[R] Threadjacking in Religious LGBT thread

[United Marxist Nations]

viewtopic.php?p=30597993#p30597993

[New Sviblovo]

I don't see this as threadjacking, unless you consider an alternative worldview "threadjacking".

[United Marxist Nations]

I don't see this as threadjacking, unless you consider an alternative worldview "threadjacking".

He's trying to continue an argument he lost on the CDT months ago. He has had lengthy explanations why he is wrong on this. Moreover the "Christians" comment is baiting, especially when he himself isn't a Christian in the historical sense (he is a Gnostic).

[New Sviblovo]

He's discussing religion in a religious thread? Also, does it matter if he's still arguing a point he lost? It doesn't look like he's trolling. If you believe he's wrong, let him to continue to make a fool of himself, it doesn't matter.

[United Marxist Nations]

He's discussing religion in a religious thread? Also, does it matter if he's still arguing a point he lost? It doesn't look like he's trolling. If you believe he's wrong, let him to continue to make a fool of himself, it doesn't matter.

A thread meant to talk about LGBT issues, such as the theology of marriage and surrounding views of homosexuality. He wants to get into a discussion about iconography.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=30597993#p30597993

I asked a perfectly reasonable question.

If we're going to ban same-sex marriage because it is supposedly not permissible within Christianity, then, under that logic, why not ban, for the sake of maintaining the Law of the Gospel, the idolatry of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the other churches which promote and create images of the Trinity?

It is entirely related to the topic and is, in no way, shape, or form, derailing the conversation.

He's trying to continue an argument he lost on the CDT months ago. He has had lengthy explanations why he is wrong on this. Moreover the "Christians" comment is baiting, especially when he himself isn't a Christian in the historical sense (he is a Gnostic).

"I'm right, you're wrong! Therefore, you're threadjacking!"

There's no logic to be found here. Iconophiles in the CDT made failed attempts to defend Church idolatry several months ago; therefore, because I'm referencing Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Church idolatry now, I must be trying to continue that same argument? Absolute nonsense. I raised a question related to the topic, with no references to past arguments. You're just conjuring up excuses at this point.

[United Marxist Nations]

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=30597993#p30597993

I asked a perfectly reasonable question.

If we're going to ban same-sex marriage because it is supposedly not permissible within Christianity, then, under that logic, why not ban, for the sake of maintaining the Law of the Gospel, the idolatry of the Eastern Orthodox Church and the other churches which promote and create images of the Trinity?

It is entirely related to the topic and is, in no way, shape, or form, derailing the conversation.

He's trying to continue an argument he lost on the CDT months ago. He has had lengthy explanations why he is wrong on this. Moreover the "Christians" comment is baiting, especially when he himself isn't a Christian in the historical sense (he is a Gnostic).

"I'm right, you're wrong! Therefore, you're threadjacking!"

There's no logic to be found here. Iconophiles in the CDT made failed attempts to defend Church idolatry several months ago; therefore, because I'm referencing Eastern Orthodox and Catholic Church idolatry now, I must be trying to continue that same argument? Absolute nonsense. I raised a question related to the topic, with no references to past arguments. You're just conjuring up excuses at this point.

We explained to you that it's not idolotry, and then you went off on a tangent of why we should eradicate Jewish influences in the Bible.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

We explained to you that it's not idolotry, and then you went off on a tangent of why we should eradicate Jewish influences in the Bible.

And I've explained that you and the other Orthodox theologians are wrong; the apostles were abundantly clear that creating images of God is sinful and idolatrous (For as much then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device). Regardless, the existence of a prior debate on Church imagery, months in the past, is completely irrelevant. Are we suddenly not allowed to talk about the same topic more than once? I raised a relevant question challenging the logic of you and all the others who promote supposedly Christian-inspired bans on same-sex marriage; the fact that I've brought up idolatry in the past on rare occasions doesn't mean I'm threadjacking in any way.

Believe it or not, there is nothing in the rules banning people from talking about something on more than one occasion.

[United Marxist Nations]

We explained to you that it's not idolotry, and then you went off on a tangent of why we should eradicate Jewish influences in the Bible.

And I've explained that you and the other Orthodox theologians are wrong; the apostles were abundantly clear that creating images of God is sinful and idolatrous (For as much then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device). Regardless, the existence of a prior debate on Church imagery, months in the past, is completely irrelevant. Are we suddenly not allowed to talk about the same topic more than once? I raised a relevant question challenging the logic of you and all the others who promote supposedly Christian-inspired bans on same-sex marriage; the fact that I've brought up idolatry in the past on rare occasions doesn't mean I'm threadjacking in any way.

Believe it or not, there is nothing in the rules banning people from talking about something on more than one occasion.

Then you can go to the CDT and talk about it.

If you must argue about iconography, go there, but you won't because the people there will beat you there.

Also, St. Luke (the author of the Gospel According to Luke and the Book of Acts, IIRC) made the first icon.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

Then you can go to the CDT and talk about it.

If you must argue about iconography, go there, but you won't because the people there will beat you there.

The point wasn't is idolatry sinful? We already know the answer to that question, because the apostles told us that religious idols are absolutely forbidden; whether or not the iconophilic churches listen to the answer is their own issue. The point was that, if we're going to use the state to create laws banning same-sex marriage because your church says it's not permissible in Christianity, then why shouldn't we ban religious idols as well?

"Oh, but you dirty iconoclasts lost the argument!"

Calvin, Zwingli, and Karlstadt disagree; in fact, a substantial portion of Christianity agrees that religious images are not permissible. So, tell me, why is it that, because you believe I "lost" an argument on idolatry several months ago, my question is completely irrelevant and is threadjacking?

It's pretty obvious that this report is completely frivolous, and is nothing but excuses conjured up for the sake of you wanting to silence people who bring up Orthodox hypocrisy.

[United Marxist Nations]

Then you can go to the CDT and talk about it.

If you must argue about iconography, go there, but you won't because the people there will beat you there.

The point wasn't is idolatry sinful? We already know the answer to that question, because the apostles told us that religious idols are absolutely forbidden; whether or not the iconophilic churches listen to the answer is their own issue. The point was that, if we're going to use the state to create laws banning same-sex marriage because your church says it's not permissible in Christianity, then why shouldn't we ban religious idols as well?

"Oh, but you dirty iconoclasts lost the argument!"

Calvin, Zwingli, and Karlstadt disagree; in fact, a substantial portion of Christianity agrees that religious images are not permissible. So, tell me, why is it that, because you believe I "lost" an argument on idolatry several months ago, my question is completely irrelevant and is threadjacking?

It's pretty obvious that this report is completely frivolous, and is nothing but excuses conjured up for the sake of you wanting to silence people who bring up Orthodox hypocrisy.

It's not idolatry, this has been explained before. Idolatry is worshiping the image, which is not what we do.

Now, let's stop spamming moderation and go to the CDT.

[Old Tyrannia]

Fascist Russian Empire: *** Warned for spamming moderation. *** This is not the place to carry on a debate that was off-topic in the first place. If you want to advocate iconoclasm, make a thread about iconoclasm.

EDIT: Oops, missed this one.

I don't see this as threadjacking, unless you consider an alternative worldview "threadjacking".

New Sviblovo: Your opinion is neither wanted nor needed here. Given this is not your first offense, I'm giving you an official *** warning for spamming in moderation. ***

[United Marxist Nations]

Fascist Russian Empire: *** Warned for spamming moderation. *** This is not the place to carry on a debate that was off-topic in the first place. If you want to advocate iconoclasm, make a thread about iconoclasm.

EDIT: Oops, missed this one.

I don't see this as threadjacking, unless you consider an alternative worldview "threadjacking".

New Sviblovo: Your opinion is neither wanted nor needed here. Given this is not your first offense, I'm giving you an official *** warning for spamming in moderation. ***

Thank you.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

Fascist Russian Empire: *** Warned for spamming moderation. *** This is not the place to carry on a debate that was off-topic in the first place. If you want to advocate iconoclasm, make a thread about iconoclasm.

I disagree. UMN accused me of threadjacking, and I responded to his accusations; that's not against the rules.

You think I'm continuing an off-topic debate? Then please, tell me, what is UMN doing in these posts?

Then you can go to the CDT and talk about it.

If you must argue about iconography, go there, but you won't because the people there will beat you there.

Also, St. Luke (the author of the Gospel According to Luke and the Book of Acts, IIRC) made the first icon.

It's not idolatry, this has been explained before. Idolatry is worshiping the image, which is not what we do.

Now, let's stop spamming moderation and go to the CDT.

We explained to you that it's not idolotry, and then you went off on a tangent of why we should eradicate Jewish influences in the Bible.

Is he not continuing an off-topic debate with these posts? Are his posts nothing but moderation-related material, with nothing off-topic in them?

If my posts qualify as continuing an off-topic discussion, then, surely, his would as well?

I demand a second opinion here.

[USS Monitor]

Fascist Russian Empire has a right to defend himself since he was the one being reported. Although he got mildly sidetracked in subsequent posts, he still had a legitimate reason to post. He and UMN both brought their NSG debate in here, both started out with a legitimate reason to post and then got sidetracked, so we should warn both for that or warn neither.

Appeal granted.

That said, UMN and FRS, both of you would do well to be more careful about keeping your NSG debates in NSG.

[United Marxist Nations]

viewtopic.php?p=30600615#p30600615
Did it again, after an unofficial warning.

While I am partly responsible, I just had a one-off comment to disagree with someone's position; his vast amount of links and text-wall show immense premeditation.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

Adultery is definitely important and a mortal sin. And anyway, Christians do not kill either one (or normal Christians don't, anyway.)

Tell me, UMN, why is this not threadjacking? Why is bringing up murder and adultery, with no references to homosexuality in any way, relevant to the topic?

You're being completely frivolous with your definition of threadjacking.

[Farnhamia]

I think the fouls are offsetting. I'm not going to warn anyone at this time but I do think you would all do better to stick to the topic, which is, if I read the OP correctly, theological takes on homosexuality. It is not the role good works play in salvation or faith, or what sins are or are not major. How about everyone go to neutral corners for a minute, get a drink of water, have that cut over your eyebrow patched, and calm down. Or I could, you know, just lock the thread. Your choice.

[United Marxist Nations]

viewtopic.php?p=30601561#p30601561

Still going on. I would prefer if the thread weren't locked though, because, up until now, the quality of discussion has been good.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=30601561#p30601561

Still going on. I would prefer if the thread weren't locked though, because, up until now, the quality of discussion has been good.

Again, you're being one selective and frivolous. You're conjuring up excuses to attack me, while ignoring everyone else. Luminesa posted a question aimed towards me, and I responded to it. How am I the one in the wrong, here?

Start showing some consistency, already. If you actually cared about people making posts which don't completely, 100% revolve around homosexuality, you would have reported a dozen people by now. This is just ridiculous; you're contriving absolutely every excuse imaginable to report me, while ignoring the actions of everyone else.

But what does Paul say in Romans? He asks, "Does this mean we should not obey the law? No!" And a lot of other answers in that order. Once again, you simply throw down verses and don't answer any of my questions.

[Fascist Russian Empire]

Oh, and, you know what? There's more! Not only is Luminesa completely, absolutely ignoring the topic of the thread in every way, shape, and form, Luminesa is also making obvious attempts at baiting. And, yet, not a single report of him coming from you, UMN; I wonder if that says something about your motivations.

This whole report thread is nothing but mods-as-weapons, with UMN attempting to pass me off as breaking the rules while deliberately and knowingly refusing to report people in the thread with obvious rule violations like Luminesa.

"I'm a college student, not a humanitarian aid worker."

So the next time a flood happens like the one that happened in my state, I probably should not expect you to be among the multitude of college students at my state university who gave their time and effort to help people in need, when over 3,000 people lost their homes. Because you're a college student, not a lowly humanitarian. That would require you actually following Christ's commandments, which you're obviously too good for, being a college student. How dare I bother you with such a pathetic question.

And once again, you show that you utterly lack the heart to be an actual Christian. You're so busy worrying about our supposed threats against you, that you have blocked any sort of charity in your heart. A sign of a true Christian is one who holds the love of the Lord deep in their heart. And you, good sir, hold none of it. And if Christ ever offered it to you, you stomped it under your feet with that statement. And during the month of December, in which we celebrate the birth of the Infant Jesus in a few weeks. A poor, starving child, born to a teenage mother and her husband, a poor family that had few friends and few loved ones.

But no. You're a college student, not a humanitarian. You'd obviously be too good to open the door to such a family anyway. To hold the Infant Christ in your heart. With an attitude like that, you might as well drop the Infant Jesus on His Precious Head and leave Him and His family to freeze in the cold. Because obviously the snow outside holds more love in its frozen molecular structure than you do.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

This report thread is being locked now. The last couple of posts will be addressed.