Someone pointed out that a causal visitor to this site might come away with the impression that this is an atheist centric Christianity-bash-site. That is understandable given "Christianity and Apologetics" board is littered with topics such as "Is God a Bigot?" or "Could Jesus have been a deceiver?" This could build a negative feedback loop where fewer theists visitors would register, which means a higher ratio of topics challenging theism, which mean fewer theists and so on.
So here is my simple suggestion, we reorder how the boards appear on the front page, by moving "Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma" above "Christianity and Apologetics." I propose that with minimal effort and disruption, this site could be made more welcoming to theists and Christians visitors in particular since the first things they see would be the kind of discussions they are familiar with.
Thoughts?
Make this site more welcoming to Christians
Moderator: Moderators
- Tired of the Nonsense
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 5680
- Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:01 pm
- Location: USA
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Make this site more welcoming to Christians
Post #2[Replying to Bust Nak]
Changing the name of the "Holy Huddle Room" sub-forum to something like "Christians Talking To Christians," or "Christians Supporting Christians," something which was clear and obviously about Christianity and for Christians only, might help. As a last resort the "Christianity and Apologetics" sub-forum could be renamed something like "Believers Debating Non Believers." At least people would understand exactly what to expect going in. On the other hand, there are plenty of forums around which are designed exclusively to cater to Christians. A place like this one where believers have to man up a bit about what they think they believe isn't such a bad thing.
Changing the name of the "Holy Huddle Room" sub-forum to something like "Christians Talking To Christians," or "Christians Supporting Christians," something which was clear and obviously about Christianity and for Christians only, might help. As a last resort the "Christianity and Apologetics" sub-forum could be renamed something like "Believers Debating Non Believers." At least people would understand exactly what to expect going in. On the other hand, there are plenty of forums around which are designed exclusively to cater to Christians. A place like this one where believers have to man up a bit about what they think they believe isn't such a bad thing.
"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honorable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this." -- Albert Einstein -- Written in 1954 to Jewish philosopher Erik Gutkind.
- ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #3
In answer to one of my first posts a fellow wrote:
To me suggestions so far are surface bandaid fixes when what is needed is to make Christians welcome to a site that is not in fact very welcoming. The forum name might be welcoming but if the attitude is harsh inside they will just feel set-up.
But the debating format is an adversarial format - each debater is trying to win the debate or prove their position is more logical, reasonable or spiritual... Such conflict is inimical to many Christians even when the presenter is soft and friendly in their approach let alone when they are openly disdainful or hostile. As they say, "if you want to make a rabbit stew, first catch a rabbit." which means if you want to debate a Christian, then first entice a Christian to believe it will be a positive experience for him rather than a blood letting.
That debate is by definition adversarial which is why I do not debate which has has been complained of many times and why I like discussion which has the image of people talking and working together to find a common truth or even the best understanding of each other's truth.
I just about quit right there but I liked the topic so I kept reading and found he was chastised for his attitude:And yes, your idea of worshiping a Narcissistic Ego Maniac is glorifying! /sarcasm.. And why should we fullfill his plan? Can't he do that himself? Just pull the puppet strings and get the show over with already so everyone can go home and spend some actual time with the family. You know, the real family and not the imaginary one.
I decided the Mod Team were on the ball and the rules of acceptance, civility and politeness were supported so I found the ignore feature and moved on and he was soon banned.When addressing other users, make sure to be respectful and civil. This post of yours is the exact opposite.
I understand that you're trying to drive your point home, but you will have to do it without mocking other users and their beliefs. It is perfectly possible to make a strong point without resorting to sarcasm and incivility.
Moderator warnings count as a strike against users.
To me suggestions so far are surface bandaid fixes when what is needed is to make Christians welcome to a site that is not in fact very welcoming. The forum name might be welcoming but if the attitude is harsh inside they will just feel set-up.
But the debating format is an adversarial format - each debater is trying to win the debate or prove their position is more logical, reasonable or spiritual... Such conflict is inimical to many Christians even when the presenter is soft and friendly in their approach let alone when they are openly disdainful or hostile. As they say, "if you want to make a rabbit stew, first catch a rabbit." which means if you want to debate a Christian, then first entice a Christian to believe it will be a positive experience for him rather than a blood letting.
That debate is by definition adversarial which is why I do not debate which has has been complained of many times and why I like discussion which has the image of people talking and working together to find a common truth or even the best understanding of each other's truth.
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
- bluethread
- Savant
- Posts: 9129
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 1:10 pm
Post #4
I'm not sure whether an audio function could be added, but if music that is indistinguishable, apart from an occasional reference to "Jesus", from what is on the download top 40 were played, I think that would make may Christians feel more comfortable.
-
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25089
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 40 times
- Been thanked: 73 times
Post #5
.
I doubt that an open, “level playing field� debate can be made appealing to Religionists. Unless Theism is given some handicap or preferential treatment, attempting to defend supernaturalism in the age of information, knowledge, science, technology is very difficult. Evidence of supernatural entities and events is slim to none while faith and belief are meaningless in debate if (since) they cannot be substantiated with sound evidence.
The site does provide cloistered / protected sub-forums wherein Theists of various persuasions can talk among themselves without encountering opposition views. However, those sub-forums are much less populated than the more adversarial C&A. Why?
Why would Theists choose to “mix it up� (debate) with Non-Theists where they can be assured of encountering strong opposition? Rather than feel put upon, at a disadvantage (or whatever) would it not make more sense to stay in comfort zone with fellow believers in Holy Huddle or Theology, Doctrine and Dogma sub-forums? Is there some motivation to debate in C&A to “show those Atheists a thing or two� or “spread the word� (evangelize / proselytize)?
Many Theists seem unfamiliar with (or adverse to) debate – mistakenly thinking it is a place to preach and proselytize – to make claims that cannot be substantiated. Although church environment experience may make it seem as though all should agree to accept ancient literature, theistic opinions and testimonials as compelling evidence, those have no place in reasoned debate.
Those who do not fare well in debate seem prone to complain about being discriminated against or complain about opponents style of debate -- and often become emotional and/or resort to personal attacks in lieu of debating issues.
I doubt that an open, “level playing field� debate can be made appealing to Religionists. Unless Theism is given some handicap or preferential treatment, attempting to defend supernaturalism in the age of information, knowledge, science, technology is very difficult. Evidence of supernatural entities and events is slim to none while faith and belief are meaningless in debate if (since) they cannot be substantiated with sound evidence.
The site does provide cloistered / protected sub-forums wherein Theists of various persuasions can talk among themselves without encountering opposition views. However, those sub-forums are much less populated than the more adversarial C&A. Why?
Why would Theists choose to “mix it up� (debate) with Non-Theists where they can be assured of encountering strong opposition? Rather than feel put upon, at a disadvantage (or whatever) would it not make more sense to stay in comfort zone with fellow believers in Holy Huddle or Theology, Doctrine and Dogma sub-forums? Is there some motivation to debate in C&A to “show those Atheists a thing or two� or “spread the word� (evangelize / proselytize)?
Many Theists seem unfamiliar with (or adverse to) debate – mistakenly thinking it is a place to preach and proselytize – to make claims that cannot be substantiated. Although church environment experience may make it seem as though all should agree to accept ancient literature, theistic opinions and testimonials as compelling evidence, those have no place in reasoned debate.
Those who do not fare well in debate seem prone to complain about being discriminated against or complain about opponents style of debate -- and often become emotional and/or resort to personal attacks in lieu of debating issues.
.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
- ttruscott
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 11064
- Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 5:09 pm
- Location: West Coast of Canada
- Been thanked: 3 times
Post #6
<BIG sigh> I sort of hate all modern so called Christian music...and all pop music.bluethread wrote: I'm not sure whether an audio function could be added, but if music that is indistinguishable, apart from an occasional reference to "Jesus", from what is on the download top 40 were played, I think that would make may Christians feel more comfortable.
PCE Theology as I see it...
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.
We had an existence with a free will in Sheol before the creation of the physical universe. Here we chose to be able to become holy or to be eternally evil in YHWH's sight. Then the physical universe was created and all sinners were sent to earth.
This theology debunks the need to base Christianity upon the blasphemy of creating us in Adam's sin.