Certain tactics

[Dantalion]

I would just like to say, that in my humble opinion, 'the community' here must look into this matter.
In general, certain people and certain tactics just serve to anger people, discredit genuine believers and make a mockery of the debate forum.

This isn't a 'theists vs atheists' thing, it's about intellectual honesty, respect for the principles of 'the debate'.
This is of course not for me to point out, but every rational person here can see there are users that SO often break the same rules (in this case, 5, 7, 9 and sometimes even 13) I find it baffling they're not acted upon.

[ndf8th]

The title is Debating Christianity and Religion Forum
so not only Christian religion.

I am not into debating. I may act like that out of bad habit
or out of ignorance not grasping me had started a debate
while I just wanted to share my take on things religion.

I find religions to be very interesting phenomena.
I want to really know what it is to be religious.

I don't think debating help to get reliable knowledge
because those that debates have too much pride in winning the debate.

The science part get underplayed and the rhetoric tricks get used
and that makes the debate most likely not intellectually honest.

Just me guessing why it is as it is. How to shape up I don't know.

[otseng]

I'm doing my best to ignore these evangelical extremists. Yet, ironically this is a religion debate forum and the whole purpose of this forum is to debate religions.

Nobody says you need to read or respond to posts on the forum. There will always be a huge variety of beliefs on the forum, even those that might be disagreeable to you. This is the nature of being an open forum.

They demand that they can "back-up" all their claims using scriptures. But the problem with that is that the Biblical scriptures are so full of insane parts that it's truly easy to "back-up" almost any claim anyone would like to make about these stories.

Using the Bible to support claims is certainly allowed on this forum, even in the C&A subforum. But, it is true that it would not persuade non-Christians. Ideally, claims should also be affirmed by non-Biblical sources.

When the truth is they haven't demonstrated anything more than extreme personal arrogance.

You'll need to stop making personal comments like this.

I just gleaned over the rules and I don't see where this site makes preaching against the rules. I'm surprised that they don't. Many other sites I've been on make it clear that constant preaching or evangelizing will not be considered legitimate debate.

It is true that preaching is not against the rules of the forum, but it discouraged per the Guidelines for the C&A subforum. There is no way to ban all "preaching" here. What exactly constitues preaching? Is mentioning Jesus as a Savior preaching? If so, then I'm also guilty. Is it giving a long sermon on one's beliefs? If so, then even atheists can be guilty. Where it does cross the line for me is that when it's excessive and has no relevance to the OP. In that case, I'm willing to step in.

Now I'm going to return back to ignoring you. And now at least everyone can know precisely why I am ignoring you. You're a troublemaker and I want no parts of your troubles. I don't need any citations caused by conversing with you.

There is no need to tell the world who you have on ignore. And referring to others as a troublemaker would be a personal attack.

The fundamental principle of this forum is that all participants be treated with respect, even if they do not argue to one's standards. There are no rules against fallacious arguments. And though I'd like to everyone to give good arguments, I don't know how we can enforce that all arguments should be sound.

[ndf8th]

The fundamental principle of this forum is
that all participants be treated with respect,

That seems to be a good way to set up a forum.
I maybe is not good at acting like that but I will try.

[Divine Insight]

To otseng,

I wrote the following post before you posted. I hope you at least understand the point that I'm trying to make here. TheTruth101 preaches a negative picture of his own personal view of God. Then he complains when people recognize it to be precisely what he makes it out to be.

I hope you're take a moment to read this post to see where I'm coming from. I've done a lot of highlighting in red precisely to make the point that what TheTrut101 often accusing other people of attacking are precisely the very things that he demands that his version of God must possess.

So I'm just trying to point out how he is being unreasonable. He preaches a hateful picture of a God, and then complains when people acknowledge this.

I acknowledge that he's preaching a terrible picture of God. What more does he want?

You talk about respecting people, and I agree that's a very good quality. However, it seems to me that this man is preaching a very non-respectful picture of God. He preaches condemnation toward all nonbelievers in the name of his God. How is that respectful toward anyone?

This is precisely the problem I have with these kinds of religions they basically preach disrespect of others in the name of their jealous God.

The following is the post I've already typed up so I'm going to post it. I feel that it needs to be said.

~~~~~~~~

original post:

The things about condemnation and enslavement and such, I am only stating that because thats what the Bible says. And when they cant refute such facts, they dismiss the whole source (in this case the Bible) when it's a christianity debating site to begin with.

You purposefully preach condemnation and enslavement, and all manner of negativity. And demands that this is what "Your God" is all about.

I personally find this to be disgusting. Yes.

As you can clearly see moderators, he said something like "Hebrew God is a discusting jealous God" etc.

When I hear that, ofcourse I'm going to defend my God, and since "Hebrew God is a discusting jealous God" I am going to retalliate again by saying, that's your personal opinion.

That's all. (I hope mods see again here a prime example of what's going on).

Yes, I hope the mods can see exactly what you are doing. You purposefully create a hateful picture of a jealous God that is all about condemnation and enslavement, and then take exception when someone accepts your very picture of "Your God".

Is the Biblical God a jealous God?

You claim that Biblical scriptures are legitimate sources of evidence, so here you go:

Exod.34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

Deut.4:24 For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.

Deut.5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,

Deut.6:15 (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.

I call the God of the Bible a "jealous God" in honor of these very scriptures. They demand over and over again that this is a jealous God, and there are far more scriptures than I have posted above that make this claim.

So the Bible demands that its God is a "jealous God"

You can hardly blame me for that. I didn't write those ancient fables.

Couple this fact that the Bible demands that this is a "jealous God" with your demand that this God is all about condemnation and enslavement, and yes, my open public opinion is that you are preaching a disgusting jealous God.

You could be preaching the things that Jesus preach. (i.e. love and forgiveness, and non-judgment). But you don't. By your own admission you choose to preach condemnation and enslavement.

I personally feel that condemnation and enslavement is disgusting.

And especially in the way that you preach it in the name of this "jealous God".

So why are you whining to the mods?

All I'm doing is acknowledging your very own portrait of your very own God.

In fact, I even conceded that this is precisely what you have. You have your own personal interpretations of what you would like for this God to be.

You could be focusing on the LOVE and on the non-judgmental forgiveness of Jesus. But instead you chose to focus on the condemnation and "slavery" of the jealous God of Abraham.

I'm not even sure where you even get the slavery aspect to be honest. But I do not that the Bible has the God of Abraham condoning slavery.


But you're the one who chooses to preach disgusting things in the name of your God (i.e. condemnation and slavery)

And then you're going to cry 'wolf' when people acknowledge what you preach?

That makes no sense at all.

And, IMHO, this is typical of all your so-called "Debates". There is no sound logic to them. All you do is go around accusing other people of attacking your God, when in fact it's no wonder they do. You purposely create a picture of a God who is chomping at the bit to condemn and enslave non-believers, and then you wonder why non-believers see your God as being so disgusting?

I personally think that most decent people will view unwarranted condemnation and slavery as being disgusting.

And the case of your "jealous God" what warrants this condemnation and slavery?

Nothing warrants it short of the fact that this God himself is a "jealous God" who will condemn people for merely not believing in him or worshiping him.

I personally view these Hebrew myths to be myths about an extremely disgusting God. Yes I do. And especially when they are being preached as such by someone like you.

This is precisely why I renounce these religions as being detrimental to humanity.

How does humanity benefit from "jealous God religions" that have their followers going around condemning their neighbors?

I hold that Jesus (the supposed Christ of Christianity) taught people not to judge others, nor to condemn others:

Luke.6:37 Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven:

So IMHO, TheTruth101, you aren't even preaching "Christianity" at all, but instead you are preaching a truly corrupt and anti-Jesus version of it.

As a former Christian I do not even recognize "Christianity" in anything you preach.

[Divine Insight]

To Otseng,

I would also like to bring attention to the following rule:

5. Support your assertions/arguments with evidence. Do not persist in making a claim without supporting it. All unsupported claims can be challenged for supporting evidence. Opinions require no support, but they should not be considered as valid to any argument, nor will they be considered as legitimate support for any claim.

When someone starts "preaching" what they claim their God wants from people or is supposedly going to do to people, shouldn't they be required to state clearly something like:

I believe, that my God would do,.....

Or

It's my opinion that God would do,....

Instead of just outright talking like as if they are directly speaking on behalf of "God".

Some religious forums I've been on in the past won't tolerate preaching.

And this included anyone making direct claims about what God is actually like, or what God would actually do, or who God would condemn, etc.

They demand that any such opinions be voiced as personal opinions as I've stated above.

I believe, that my God would do,.....

It's my opinion that God would do,....

etc.

And this stops people from actually "preaching" on behalf of their Gods.

That would be my suggestion.

Make a new rule, "No Preaching".

And then demand that people speak in terms of what they think or believe their Gods might do, rather than speaking in absolute terms as if they actually speak on behalf of their Gods.

I seriously feel that this is an issue that needs to be addressed to stop evangelism and preaching on a debate forum.

[playhavock]

Always remove emotion from debate. Thats key. I find that the level of debate now that I understand the idea of the page is higher in my brain then in reality, so I should not be disaponted in that some people are not at the level I might want. We have subfourms for things if we want a (X) bar to be put for (Y) level of debate and we can ignore or skip past people who bother us. I've never personaly put someone on iggy other then when they were a troll and then they are typicaly baned. When I was a mod on a whole other page it was very hard to deside when someone was breaking the "spirt" of the rules and not, since there will always be rule lawers. -_-;

So, I guess we must contune to encorage better debate then what we have, and/or make a sub fourm thingy where we say "to debate here you must do (X)(Y)(Z) things or not do (A)(B)(C) things." and both. Its imporant to me that we rase each other up rather then knock each other down more so when we disagre with each other, I totaly disagre with how truth101 debates, but I totaly think he is a unique human who has value and meening in our planet and whos ideas might have value, remember the logical fallacy that even if the premices are invlad that does not meen the conclusion is not valad. The sorce of an idea does not make the idea itself invald. I apreate his/her input and time spent trying to get there ideas across to us as I emplore them on a personal level to rase there own bar of doing that for themselfs.

Some tactics are harmfull if they are uncival in nature. I trust the mods judgment on desideing when it is and is not preaching, I'll warn if I feel it is warrented and let them deside what to do.

I think we might be frustrated when we expect people to behave a serten way and they do not, we must place that to the side.

We must insteed focus on what tactics are harmfull in general for debate at all.

What tactics are harmfull? Preaching - sure, but thats sort of subjective so we musst leave it to the mods to deside when the spirt of that rule has been broken.

How about linking to youtube? Well there are actual videos on youtube that have actual science, so we cant say "no" to that, we can not rid the bad without rid the good as well.

So, perhaps there are some tactits we object to and we should then just report when we feel those are have been used if they break the rules, and if we want a higher bar set we could put our tokens togeter and make a sub fourm perhaps called "Higher bar" with strict rules about things and maybe even have mod powers in said fourm granted for the people who run said sub fourm so they can lock topics that broke the rules or just kick out people who break the rules from the group or something like that. Just one idea tossing out there.

Anyway, I hope that clears up the air somewhat

[otseng]

Make a new rule, "No Preaching".

And then demand that people speak in terms of what they think or believe their Gods might do, rather than speaking in absolute terms as if they actually speak on behalf of their Gods.

What I'm inclined to do is elaborate more in the guidelines about "preaching" and make it applicable forum wide. Also state in the rules that consistent abuse of the guidelines can result in a warning.

[otseng]

Here's a starter on guidelines on preaching. Feel free to add or modify it.

1. Preaching is not in itself against the rules, but posters should take note of the following guidelines.

2. Do not use the forum as simply a way to present people with the gospel message. This is a debating forum, not a convenient place to overtly proselytize.

3. Do not portray yourself as speaking directly for God or as a special messenger of God.

4. Do not proclaim where another person is going to go in the afterlife. Do not pronounce that God should judge another person with any sort of punishment.

5. Do not judge if someone is or is not a real Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc. If someone claims to be something, do not argue that he is not what he claims to be. If someone does not claim to be something, do not impose a label on that person. (If someone does not call himself a Satanist, don't call him a Satanist.)

6. Do not claim that you alone know the truth and everyone else is in error. Do not claim that only your interpretation of scripture is the only correct one.

7. Do not use scripture to directly or indirectly attack another person or group of people.

8. Do not respond to a post by simply quoting scripture that has no relevance to the topic.

9. Do not post lengthy homilies that has no direct bearing on the topic. Do not get on a soapbox to preach an irrelevant sermon.

10. Do not present your views dogmatically. Instead, preface your views with "According to my interpretation" or "I believe that God would" or "In my opinion".

[Divine Insight]

@ Otseng,

I think those are perfect just as they are.

I think you should post those in with the same post that contains the rules. Even if listed separately as "guidelines".

Just so they are easy to find and point to.

I wouldn't even mind having #6 as part of my signature line:

~~~~~

Preaching guidelines: 6. Do not claim that you alone know the truth and everyone else is in error. Do not claim that only your interpretation of scripture is the only correct one.

[TheTruth101]

@ Otseng,

I'm fine with the rules. Thank you for the update.