trying to be consistent, I, too, need to remember that not everybody naturally sees context. It is one of my Top 5 Strengths. I live and breathe context. The context of other people likely makes it not as easy and natural to see context as it does for me.
    StrengthsFinder Top 5: Input ---------- Intellection ---------- Connectedness ---------- Context ---------- Belief

    Myers-Briggs Type: Introversion ---------- Intuition ---------- Feeling ---------- Perception (INFP)

    My Website & Blog: alucasfinch.net
    Thanks Jim Bentley, Tim Troxler, Jim Chabot, Gina Stevenson - "thanks" for this post

  6. #106
    Senior Member Lucas Finch's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Victor, MT
    Posts
    4,436
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Emiko Cothran View Post
    Not really. Blame goes all around! It kinda went like this:

    A Conservative: So and so is a poo poo face!

    A Liberal: No, You're the poo poo face!

    Moderator: This thread's the poo poo face!

    Lucas: The death of DOTCOM is the poo poo face! DOTCOM FOREVER!!! RESIST!!!

    P.s. sorry for gratuitive use of the word "poo poo face". ^_~
    Back to this, for several days I've been tempted to change my avatar to this:



    For those who don't speak geek, this is Hugh the Borg from Star Trek: The Next Generation. The Borg are one of the most deadly opponents that the heroes of the Enterprise and Voyager have come up against. Their catchphrase is "Resistance is futile." Hugh was an injured Borg that our heroes found, and they were able to convince him that "Resistance is NOT futile."
    StrengthsFinder Top 5: Input ---------- Intellection ---------- Connectedness ---------- Context ---------- Belief

    Myers-Briggs Type: Introversion ---------- Intuition ---------- Feeling ---------- Perception (INFP)

    My Website & Blog: alucasfinch.net
    Thanks Emiko Cothran, Susan Unger - "thanks" for this post

  7. #107
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen Troxler View Post
    No, I definitely wouldn't say that the examples you gave are Christians; and in fact, along with you would say they are anything but Christian. In that sense, I suppose you could say that I am inconsistent. I admit that I struggle with what the difference is. (As an aside, I think it is okay and even good to struggle with some issues. By doing so, at least we are open. IMO, when we stop questioning and stop struggling with anything at all and say everything is settled in our mind, we're in trouble.)

    Here's another example . . . you and I. We obviously disagree with one another on the matter of judging others. However, I would never think or say that you are not a Christian just because you think differently than I do; and I don't think that you would make that claim against me. I can see your heart that you love the Lord. In fact, it's your love for him that makes you want to defend him and the Cross. It's my love for him that makes me not want to condemn people who I believe that he loves. I put Jim Jones, Westboro Baptist people, and the KKK in a completely different category than I do you or even the other individual mentioned in the now deleted thread.

    Just so we're clear . . . I harbor no bad feelings towards you, and I appreciate your openness to discuss things. Disagreeing with one another doesn't mean that we aren't members of the same family/team.

    Edited to add: As usual, Tim said it so much better than I did!
    Karen, thanks for the candid and transparent response. Of course I would never say that you are not Christian. Yes, we disagree on the judging part, but you have never said or implied anything remotely close to non-Christlike. I also agree that it is good to struggle with issues and be willing to hear from the Holy Spirit.

    As far as Tim's response, I say this (and not to ignore his comment, just to not duplicate my response)...His initial question was "I would ask what's the value in judging? " I suppose to answer this would be to say that it is the Evangelist in me. Not only am I called to be a Shepherd (Protector of the flock), the Evangelist in me, I believe, is to be a proclaimer of truth as I see it. Scripture does not say that we shouldn't judge those that call themselves followers of Christ. In fact, Paul says the opposite. He declares that we should not judge those OUTSIDE of the church, but for those inside we not only should, but must. I know that you know full well the story of Jim Jones. But for those who don't, he was actually a very good, charismatic, preacher. He had good things to say at first (at least the way I understand history). In those early days, when he started going off of the reservations, someone should have been not only vocal about his heresy, but in his face. Maybe they were and it didn't so any good. But I would hate to be a person who has blood on my hands that choose not to stand up to him because of the idea that we shouldn't judge.

    I know many placed a sticker on that other thread of "gossip". My only point was to say that certain actions and thoughts that had been made public are not Christlike. And in the same way as members of the KKK, Westboro, and Jim Jones, can and should be judged, so should those words and actions. To me, the value in judging as Tim has asked, is to be an apologist for the faith. Of course we should also live accordingly so that our life is an example to others of Christ. But it is also true that there is a false religion out there today that has found it's way into the church that says what we have been debating here - "If I say I am a Christian, who are you to say otherwise. I can do what ever I want, act however I want, believe that scripture has no authority, and all will be ok." (edit to add...and many on here say that this person should not be judged. And to be clear, I am talking in general, not about anyone specific). I know it's extreme, but how far is the bridge from this to 918 murder-suicides? At what point do you step in and judge and say - "You might call yourself a Christian, but your fruit and actions show something completely anti-Christ"

    Forgot to put - I also have no bad feelings toward you, or anyone else who differs in their thought. I say again what I said to Tim before, I thought the discussion was good until one or two comments at the end. Some won't agree, but in defense of "learning from one another", things will get tense. That's not bad. That's passion.
    Thanks Tim Troxler, Karen Troxler - "thanks" for this post

  8. #108
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Troxler View Post
    In the cases you've described, the more valuable thing than saying "The KKK aren't like us" or "the WBC isn't Christian" is to stop with the rhetoric and act. The Christians who stand between the WBC protesters and their targets put their Christianity into practice. The Christians who help a black neighbor clean up racist graffiti put their Christianity into practice.

    What I've described puts judging in the context of right belief and right action. Right belief alone is legalism, as there's no heart to it.

    I invite you to reflect on the Mildred Bangs Wynkoop quote in my signature. If you don't know who she is, look her up. She's more Nazarene than most of us will ever be.
    "Neither holiness nor love is Christian without the other...Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination ends in nitpicking and divisiveness."

    This is a foundational quote for the Church of the Nazarene. All this to say, I find that a judgemental spirit does not match our core beliefs.
    Tim, I answered the first question in my response to Karen. In the thought of yours that I highlighted, I would disagree (I guess since we can't start another thread, we can talk about it here). I can't speak for you, but I stand firm on absolute truth. There are things in scripture not up for discussion with me. Otherwise we really do end up in a world of what i view as relative morality. I think you believe in absolute truth as well. We just differ on where that line is drawn. If you say you don't, then I would ask if think it's ok for a 50 year old man to marry an 11 year old girl? What if society and law said it was ok? We have to draw a line somewhere. For me, the line is when people start speaking contrary to how I interpret scripture and what defines a Christian. Though I certainly don't agree with everything he says, and I will never write a book like "Counterfeit Revival", I still think that there are those like Hank Hanagraff that God calls to stand up for Him in the midst of this world that grows darker and darker as time goes. As the ever so prophetic words of Peter to Timothy:

    “You should know this, Timothy, that in the last days there will be very difficult times. For people will love only themselves and their money. They will be boastful and proud, scoffing at God, disobedient to their parents, and ungrateful. They will consider nothing sacred. They will be unloving and unforgiving; they will slander others and have no self-control. They will be cruel and hate what is good. They will betray their friends, be reckless, be puffed up with pride, and love pleasure rather than God. They will act religious, but they will reject the power that could make them godly. Stay away from people like that!……..These teachers oppose the truth …… They have depraved minds and a counterfeit faith.”
    Thanks Tim Troxler, Karen Troxler - "thanks" for this post

  9. #109
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucas Finch View Post
    In my not-so-humble opinion, Jim B. failed to take context into consideration, even to the point of quoting a person entirely out of context (in my not-so-humble opinion.)
    No, we just disagree on what that context was

  10. #110
    Senior Member Lucas Finch's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Victor, MT
    Posts
    4,436
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    No, we just disagree on what that context was
    And, of course, since we're not naming the person and risking me losing any more posts (#priorities) due to an eventual deletion, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
    StrengthsFinder Top 5: Input ---------- Intellection ---------- Connectedness ---------- Context ---------- Belief

    Myers-Briggs Type: Introversion ---------- Intuition ---------- Feeling ---------- Perception (INFP)

    My Website & Blog: alucasfinch.net
    Laughing Jim Bentley, Jim Chabot, Gina Stevenson - thanks for this funny post

  11. #111
    Senior Member Tim Troxler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    The moment
    Posts
    875
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    Tim, I answered the first question in my response to Karen. In the thought of yours that I highlighted, I would disagree (I guess since we can't start another thread, we can talk about it here). I can't speak for you, but I stand firm on absolute truth.
    Thanks for your responses. As before this is a good conversation and I appreciate that while disagreeing we can still converse.

    I believe in absolute truth. What I don't believe is that I faultlessly know absolute truth in its entirety. I've grown sensitive to the difference between absolute truth and cultural truths. A biblical example is circumcision. We can see throughout the new testament the early church wrestling with this issue. What was seen as an absolute truth by the Jewish Christians was not by the Gentile Christians, and we can see a clash in cultures.

    We see a similar issue today with Christians and divorce. In my readings of the scripture, I find what Jesus says about divorce and the way our church treats divorce to be at odds. I'm left wondering about the truth and culture of divorce.

    I also see differences in our response. You noted that much of your response is due to the evangelist in you. That makes a lot of sense to me. I'm certainly not an evangelist, but I can appreciate your response in light of that context.

    I would however disagree with what you said about a shepherd being protector of the flock. I suppose it's more accurate to say I partially agree. In my opinion you've offered an incomplete definition of the shepherd. Looking throughout the scriptures, I find the role of shepherd to also be rooted in the ancient hospitality culture. The commentary I had is currently packed away so forgive the lack of a citation. Looking at Psalm 23, we can see the dual role of the shepherd. The protector is seen very clearly in v4 (your rod and staff comfort me). Moving into v5-6, the Psalm shifts from the role of protector to role of host. The shepherd welcomes and provides a meal for the guest. While the qualities of protector and host may often be in tension in the average individual, I believe Jesus perfectly illustrated both. My comment, then, is that in protecting the flock, we do not forget to welcome the unexpected guest.
    "Neither holiness nor love is Christian without the other...Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination ends in nitpicking and divisiveness." - MBW

  12. #112
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Warr Acres, OK (OKC)
    Posts
    948
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Chabot View Post
    . . . those who say that we shouldn't judge those who claim to be Christian are guilty of some bad or shallow theology on the nature of sin. Beyond that they are disobedient to the requirement that we judge. . . . it can be said that to be a Nazarene is to judge according to the Agreed Statement and the Covenant of Christian Character.
    Matthew 7:1 "Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. 7:2 For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. 7:3 Why do you see the speck in your neighbor's eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? 7:4 Or how can you say to your neighbor, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' while the log is in your own eye? 7:5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor's eye.

    Grace and Peace,

    Dennis B.

  13. #113
    Host CE and Gen. Disc. forums David Parker's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Central California
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Getting back to who will/will not be on NN on FB....I invited my Dad and a few other family members that have never had any interest in the forums here. Dad has already made several posts. Not bad for 83!
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Though we cannot think alike, may we not love alike? May we not be of one heart, though we are not of one opinion? Without all doubt, we may." ~ John Wesley
    Thanks Jim Chabot, Gina Stevenson, Susan Unger - "thanks" for this post

  14. #114
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tim Troxler View Post
    Thanks for your responses. As before this is a good conversation and I appreciate that while disagreeing we can still converse.

    I believe in absolute truth. What I don't believe is that I faultlessly know absolute truth in its entirety. I've grown sensitive to the difference between absolute truth and cultural truths. A biblical example is circumcision. We can see throughout the new testament the early church wrestling with this issue. What was seen as an absolute truth by the Jewish Christians was not by the Gentile Christians, and we can see a clash in cultures.

    We see a similar issue today with Christians and divorce. In my readings of the scripture, I find what Jesus says about divorce and the way our church treats divorce to be at odds. I'm left wondering about the truth and culture of divorce.

    I also see differences in our response. You noted that much of your response is due to the evangelist in you. That makes a lot of sense to me. I'm certainly not an evangelist, but I can appreciate your response in light of that context.

    I would however disagree with what you said about a shepherd being protector of the flock. I suppose it's more accurate to say I partially agree. In my opinion you've offered an incomplete definition of the shepherd. Looking throughout the scriptures, I find the role of shepherd to also be rooted in the ancient hospitality culture. The commentary I had is currently packed away so forgive the lack of a citation. Looking at Psalm 23, we can see the dual role of the shepherd. The protector is seen very clearly in v4 (your rod and staff comfort me). Moving into v5-6, the Psalm shifts from the role of protector to role of host. The shepherd welcomes and provides a meal for the guest. While the qualities of protector and host may often be in tension in the average individual, I believe Jesus perfectly illustrated both. My comment, then, is that in protecting the flock, we do not forget to welcome the unexpected guest.
    Good stuff Tim. My first response to - "We see a similar issue today with Christians and divorce. In my readings of the scripture, I find what Jesus says about divorce and the way our church treats divorce to be at odds. I'm left wondering about the truth and culture of divorce" - I agree they are at odds and I believe the church has been wrong for a long time. We have allowed and accepted divorce to the point that, as one person who came to my wife and I for counseling years back said - "God would not want me to be so unhappy. I believe he is more concerned over my happiness then he is over a divorce." To which I replied, there is no promise in scripture that God gives to say we will be happy. Divorce is wrong period (except, as Jesus said, in the case of adultery. And even then I do not believe it is His will). In an abuse situation, I never give council to divorce, only separate and get out of the abusive situation. We as the church have turned our back on absolute truth.

    And yes, we absolutely agree that the role of Shepherd is more complex. I should have been more clear but was just focusing on one part. As Shepherd, I have many more "duties" then just protection. Being a light in a dark world by loving the least of these. As people enter my arena of influence, loving them and inviting them in to have a meal "as a guest." To me, that role changes once they become part of the "family." At which time, those who claim to be part of the family as grafted in, must respect and adhere to the "family rules." When they don't, they should be made aware of it so they don't become "un-grafted" and removed from the family.

    Listen, I'm am not saying that this is as easy as I am probably making it sound. I just think that there is a place and time to call a wolf in sheep's clothing a wolf and that to do so is not gossip, or slander, or anything else. Example - two days ago, an print of an interview came out about Eugene Peterson (which by the way, there are already way too many questions about "The Message." So many call it a translation but it is only a paraphrase and should be treated as such). Anyway, Petersons words were clear that he is now on the affirmation side of the homosexual debate. One of his non disputable answers was - Q - Would you marry a same sex couple", A - "Yes." Pretty clear, right. Then yesterday he goes back and retracts and says he was confused by the questions and caught off guard. I cry - GARBAGE. Lifeway threatened to pull all of his material, so he backed out of what went on record as his true feelings (which were much more detailed than that one question by the way). Is it gossip to judge his words? Is it "judgemental" to question his own words. Or should shouts of warning go out? When the movie "The Shack" came out, I had no issue with speaking on it from the pulpit as a warning to my flock. I let them know that it was their choice to watch the movie and that most likely I would as well. But they should also know that the author of the book which the movie is based on is NOT a Christian. He is a Universalist, which is NOT Christian (edit to add - I can not in good conscience say "my opinion" because I believe it is the opinion of scripture). Those were not words of gossip, but they were words of judgement based on his public confession to that very fact while at the same time still saying he is christian. Absolute truth says there is only way name by which we can be saved, and that is the name of Jesus. Absolute truth says that my God and the god of the Muslim are NOT the same god. Otherwise one would not contradict the other. Only one can be right. I choose Yahweh!
    Thanks Jim Chabot, Kevin Wright, Tim Troxler, Karen Troxler - "thanks" for this post

  15. #115
    Senior Member Lucas Finch's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Victor, MT
    Posts
    4,436
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    the author of the book which the movie is based on is NOT a Christian. He is a Universalist, which is NOT Christian.
    StrengthsFinder Top 5: Input ---------- Intellection ---------- Connectedness ---------- Context ---------- Belief

    Myers-Briggs Type: Introversion ---------- Intuition ---------- Feeling ---------- Perception (INFP)

    My Website & Blog: alucasfinch.net
    Laughing Brandon Brown, Tim Troxler, Gina Stevenson, Susan Unger - thanks for this funny post

  16. #116
    Senior Member Brandon Brown's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Hendersonville, TN
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucas Finch View Post
    There’s the koala!
    Laughing Lucas Finch, Gina Stevenson - thanks for this funny post

  17. #117
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    South Texas
    Posts
    424
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Brandon Brown View Post
    There’s the koala!
    He is very cute, isn't he!!
    Thanks Susan Unger - "thanks" for this post

  18. #118
    Senior Member Emiko Cothran's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Roseburg, OR
    Posts
    1,051
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucas Finch View Post
    Back to this, for several days I've been tempted to change my avatar to this:



    For those who don't speak geek, this is Hugh the Borg from Star Trek: The Next Generation. The Borg are one of the most deadly opponents that the heroes of the Enterprise and Voyager have come up against. Their catchphrase is "Resistance is futile." Hugh was an injured Borg that our heroes found, and they were able to convince him that "Resistance is NOT futile."
    I remember Hugh! Beverly called him "you" a concept he did not understand, which is where he got the name "Hugh".

    As long as we are marching and chanting with our fists in the air, protesting the death of things we once loved:
    TNG FOREVER!!!
    Thanks Lucas Finch - "thanks" for this post
    Laughing Susan Unger - thanks for this funny post

  19. #119
    Senior Member Eric Frey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,635
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Been on the new FB groups already. Seen several long time participants drop out already. Seen admins policing responses already. Probably will follow my friends out. God knows I have plenty of facebook groups already. Thank you all for many, many years worth of deep, provocative, and growth-stimulating conversations. Peace.
    “Martyrs rather than the pastors of megachurches might now become our evangelistic exemplars, and the ‘excellence’ of evangelistic practice’ will be measurable not by numbers but rather by obedience to a crucified God”

    - Bryan Stone Evangelism After Christendom

  20. #120
    Senior Member Marsha Lynn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Odon, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    5,582
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Frey View Post
    Been on the new FB groups already. Seen several long time participants drop out already. Seen admins policing responses already. Probably will follow my friends out. God knows I have plenty of facebook groups already. Thank you all for many, many years worth of deep, provocative, and growth-stimulating conversations. Peace.
    Hope to see you around, Eric.
    Only the power of the Holy Spirit can get truth past the obvious.
    Thanks Eric Frey, Susan Unger - "thanks" for this post

  21. #121
    Senior Member Rich Schmidt's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Valparaiso, IN, USA
    Posts
    5,748
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    Listen, I'm am not saying that this is as easy as I am probably making it sound. I just think that there is a place and time to call a wolf in sheep's clothing a wolf and that to do so is not gossip, or slander, or anything else. Example - two days ago, an print of an interview came out about Eugene Peterson (which by the way, there are already way too many questions about "The Message." So many call it a translation but it is only a paraphrase and should be treated as such). Anyway, Petersons words were clear that he is now on the affirmation side of the homosexual debate. One of his non disputable answers was - Q - Would you marry a same sex couple", A - "Yes." Pretty clear, right. Then yesterday he goes back and retracts and says he was confused by the questions and caught off guard. I cry - GARBAGE. Lifeway threatened to pull all of his material, so he backed out of what went on record as his true feelings (which were much more detailed than that one question by the way). Is it gossip to judge his words? Is it "judgemental" to question his own words. Or should shouts of warning go out?
    I guess you can believe he's lying if you want to... and it sounds like you're not shy about telling others he's lying. Personally, I try to give my brothers and sisters in Christ the benefit of the doubt, whenever possible. I hope you recognize that you've moved beyond simply judging his words and have gone to judging his heart, deciding that you know what motivated his words... based on very little evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    When the movie "The Shack" came out, I had no issue with speaking on it from the pulpit as a warning to my flock. I let them know that it was their choice to watch the movie and that most likely I would as well. But they should also know that the author of the book which the movie is based on is NOT a Christian. He is a Universalist, which is NOT Christian (edit to add - I can not in good conscience say "my opinion" because I believe it is the opinion of scripture). Those were not words of gossip, but they were words of judgement based on his public confession to that very fact while at the same time still saying he is christian. Absolute truth says there is only way name by which we can be saved, and that is the name of Jesus. Absolute truth says that my God and the god of the Muslim are NOT the same god. Otherwise one would not contradict the other. Only one can be right. I choose Yahweh!
    I hope that one day you get the chance to become good friends with a Christian who then reveals to you that he or she interprets the Bible to say that all will eventually be saved (universalism). I hope you have many good (and perhaps heated) conversations with that friend. And I hope you come out the other side seeing how a person can be a Christian and also a universalist.

  22. #122
    Senior Member David Troxler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Duxbury, MA
    Posts
    1,405
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucas Finch View Post
    My issue would be that there is so much more context involved than simply what a person thinks he or she knows about another person. In my not-so-humble opinion, Jim B. failed to take context into consideration, even to the point of quoting a person entirely out of context (in my not-so-humble opinion.)

    But . . . as I write that, and trying to be consistent, I, too, need to remember that not everybody naturally sees context. It is one of my Top 5 Strengths. I live and breathe context. The context of other people likely makes it not as easy and natural to see context as it does for me.
    I knew I liked you...Top 5 Strengths of mine- Input, Context, Ideation, Learning and Intellection.
    Myers-Briggs- INTP

    You're oh so close to perfection Lucas!

    (And since I'm a Learner, I had to go look up what alerity meant. Thanks Tim.)
    Laughing Rich Schmidt, Lucas Finch - thanks for this funny post

  23. #123
    Senior Member Karen Troxler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Duxbury, MA
    Posts
    378
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jim Bentley View Post
    Karen, thanks for the candid and transparent response. Of course I would never say that you are not Christian. Yes, we disagree on the judging part, but you have never said or implied anything remotely close to non-Christlike. I also agree that it is good to struggle with issues and be willing to hear from the Holy Spirit.

    As far as Tim's response, I say this (and not to ignore his comment, just to not duplicate my response)...His initial question was "I would ask what's the value in judging? " I suppose to answer this would be to say that it is the Evangelist in me. Not only am I called to be a Shepherd (Protector of the flock), the Evangelist in me, I believe, is to be a proclaimer of truth as I see it. Scripture does not say that we shouldn't judge those that call themselves followers of Christ. In fact, Paul says the opposite. He declares that we should not judge those OUTSIDE of the church, but for those inside we not only should, but must. I know that you know full well the story of Jim Jones. But for those who don't, he was actually a very good, charismatic, preacher. He had good things to say at first (at least the way I understand history). In those early days, when he started going off of the reservations, someone should have been not only vocal about his heresy, but in his face. Maybe they were and it didn't so any good. But I would hate to be a person who has blood on my hands that choose not to stand up to him because of the idea that we shouldn't judge.

    I know many placed a sticker on that other thread of "gossip". My only point was to say that certain actions and thoughts that had been made public are not Christlike. And in the same way as members of the KKK, Westboro, and Jim Jones, can and should be judged, so should those words and actions. To me, the value in judging as Tim has asked, is to be an apologist for the faith. Of course we should also live accordingly so that our life is an example to others of Christ. But it is also true that there is a false religion out there today that has found it's way into the church that says what we have been debating here - "If I say I am a Christian, who are you to say otherwise. I can do what ever I want, act however I want, believe that scripture has no authority, and all will be ok." (edit to add...and many on here say that this person should not be judged. And to be clear, I am talking in general, not about anyone specific). I know it's extreme, but how far is the bridge from this to 918 murder-suicides? At what point do you step in and judge and say - "You might call yourself a Christian, but your fruit and actions show something completely anti-Christ"

    Forgot to put - I also have no bad feelings toward you, or anyone else who differs in their thought. I say again what I said to Tim before, I thought the discussion was good until one or two comments at the end. Some won't agree, but in defense of "learning from one another", things will get tense. That's not bad. That's passion.
    I too appreciate the ability to have good discussion with you. While we may disagree on some things, I know we are both passionate about our relationship with the Lord and the Faith! I appreciate your openness and the fact that you have not judged me or others simply because we don't see eye to eye on all the intricacies of how we live out our faith in obedience! Thank you, and I certainly hope to meet up again on other forums!
    Thanks Lucas Finch, Gina Stevenson, Susan Unger - "thanks" for this post

  24. #124
    Senior Member Lucas Finch's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Victor, MT
    Posts
    4,436
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Troxler View Post
    I knew I liked you...Top 5 Strengths of mine- Input, Context, Ideation, Learning and Intellection.
    Myers-Briggs- INTP

    You're oh so close to perfection Lucas!

    (And since I'm a Learner, I had to go look up what alerity meant. Thanks Tim.)
    So close on both! My F on Myers-Briggs is actually my closest to center. I think I'm 7 points on the F side.
    StrengthsFinder Top 5: Input ---------- Intellection ---------- Connectedness ---------- Context ---------- Belief

    Myers-Briggs Type: Introversion ---------- Intuition ---------- Feeling ---------- Perception (INFP)

    My Website & Blog: alucasfinch.net
    Thanks David Troxler - "thanks" for this post

  25. #125
    Senior Member Brandon Brown's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    Hendersonville, TN
    Posts
    234
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    I found a prayer in by BCP that I feel is appropriate for Lucas at this time. This is mostly serious because this does feel like a thing to grieve over. NN is already emptying out and the FB group is very different. I know I will miss many of you who are not going to FB.

    O merciful Father, who hast taught us in thy holy Word that thou dost not willingly afflict or grieve the children of men: Look with pity upon the sorrows of thy servant for whom our prayers are offered. Remember him, O Lord, in mercy, nourish his soul with patience, comfort him with a sense of thy goodness, lift up thy countenance upon him, and give him peace; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

  26. #126
    Senior Member Jim Chabot's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Norton, MA Connor, ME
    Posts
    12,192
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rich Schmidt View Post
    I hope that one day you get the chance to become good friends with a Christian who then reveals to you that he or she interprets the Bible to say that all will eventually be saved (universalism). I hope you have many good (and perhaps heated) conversations with that friend. And I hope you come out the other side seeing how a person can be a Christian and also a universalist.
    Unless Jim misspoke and meant to say Unitarian.
    -Jim

    To know and to serve God, of course, is why we're here, a clear truth, that, like the nose on your face, is near at hand and easily discernible but can make you dizzy if you try to focus on it hard. But a little faith will see you through.

    Garrison Keillor

  27. #127
    Senior Member Eric Frey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,635
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    You know, I probably won't be migrating, so take this for what its worth because I really hope the transition is smooth and you are able to find there what was taken from you here. I have been in several groups, both facebook and forums like this that have closed. I believe there is a commonality: over-moderation. In every single group I have been in that has closed, the closing was foreshadowed by the departure of key members due to over-moderation. I am not saying that is the only factor, but it certainly is a big factor and present in every group I have been in. They were very loosly moderated, grew, got large, and often a little unruly. In response moderators/admins started cracking down, trying to control and police the conversations, and people left. Don't make that mistake there.

    Case study: consider two facebook groups -- Missional Nazarenes and Nazarene Too. One became a police state. One became the wild west. The police state is gone. The wild west is thriving. Don't try to control and police conversations. It never, ever ends well.

    Good luck!
    “Martyrs rather than the pastors of megachurches might now become our evangelistic exemplars, and the ‘excellence’ of evangelistic practice’ will be measurable not by numbers but rather by obedience to a crucified God”

    - Bryan Stone Evangelism After Christendom

  28. #128
    Senior Member Tim Troxler's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Location
    The moment
    Posts
    875
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Frey View Post
    Case study: consider two facebook groups -- Missional Nazarenes and Nazarene Too.
    Not to be confused with MissionalNazarenes2.0
    "Neither holiness nor love is Christian without the other...Love without holiness disintegrates into sentimentality. Personal integrity is lost. But holiness without love is not holiness at all. In spite of its label, it displays harshness, judgmentalism, a critical spirit, and all its capacity for discrimination ends in nitpicking and divisiveness." - MBW
    Laughing Lucas Finch - thanks for this funny post

  29. #129
    Senior Member Susan Unger's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Penn's Woods :)
    Posts
    10,036
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Troxler View Post
    Dave Gerber has indicated he won't be joining the Facebook group. I appreciate him and his input, though he would describe his input here as mostly lurking.

    I have joined the naznet on FB groups but have difficulty adjusting to the format which tends to be a free for all without any cohesive way to follow a thread on any one topic. That frustrates me greatly.

    As it is with Naznet, I don't read every forum or posted thread, just topics that catch my interest. There doesn't seem to be a way to capture the theme for any facebook post that allows me to do that. So, I either need to read it all to find what does interest me, or ignore it altogether. I think I'm tending toward the latter.
    This is my issue with it. It is so confusing to read and follow.
    Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth. 1 John 3:18

    There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. 1 John 4:18a


    Become an organ donor ~ donatelife.net ~ www.organdonor.gov
    Thanks Lucas Finch, David Troxler - "thanks" for this post

  30. #130
    Host Fun & Prayer forums Gina Stevenson's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    W Michigan
    Posts
    12,245
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Susan Unger View Post
    This is my issue with it. It is so confusing to read and follow.

    Definitely confusing!! Still think it's sad that this was not admitted, rather it was just pushed as being basically "the same," only more people involved. It's not at all the same. Resigned to reading here & there to try to stay connected w/NN friends, yes. Happily expecting the confusion to go away so an entire thread may be actually completely read after there are more than a few posts? No . . . .

    Maybe I will save time, not wanting to waste time scouring threads each time a notification says there's a new post added to some already-long thread.
    Life beats down and crushes the soul and art reminds you that you have one. ~ Stella Adler
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    [COLOR=Indigo][FONT=Palatino Linotype]It takes a great deal of maturity to accept that trying to eliminate all risk eliminates life. ~ Susan Lapin ~
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

  31. #131
    Senior Member Monte Butts's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Arlington, TX
    Posts
    244
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    I know I was only a tangential member here....mostly lurking as I moved into an area with no Naz presence as a way to keep up with what was going on.....but I enjoyed the discussions here.

    As an UMC member and one who is really starting to limit my social media, I will not be moving to Facebook.

    Nice talking with all of you!
    Thanks Gina Stevenson, David Troxler, John Kennedy - "thanks" for this post

  32. #132
    Senior Member Marsha Lynn's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Odon, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    5,582
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Monte Butts View Post
    I know I was only a tangential member here....mostly lurking as I moved into an area with no Naz presence as a way to keep up with what was going on.....but I enjoyed the discussions here.

    As an UMC member and one who is really starting to limit my social media, I will not be moving to Facebook.

    Nice talking with all of you!
    Monte, you haven't posted enough for me to feel like I really know you, but enough to make me think it would be beneficial to know you better.

    Thanks for your participation.

    Marsha
    Only the power of the Holy Spirit can get truth past the obvious.
    Thanks Lucas Finch, Monte Butts, David Troxler, John Kennedy - "thanks" for this post

  33. #133
    Senior Member Emiko Cothran's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Roseburg, OR
    Posts
    1,051
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Re: gossip vs discernment

    I think the big difference here is:

    Gossip involves talking about a person behind their back, making judgements about a person you don't know well, assuming the heart and thoughts of a person not even present to correct the (potentially false) assumption.

    Proper Christian Discernment is talking about an -issue-. For example it's okay to debate if a homosexual can be a "true Christian" or not, or if pluralism is true or false or even "dangerous", or if eternal torment is biblical or not. Those are concepts and ideas being discussed, but not individual PEOPLE.

    It is also okay to discuss with a brother or sister TO THEIR FACE when you believe they have wondered off the reservation. Send them an email in private, or bring it up in small group together. Even in a forum like this with the other person actively engaged in the conversation would not be "gossip" because at least the other person can speak for themselves and is involved (tho it may not be the most Christian way to approach the situation.)

    So, I would say "Jessica is not a Christian because she believes Athiests will go to heaven" would be gossip but, "I refute the position that Athiests will go to heaven." Is not gossip, it is discernment.

  34. #134
    Senior Member Emiko Cothran's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Roseburg, OR
    Posts
    1,051
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Re: "obviously kkk and Jones town people are/were not Christian! This is why we need proper judgement".

    Again I would say to judge the IDEA not the PERSON.

    Example:

    "Jessica believes whites are superior to blacks."

    You don't know Jessica, I don't know Jessica. All we know is the statement above.

    CAN we know with absolute certainty that she is not a Christian?

    We CAN definitely say "elevating one race above another is evil, anti-christian, dangerous, and wrong!" Yes! Absolutely! That is 100% true.

    We can say "believing whites are superior to blacks is wrong. Goes against the teaching of the Bible. Is dangerous and hurts people. And we should never, ever do it."

    That is also true.

    But can we say "Jessica is not a Christian"?
    For certain?

    Can we say with absolute certainty "noone who ever owned slaves 200 years ago could have possibly been Christian"?

    I don't think so. Even tho the idea that one human could own another is very, very wrong, they could have been brainwashed by the culture... They could have fruit in many, many areas of their life, but in that one area they were gravely mistaken...

    Could we say "no one who supported segregation 60 years ago could have possibly been a Christian"?

    I don't want to make that assumption.

    We can talk with certainty about issues without being certain about the heart and soul of every individual who holds or ever held that belief.
    Thanks John Kennedy - "thanks" for this post

  35. #135
    Senior Member Susan Unger's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Penn's Woods :)
    Posts
    10,036
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Monte Butts View Post
    I know I was only a tangential member here....mostly lurking as I moved into an area with no Naz presence as a way to keep up with what was going on.....but I enjoyed the discussions here.

    As an UMC member and one who is really starting to limit my social media, I will not be moving to Facebook.

    Nice talking with all of you!
    The few times you did post, I enjoyed it. I'll miss your online presence.
    Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth. 1 John 3:18

    There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. 1 John 4:18a


    Become an organ donor ~ donatelife.net ~ www.organdonor.gov
    Thanks Monte Butts - "thanks" for this post

  36. #136
    Senior Member Susan Unger's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Penn's Woods :)
    Posts
    10,036
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    I'll miss all of you folks who aren't my FB friends. It is hard for me to say good-bye to friends.
    Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth. 1 John 3:18

    There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. 1 John 4:18a


    Become an organ donor ~ donatelife.net ~ www.organdonor.gov

  37. #137
    Senior Member Rich Schmidt's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Valparaiso, IN, USA
    Posts
    5,748
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Susan Unger View Post
    I'll miss all of you folks who aren't my FB friends. It is hard for me to say good-bye to friends.
    I'm not FB friends with most NazNetters, because I've never met most NazNetters face to face, and that's my rule for who I accept as FB friends. (Otherwise, it would be even more unmanageable than it already is!)

    But I interact with TONS of people I'm not FB friends with in FB groups. Including many NazNetters.

  38. #138
    Senior Member Mark Bolerjack's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Oklahoma City, OK
    Posts
    251
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Who will NOT be on Facebook?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Frey View Post
    You know, I probably won't be migrating, so take this for what its worth because I really hope the transition is smooth and you are able to find there what was taken from you here. I have been in several groups, both facebook and forums like this that have closed. I believe there is a commonality: over-moderation. In every single group I have been in that has closed, the closing was foreshadowed by the departure of key members due to over-moderation. I am not saying that is the only factor, but it certainly is a big factor and present in every group I have been in. They were very loosly moderated, grew, got large, and often a little unruly. In response moderators/admins started cracking down, trying to control and police the conversations, and people left. Don't make that mistake there.

    Case study: consider two facebook groups -- Missional Nazarenes and Nazarene Too. One became a police state. One became the wild west. The police state is gone. The wild west is thriving. Don't try to control and police conversations. It never, ever ends well.

    Good luck!
    This should be posted over there. Maybe anonymously.

    I am a part of the group, but don't go over there too often because my FB on my phone always takes me back to the top before I am ready. When on the PC, it doesn't do that, but i'm not on the pc as much as on my phone.
    Godspeed.

    Mark B








    www.mbb.helo.life

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts