Section 2 - Content

[GodsGrace]

suggestions:

1.3 When discussing differences, address the issue, not the person --- do not make derogatory personal remarks.

1.6 ....................................................
Do not use this site for illegal purposes. If such activity is discovered, the proper authorities will be notified, including the police and your Internet Service Provider (ISP). Christianforums.net hereby states that we intend to cooperate fully with the proper authorities in the effort to enforce, to the full extent of the law, any illegal activity and the consequences thereof.

 

[stovebolts]

suggestions:

1.3 When discussing differences, address the issue, not the person --- do not make derogatory personal remarks.

1.6 ....................................................
Do not use this site for illegal purposes. If such activity is discovered, the proper authorities will be notified, including the police and your Internet Service Provider (ISP). Christianforums.net hereby states that we intend to cooperate fully with the proper authorities in the effort to enforce, to the full extent of the law, any illegal activity and the consequences thereof.

Alright, I think I got it. Take a quick look and let me know what you thing.

 

[stovebolts]

JohnDB, WIP, Truthfrees, questdriven
I have updated the "Staff Expectations" page. Please review and lets tweak as needed.

 

[GodsGrace]

Alright, I think I got it. Take a quick look and let me know what you thing.

1.10 " within " is one word.

1.15 fix "TWITS"

1.15 "only you and CFnet staff are able to respond......"

That's it!

P.S. You had said the following in a previous post on here..
post 90:

This is cause for a final clause:
Posts or threads may be removed at the discretion of staff.

 

[stovebolts]

1.10 " within " is one word.

1.15 fix "TWITS"

1.15 "only you and CFnet staff are able to respond......"

That's it!

P.S. You had said the following in a previous post on here..
post 90:

This is cause for a final clause:
Posts or threads may be removed at the discretion of staff.

Woot! Thank you! Wow, we did it!!
Would you want to look over the Staff Expectations for any errors?

 

[GodsGrace]

Woot! Thank you! Wow, we did it!!
Would you want to look over the Staff Expectations for any errors?

No Problem.
Have company...as soon as they leave.

 

[stovebolts]

No Problem.
Have company...as soon as they leave.

Not a problem. My wife had surgery last week and didn't sleep well last night. I can't tell you how many times we were both up last night... I'm free until she wakes up lol!

 

[WIP]

http://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?pages/TOS/

I need to fix the html links, other than that, how does it look?

The following statement contains a double negative suggesting the opposite of what is intended.

1.9: No foul language, pornographic, sexually offensive, sexually explicit, or similarly related material is not allowed.

It should be changed to the following.

1.9: No foul language, pornographic, sexually offensive, sexually explicit, or similarly related material allowed.

 

[WIP]

1.11: All Bible verses and passages must be referenced (NASB, NIV, etc.) unless it is public domain like the KJV, YLT, etc.
Info on copyrights here:
http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/

I realize that some version are not copywrited however, it is really nice if all quoted references are identified for the sake of the reader and moderators. I for one don't have all versions memorized so it forces me to copy the quoted text and search to determine the revision in order to very it was not infringing on copywrite laws.

 

[stovebolts]

1.11: All Bible verses and passages must be referenced (NASB, NIV, etc.) unless it is public domain like the KJV, YLT, etc.
Info on copyrights here:
http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/

I realize that some version are not copywrited however, it is really nice if all quoted references are identified for the sake of the reader and moderators. I for one don't have all versions memorized so it forces me to copy the quoted text and search to determine the revision in order to very it was not infringing on copywrite laws.

Thanks Wip,
I've updated the TOS for 1.9, but I don't think we should force all versions to be referenced if they don't need to be. That would be a tough one IMHO.

 

[GodsGrace]

Woot! Thank you! Wow, we did it!!
Would you want to look over the Staff Expectations for any errors?

Hi SB,

Went thru the Staff Expectation
(or is it Expectations? Both have been used - check it out)

Here are some changes that could be made:
Paragraph 1 starts with John 13.35


P 2
"we spur one another ON...."

P3
Remove "as"...through the bldg up of one another....

"learn and grow in our faith"....


P3
We hope you engage others with whom you might disagree, but that you do so in a way that edifies instead of tearing down.


P4 "Savior" who is willing....

His commandments..... (both capitalized)


P6 "disruptS"

"A staff member may.....address....."

A Private Message (instead of PM?)




P7
"that spurs on....."

P8
endures all things. (period)

P9
as outlined earlier. (period)


P10
of spam, (comma)


P11
Any REASON, instead of any point????

 

[Truthfrees]

JohnDB, WIP, Truthfrees, questdriven
I have updated the "Staff Expectations" page. Please review and lets tweak as needed.

looks good - like it a lot

 

[JLB]

Doctrines and theologies where heretical sources such as the book of Mormon, Gospel of Thomas, Enoch etc are the backbone of said theologies, those should remain. There has to be a way of rewording these.

WOW!!!

Lumping the book of Enoch, a New Testament source, in with the Book of Mormon, or the Gospel of Thomas is a bit f a stretch.



JLB

 

[JLB]

Woot! Thank you! Wow, we did it!!
Would you want to look over the Staff Expectations for any errors?

1.11: All Bible verses and passages must be referenced (NASB, NIV, etc.) unless it is public domain like the KJV, YLT, etc.
Info on copyrights here:
http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/

I realize that some version are not copywrited however, it is really nice if all quoted references are identified for the sake of the reader and moderators. I for one don't have all versions memorized so it forces me to copy the quoted text and search to determine the revision in order to very it was not infringing on copywrite laws.

No Problem.
Have company...as soon as they leave.

Y’all are doing an amazing job!!!



JLB

 

[JohnDB]

WOW!!!

Lumping the book of Enoch, a New Testament source, in with the Book of Mormon, or the Gospel of Thomas is a bit f a stretch.



JLB

Not really.
The Book of Enoch is considered pseudopigrapha. (Meaning false authorship) and nobody ever considered it to be scripture (quotes Jesus made of the book notwithstanding). It is a piece of religious fiction.

There were 100+ tests writing prophets of old had to pass before their works would be considered inspired of God and thereby scripture. Enoch deliberately fails these tests in it's preface. The book of Jeremiah wasn't finished with it's test when Daniel claimed it's validity. (Which is rather unique)

Otherwise the only other books that were included in the Bible but never were claimed to be scriptures are the Apocrypha. And their removal and inclusion has been spotty over the centuries...but again not ever considered to be scriptures.

And before you ask... nope, I don't remember where I seen the list of tests the Jews had to test writings with. And if I did I'm not sure that it's available online.

You can probably try to Google it.

 

[stovebolts]

The Jews also reject the book of Enoch.

https://www.chabad.org/library/arti...t-Is-the-Jewish-Approach-to-the-Apocrypha.htm

Thanks for all of your help moving this site forward JLB , your help is greatly appreciated as well as your scriptural knowledge. I am thankful you are here.

 

[JLB]

Not really.
The Book of Enoch is considered pseudopigrapha. (Meaning false authorship) and nobody ever considered it to be scripture (quotes Jesus made of the book notwithstanding). It is a piece of religious fiction.

There were 100+ tests writing prophets of old had to pass before their works would be considered inspired of God and thereby scripture. Enoch deliberately fails these tests in it's preface. The book of Jeremiah wasn't finished with it's test when Daniel claimed it's validity. (Which is rather unique)

Otherwise the only other books that were included in the Bible but never were claimed to be scriptures are the Apocrypha. And their removal and inclusion has been spotty over the centuries...but again not ever considered to be scriptures.

And before you ask... nope, I don't remember where I seen the list of tests the Jews had to test writings with. And if I did I'm not sure that it's available online.

You can probably try to Google it.

I’ll stick with believing New Testament writers, over Google.


JLB

 

[JohnDB]

I’ll stick with believing New Testament writers, over Google.


JLB

Huh?

 

[Hidden In Him]

2.6 The New World Translation and Book of Mormom are not considered Christian bibles and verses cannot be posted on this site.

2.7 Discussion of other questionable sources, documents, writings, etc. is acceptable but cannot be used as a basis of support within a discussion or debate.

Hello again, sister!

I have no idea what Post #119 was about, and I'm not clicking on a bunch of strange links to find out.

But about your above quote, I have a curiosity. Why does the site allow for a Jehovahs Witnesses forum (people who are essentially non-Christians despite claiming to be and believing themselves to be), yet their version of the "Bible" is not allowed to be quoted? I think forum policy is largely all pointed in the right direction, but I would actually go the exact opposite direction when it comes to this. The falsehoods and blatant errors in the NWT ought to be allowed to be posted in order to show their fraudulence, but allowing the JWs themselves to have a forum here is inviting them to make a home and evangelize, which is a different thing from simply welcoming them and allowing them to ask questions.

Thanks for taking the time to respond in advance.
- H

 

[GodsGrace]

Hello again, sister!

I have no idea what Post #119 was about, and I'm not clicking on a bunch of strange links to find out.

But about your above quote, I have a curiosity. Why does the site allow for a Jehovahs Witnesses forum (people who are essentially non-Christians despite claiming to be and believing themselves to be), yet their version of the "Bible" is not allowed to be quoted? I think forum policy is largely all pointed in the right direction, but I would actually go the exact opposite direction when it comes to this. The falsehoods and blatant errors in the NWT ought to be allowed to be posted in order to show their fraudulence, but allowing the JWs themselves to have a forum here is inviting them to make a home and evangelize, which is a different thing from simply welcoming them and allowing them to ask questions.

Thanks for taking the time to respond in advance.
- H

Post 119 is just different advertising links for, in this case, stuff in Florida.
Restaurants, auto repair, and the such. (it's not allowed).

As to the above, it's old stuff and the rules have changed.
The JW could post what they want to in that particular forum.

In a normal debate forum, for example THEOLOGY, a thread could be made comparing the bible with the NWT...
but it would be to show how it's wrong. It cannot be used for support verses.

Also, for now, staff does not notice many JWs coming aboard.
Actually, they tend to stay awhile and then leave.
Right now it's not a problem.