Some Difficulties

[Jagella]

I have lately encountered at least two issues in this forum I find to be problematical.

The first issue I have is with my being told that I cannot use an acronym that I call "TIMITS." In case you don't know, TIMITS stands for The Invisible Man In The Sky. I have explained in the apologetics subforum exactly why I use that acronym for any god people might believe in but especially the Bible god. I even cited Bible passages to demonstrate how each of the traits of TIMITS appear in the Bible. I think I should be permitted to use this term.

The second issue is my being told by a moderator that I need to post a question for debate in my OPs. But I did post a question for debate in that OP, and I copied and pasted it into another post to prove it. Moderators should have good reading comprehension.

Finally, that same moderator told me my OP "rambled." I strongly disagree that it rambled. I take pride in all of my posts, and I work hard to make them as clear, informative, logical and relevant as I can. That OP was no exception.

So I'm still hoping that this forum is different from the other forums I've dealt with. I've been in some real zoos in which the biggest trolls are the moderators. Moderators should fairly and intelligently deal with members allowing them to post their opinions on the subject matter.

[benchwarmer]

[Replying to post 1 by Jagella]

When you have an issue with a moderator, just send them a PM and explain your position and try to understand if there was just a misunderstanding. If that doesn't help, send one to otseng, the owner.

Complaining about moderators in the open will not help as it is against the rules. Moderators have a difficult job trying to maintain a civil environment and mistakes can and will happen. C'est la vie.

Just so you know you are not alone, I did in fact send a query about one of your issues to a moderator to clarify the problem. I think in this case it was because your question for debate was somewhat 'buried' in all the text. The question is usually at the end (style choice of course) so sometimes it's missed if not read carefully. Anyway, you clarified that particular issue, so the debate should continue for those interested, regardless of where the topic ends up.

Cheers!

[Wootah]

[Replying to post 1 by Jagella]

I'm not sure on the objection to TIMITS.

I read your post again. It certainly wasn't clear to me what you wanted to say. I think we may be butting heads again. The last time I offered some help as a forum member I think I got 'moderated on'. This time, I tried to suggest your post was hard to follow and now you feel aggrieved.

Anyway third time lucky. My gut feeling is that the forum expects civility and you want to play rough. Many forum members over time come to appreciate how soft we try to play. If I may summarise my recollections.

[otseng]

I agree it's best to just send a PM to try to resolve an issue, unless it's a common problem. But, we can discuss this here.

For the TIMITS issue, I don't recall there being a discussion among the moderators about the usage of that term. You can continue to use that term until an official announcement is made by me.

For the OP, yes, it should have a debate question otherwise it'll get moved to Random Ramblings. Can you post a link to the thread you are referring to?

All the moderators have good reading comprehension, but it's possible at times to overlook things. None of us are perfect.

The OP should ideally be short. It's repeated as the first post in every page of the thread, so it takes up space every time you go to the next page.

[Jagella]

For the TIMITS issue, I don't recall there being a discussion among the moderators about the usage of that term. You can continue to use that term until an official announcement is made by me.

Thanks! Marco is the moderator who forbid me to use that term allegedly because it is insulting. I really didn't mean for "TIMITS" to be insulting but more to be "revealing." In other words, I used it to get the Christians in the forum to really think about what they believe.

For the OP, yes, it should have a debate question otherwise it'll get moved to Random Ramblings. Can you post a link to the thread you are referring to?

The Roots of Biblical and Christian Violence

All the moderators have good reading comprehension, but it's possible at times to overlook things. None of us are perfect.

Well, the question for debate is three sentences in--in the second paragraph. How can it be missed? I should point out that I've had a heck of a time getting other members to stay on topic and answer the question for debate that I posted in my other OPs. Even after I repeatedly asked them to answer that question, they almost always refused. The moderators never did anything to remedy the situation. So I hope you can understand why I got frustrated with a moderator telling me to post a question for debate. Not only did I post that question, but it didn't seem to matter to the moderators in the past if I posted a question for debate or not considering that nobody answered it.

The OP should ideally be short. It's repeated as the first post in every page of the thread, so it takes up space every time you go to the next page.

Well, how short is "short"? I know that a lot of the other members have posted very long replies.

Anyway, thank you so much for your concern. A lot of other forums I've been to are outrageously unfair and full of trolls, and some of the biggest trolls in those forums are the moderators. So it's good to see that at least this forum has a sense of fairness and courtesy.

[Jagella]

[Replying to post 1 by Jagella]

I'm not sure on the objection to TIMITS.

Marco is the moderator who forbid me to use the term, "TIMITS." His reasoning is that it is an insult to Christian belief.

I read your post again. It certainly wasn't clear to me what you wanted to say. I think we may be butting heads again. The last time I offered some help as a forum member I think I got 'moderated on'. This time, I tried to suggest your post was hard to follow and now you feel aggrieved.

I've read it several times, and I'm not sure where I'm not being clear. I always take care to "polish" my posts making sure there are no misspelled words, and I'm careful to use proper punctuation and capitalization. I stress the use of complete sentences and correct paragraph structure.

But if you're still not clear on what I'm saying, then all you need to do is ask questions.

Simply put, my post was about my hypothesis regarding the violence in the Bible and Christianity. Why are they so violent? My guess is that since Israel was enduring attacks from greater powers like Babylon and Rome, nations who wanted to control the land of Israel for military purposes, they became outraged over these attacks, and they expressed that anger in their Bible in stories about their god striking back against their invaders. Later on when Christians came on the scene, they wrote of their own anger against the Romans by saying that their version of God would ultimately wipe out Rome.

So what's so hard to understand about that?

My gut feeling is that the forum expects civility and you want to play rough.

If telling the truth about Christianity is "playing rough," then I'm the roughest guy around. If anybody can't handle being told that truth, then they have no place here in a forum that I thought was open for the purpose of allowing people to express their opinions on Christianity.

[otseng]

For the OP, yes, it should have a debate question otherwise it'll get moved to Random Ramblings. Can you post a link to the thread you are referring to?

The Roots of Biblical and Christian Violence

Well, how short is "short"? I know that a lot of the other members have posted very long replies.

Some comments about your OP:
- A better title for the thread would be: "Why is the Bible full of glorified violence?"
- End the OP with your second paragraph. That way it's clear what the question is. It would also make the OP short.
- Don't answer your debate question in the OP. Instead, post your response in a separate post. So, "I believe that part of the answer to this question is land. If you consult the map of the Old-Testament Bible lands below..." would be in the second post of the thread.
- Any replies in a thread can be as long as it wants. But the OP should ideally not be too long.

See here for more tips on creating an OP:
viewtopic.php?t=3335

[tam]

Peace to you Jagella,

I really didn't mean for "TIMITS" to be insulting but more to be "revealing." In other words, I used it to get the Christians in the forum to really think about what they believe.

This perhaps should go in its own thread, but I read it here, so I am responding here.


TIMITS


The

No problem there.


Invisible

Might have a problem here. Just because something is unseen does not mean that it is invisible. My brother lives on the other side of the country; I cannot see him, but he is not invisible.

God dwells in the spiritual realm (in unapproachable light). We may not currently see Him; but that does not mean He is invisible; nor does it mean that other spirit beings cannot see Him. As well, what would be the point of God saying, 'No one can see me and live'... if He was invisible, if no one could see Him, ever? Would He not have said instead, "No one can see me because I am invisible"?

"No one can see me and live" implies rather than that He is too powerful a being for us to physically (stand in His presence and) see Him. At least not in this vessel (the body that we currently inhabit).



Man

Problem here as well.

God is not a man (numbers 23:19; 1Samuel 15:29)



In

No particular problem with the word itself.


The

Again, no problem.


Sky


You have a problem here as well. God does not dwell in the sky (the atmosphere, the clouds in the earthly realm, etc).

God dwells in the spiritual realm (the heavens); and He can also dwell in people by means of His holy spirit (His breath, blood, seed), if indeed a person has been anointed with holy spirit (the holy spirit that Christ breathed upon His apostles, and again upon the people at Pentecost, and upon anyone who is truly a Christian - an anointed one.)




**


So you can use an inaccurate term if you like (and if the mods allow it), but it does not describe my God. I don't imagine that there are many (if any) people who profess to be Christian - on this forum or elsewhere - who thinks that God is an invisible man living in the sky.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Jagella]

For the OP, yes, it should have a debate question otherwise it'll get moved to Random Ramblings. Can you post a link to the thread you are referring to?

The Roots of Biblical and Christian Violence

Well, how short is "short"? I know that a lot of the other members have posted very long replies.

Some comments about your OP:
- A better title for the thread would be: "Why is the Bible full of glorified violence?"
- End the OP with your second paragraph. That way it's clear what the question is. It would also make the OP short.
- Don't answer your debate question in the OP. Instead, post your response in a separate post. So, "I believe that part of the answer to this question is land. If you consult the map of the Old-Testament Bible lands below..." would be in the second post of the thread.
- Any replies in a thread can be as long as it wants. But the OP should ideally not be too long.

See here for more tips on creating an OP:
viewtopic.php?t=3335

Thanks. Will do!

What I'm really curious about is if that post is understandable. I based my argument on a Hector Avalos video on YouTube. He came up with the idea of religious violence resulting from "scarce resources" like land and "salvation."

So, did you understand my argument?

[Overcomer]

Jagella wrote:

Marco is the moderator who forbid me to use the term, "TIMITS." His reasoning is that it is an insult to Christian belief.

And it is. So please have some respect for us. You don't have to agree with us, but you could at least be polite.