MennoNet.com

And taking sides in these offenses is frankly killing us - it allows a manipulative person to build a power base and then engage in an all out assault on the other person.

The victim gets told to be "nonresistant" and "stop arguing" and "stop being contentious".

It's all pretty disgusting, frankly.

Sudsy wrote:The problem, imo, with 'Bunny Trails' being used to deal with an offense is that it can cause readers to take sides on an offense.

That happens as soon as Max labels a question as hostile and implies rather strong things about the person who asked the question. Take a look, most of the time my questions are very much about the topic, but then the topic gets changed to how people should feel about Max and how people should feel about me.

Is there any way to jump in and say WAIT, WRONG TOPIC when that happens? I mean, seriously, why on earth would we want threads that seem to be about that?

Here's a 1 Corinthians 6 thing. Max and I are the wrong people to say that. We need someone else to do that. And if people simply step away from conflict, there's nobody to do that. Sometimes peacemaking means not stepping away from the conflict.

Bootstrap wrote:

Sudsy wrote:The problem, imo, with 'Bunny Trails' being used to deal with an offense is that it can cause readers to take sides on an offense.

That happens as soon as Max labels a question as hostile and implies rather strong things about the person who asked the question. Take a look, most of the time my questions are very much about the topic, but then the topic gets changed to how people should feel about Max and how people should feel about me.

Is there any way to jump in and say WAIT, WRONG TOPIC when that happens? I mean, seriously, why on earth would we want threads that seem to be about that?

Here's a 1 Corinthians 6 thing. Max and I are the wrong people to say that. We need someone else to do that. And if people simply step away from conflict, there's nobody to do that. Sometimes peacemaking means not stepping away from the conflict.

Good point. Yes, we can try to jump in more when a thread wanders away from a topic to an individual focus. Whoops, got an emergency call and got to go. Chat later.

Sudsy wrote:

Bootstrap wrote:Is there any way to jump in and say WAIT, WRONG TOPIC when that happens? I mean, seriously, why on earth would we want threads that seem to be about that?

Here's a 1 Corinthians 6 thing. Max and I are the wrong people to say that. We need someone else to do that. And if people simply step away from conflict, there's nobody to do that. Sometimes peacemaking means not stepping away from the conflict.

Good point. Yes, we can try to jump in more when a thread wanders away from a topic to an individual focus.

Thanks. I would find that extremely helpful.

I'm back, minor birding (purple martins) emergency solved. OK, I agree the GAMEO quote I gave on the Holdeman church was in reference to unbelievers. But I think this one is applicable and the text also you have referred to regarding the description of love. Colossians 3: 12-14 -

So embrace, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, a spirit of mercy, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, and longsuffering. Bear with one another and forgive one another. If anyone has a quarrel against anyone, even as Christ forgave you, so you must do. And above all these things, embrace love, which is the bond of perfection.

When I think of how Christ forgives me, it is a forgiveness that I don't deserve. I, then, am to forgive other's sins against me even if they don't deserve it and in doing this be kind, humble, meek and longsuffering. O how I need the grace of God for this to happen. Sure isn't like my fleshly nature.

You posted -

Sometimes peacemaking means not stepping away from the conflict.

Agree but if the peace needs to be made by two individuals, then is a forum environment one that can be treated as a local church ? I don't think it can. Once it fails the PM stage, then doesn't Colossians 3:12-14 the route we must take and put up with how others chose to participate ?

KingdomBuilder wrote:

Sudsy wrote:This site has produced 50 commands of Christ and then condensed the 684 NT commands into 6 generic commands.

http://www.historymakers.info/sermons/5 ... hrist.html

Good list. The language and ultra-concise language of it seems to make it geared towards Christians for reference. Don't you think?
I found this list the other day: http://www.christadelphia.org/command.php

I find the Christadelphians problematic in that they don't believe that Jesus was both fully human and the fully divine Son of God.

MaxPC wrote:

KingdomBuilder wrote:

Sudsy wrote:This site has produced 50 commands of Christ and then condensed the 684 NT commands into 6 generic commands.

http://www.historymakers.info/sermons/5 ... hrist.html

Good list. The language and ultra-concise language of it seems to make it geared towards Christians for reference. Don't you think?
I found this list the other day: http://www.christadelphia.org/command.php

I find the Christadelphians problematic in that they don't believe that Jesus was both fully human and the fully divine Son of God.

Ah, I see. The same reason Rome anathematised the Oriental Orthodox, the Eastern Orthodox, and the Church of the East...

KingdomBuilder wrote:

MaxPC wrote:I find the Christadelphians problematic in that they don't believe that Jesus was both fully human and the fully divine Son of God.

Completely irrelevant and outside of the expressed desires in the OP. Please take it elsewhere if you want.

Are you saying that how a group understands Christ's nature has no impact on their understanding of His authority when giving these commands?

MaxPC wrote:

KingdomBuilder wrote:

MaxPC wrote:I find the Christadelphians problematic in that they don't believe that Jesus was both fully human and the fully divine Son of God.

Completely irrelevant and outside of the expressed desires in the OP. Please take it elsewhere if you want.

Are you saying that how a group understands Christ's nature has no impact on their understanding of His authority when giving these commands?

KB I'm still interested in your answer to my query. Do you think that how a group understands the nature of Christ Himself will impact their understanding of His authority when giving commands?

For example, which has greater authority: a man who is also the Son of God or a good but only human individual like Mahatma Ghandi?

MaxPC wrote:KB I'm still interested in your answer to my query. Do you think that how a group understands the nature of Christ Himself will impact their understanding of His authority when giving commands?

For example, which has greater authority: a man who is also the Son of God or a good but only human individual like Mahatma Ghandi?

I'm fine with answering here
Yes, I think that if one believes Jesus was just a man,then that'll surely impact things. However, I know no Christians that esteem Jesus as only a man.
To answer as to why I linked that particular list, I believe Christadelphian/ CoG General Conference's view to be the most Biblical in light of Messianic prophecy and simple reading. I see no fault in them.