NationStates

Salus Maior wrote:

Lost Memories wrote:How much is God present in your thoughts, while you write on this forum?
(please, try to answer, without using offence as a deflection tactic, to run away from the question)

That's an incredibly pretentious thing to say.

It's a serious question.
Since love for one neighbor originates from the love for God, to have God in one thoughts while trying to love or help others, is necessary.

I'm not seeing what is pretentious about that statement. And even if again, it may be a delicate matter, I'm not seeing what is wrong with questioning the source of one "love" for their neighbor, when the actions don't seem to be about getting closer to others, but to push them away.

Lost Memories wrote:

The Marlborough wrote:LM was more or less implying than non-Protestants shouldn't be nice to Protestants/shouldn't treat Protestant views amiably.

Oh please, can you all stop trying to put words in my mouth, and generally assuming the worst?
I didn't imply anything like that.

yeah no
that was exactly what you were trying to do
or more accurately, you were attempting to roundaboutly justify the hostility that protestants like RN have talked about trying to participate in this thread
try being less blatant about your true intentions next time
i can't quote scripture, but I'm pretty sure that christianity isn't about trying to act pious and righteous while closing off the community to people who might otherwise be interested
seems to me like that's the exact sort of person Jesus preached against

Kowani wrote:

Lost Memories wrote:Oh please, can you all stop trying to put words in my mouth, and generally assuming the worst?
I didn't imply anything like that.

yeah no
that was exactly what you were trying to do

Sure, mr mindreader, who knows what others think, better than those same others.
That's exactly what I'm talking about, people putting words into others mouth.



I can apologize for a third time, if that can help end this.
But if an apology would have been necessary, the first ones should have been already enough.

Regardless, I care more for this mess to end.
I apologize for the offence my words may have caused, which offending was never my intention. And I ask the forgiveness of anyone who may have been offended by my words.

Lost Memories wrote:

Salus Maior wrote:That's an incredibly pretentious thing to say.

It's a serious question.
Since love for one neighbor originates from the love for God, to have God in one thoughts while trying to love or help others, is necessary.

I'm not seeing what is pretentious about that statement. And even if again, it may be a delicate matter, I'm not seeing what is wrong with questioning the source of one "love" for their neighbor, when the actions don't seem to be about getting closer to others, but to push them away.

It comes across as condescending. And it also implies that you're self-assured in how you're interacting with other people when you deflect criticism like that.

I'm not going to say any more because I don't like dogpiles and this has potential in turning into one. Just listen to others when they talk about how they're perceiving you.

Lost Memories wrote:

Kowani wrote:yeah no
that was exactly what you were trying to do

Sure, mr mindreader, who knows what others think, better than those same others.
That's exactly what I'm talking about, people putting words into others mouth.



I can apologize for a third time, if that can help end this.
But if an apology would have been necessary, the first ones should have been already enough.

Regardless, I care more for this mess to end.
I apologize for the offence my words may have caused, which offending was never my intention. And I ask the forgiveness of anyone who may have been offended by my words.

contexualization does not require mind-reading
just basic pattern recognition
but i doubt i'm going to get anywhere, so i'm just going to stop here

Punished UMN wrote:LM's been being passive aggressive for a week or two, he even TG'd me several times in a confrontational way.

And here goes number two.
I didn't talk to you confrontationally. After you attacked me for something I didn't say, I was trying to clear the misunderstanding. But it doesn't seem you are willing to do that yet.

How much is God present in your thoughts, while you write on this forum?
(please, try to answer, without using offence as a deflection tactic, to run away from the question)[/quote]
And what grievous attack was it that necessitated sending me several TG's insulting my faith, which you are now doing here as well.

Well, we should remain civil with those who disagree with us.

I understand being animated towards particular ideas even righteously angry, but the people we are arguing with are human beings. People who are Protestant have dignity and there is a distinction between judging the idea and judging the person. I'm not going to be dishonest about my beliefs but I will continue to do what I can to affirm the human dignity of everyone who joins us in this thread.

This is not the place for personal drama, vendettas, and petty fights.

To be completely fair, I think that low-church evangelical baptists, pentecostals, prosperity gospel supporters, and spiritual-but-not-religious folk may deserve some of the ridicule aimed at them from Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox commentators. I mean, I realize that we should try to be sympathetic and not overly unkind to people who embrace dubious theology or religious practices, but there is also value in speaking the truth. But I do get rather upset when certain people in this thread tend to carelessly generalize about Protestants. Some people in this thread talk as if liturgical, community-minded, educated, theologically literate Protestants do not exist. Also, I have thought about posting here more often, but I get nervous because I know there are some people here who seem more knowledgeable and articulate.

Bienenhalde wrote:Also, I have thought about posting here more often, but I get nervous because I know there are some people here who seem more knowledgeable and articulate.

Fortunately for you I am little more than a fool.

I've lately been taking a step back from this thread, due to a lot of what's been said, and my contribution to said atmosphere. I really do hope more people come back to the thread, and I hope I can he more incontrol of my overbearing nature in the future.


That said, I think this is a spot on example of Freud's "Narcissism of Small Differences."

Sundiata wrote:

Reverend Norv wrote:
I rest my case.

If you're suggesting that LM is being passive-aggressive or even overtly aggressive towards you, I unfortunately don't see it.

But Sundiata, LM is passive-aggressive or overtly aggressive towards almost everyone who posts in this thread; but particularly the non-Catholics who disagree with him or try and clarify different perspectives. I'm sorry you don't see it, but it's also impacted my activity in the thread in the last couple of months.

I was reluctant to continue this discussion yesterday, and didn't submit my original post on the topic, but reaction over the last couple of pages suggests that I'm not alone in feeling this way.

Yes, some of the spats between Tarsonis and Salus are unedifying (though they're generally brief, and no lasting harm done given they otherwise contribute constructively), and I can be a bit snarkily defensive about Orthodoxy (though I try to balance that with more detailed contributions), but many - by no means all, but many - of LM's posts are actively detrimental to fostering a climate of ecumenical discussion.

I stress that this isn't remotely a moderation issue; I'm not posting this with my moderation hat on to make a point about actionable behaviour. But I would invite LM to take a moment to consider why a fair few past, current, and potential contributors to this thread have had misgivings about his contributions, and whether steps can be taken so that he can play his part alongside others in making this a more congenial and inviting posting environment.

Salus Maior wrote:

Lost Memories wrote:It's a serious question.
Since love for one neighbor originates from the love for God, to have God in one thoughts while trying to love or help others, is necessary.

I'm not seeing what is pretentious about that statement. And even if again, it may be a delicate matter, I'm not seeing what is wrong with questioning the source of one "love" for their neighbor, when the actions don't seem to be about getting closer to others, but to push them away.

It comes across as condescending. And it also implies that you're self-assured in how you're interacting with other people when you deflect criticism like that.

I'm not going to say any more because I don't like dogpiles and this has potential in turning into one. Just listen to others when they talk about how they're perceiving you.

If people twist what I say, I am in the wrong for reaffirming it as it was meant?
If for self-assured you mean, to know what one was saying, then yes, I know what I was saying, which is not what people have been bandwagoning to twist into something obscene.

I am listening, I have been listening since the start.

Lost Memories wrote:I apologize for the offence my words may have caused, which offending was never my intention. And I ask the forgiveness of anyone who may have been offended by my words.

To clear one other wrong assumption. Which is souring this place.

The protestants (the generic umbrella term, since I can't really list all the different groups) are welcome in this thread. I've never tried to push anyone away.
If I make a generic comment or express an opinion over protestantism as a whole, again because I can't list all the groups of it -> Who isn't called out by the specific comment, obviously wasn't meant to be the one getting addressed by the comment or opinion.

Likewise, since the protestants(in general) are welcome, it could help to build a discussion, if they(generic) didn't too often run away or throw a tantrum every time they aren't appeased into everything they say or hold.



The same, I think, should apply to anyone who ever was critical about other christian groups. A critic is meant to start a discussion, not to shame others.

The Archregimancy wrote:I stress that this isn't remotely a moderation issue; I'm not posting this with my moderation hat on to make a point about actionable behaviour. But I would invite LM to take a moment to consider why a fair few past, current, and potential contributors to this thread have had misgivings about his contributions, and whether steps can be taken so that he can play his part alongside others in making this a more congenial and inviting posting environment.

I'll give a summary of what has been happening, from my point of view, obviously, as everyone has their own point of view, by which they filter the only existing reality.

From what I can see or remember, all this bandwagon of hate on me started some months ago. And from then, it carried on up to today.

With the post about how the devil creates division among christians. (I can go fetch it up, for who missed it or doesn't remember)
In that post I listed what I thought were bad practices which create division among christians, and I listed all the major christian groups, protestants, orthodox, catholics, and I also included the muslims for comparison, as the muslims seem to also suffer from division, though for some different reasons from christians.

In response to that post, some protestants, got overly offended, and felt called out specifically. (while, I actually made the point quite broad)
One of them left out of offence, and the other vowed to ignore me. Refusing dialogue.
You also had a first bad reaction to that post Archregimancy, and after talking it out, we got on the same page.


Then, few weeks ago, the event repeated itself.
When I made a post about how the media is all too happy to sensationalize sad events, when there is the possibility to ride on the ages old anti-catholicism.
This time it was an irreligious and a (supposedly) orthodox, to get overly offended, and accused me of denial.
During that, one of the previous people who got offended, and who vowed to ignore me, chimed in, to fan the fire of outrage.


Then, shortly after, the same played out.
This time the outrage didn't run on a post, which was about, actually few different things together. It was about how the united states are transforming out from being a christians nation, into an irreligious and pagan nation. And how the manifestations of anti-catholicism play into that transformation.
The outrage that time focused instead on a comment I made, a comment in which I showed my surprise on how for once the irreligious weren't thrashing on the catholics, but they were rather making some critical observations about protestantism. Which criticism I welcome, in equal measure as the protestants are welcome in here.
The outrage went on to twist my comment into an attack on all protestants. While somehow ignoring those same others who I commented on.


Now, the same has just repeated itself.
After I highlighted how the greatest commandment of Jesus isn't to love your neighbor, that's the second greatest, the greatest is to love God.
The outrage, which has now reached bandwagon levels, managed to twist the very words of Jesus, as to mean that to love God and then love your neighbor, should mean to hate your neighbor.
I stand by what Jesus said about the greatest commantments. Not by what lurid twist of my words has been played out.



Given all that. What do you suggest Archregimancy I should do? What would be the best way to speak, while not offending anyone?
Because, it's looking to me, correct me if I'm wrong on this, the only choice others have been repeatly giving me, is to don't speak at all.

Lost Memories wrote:To clear one other wrong assumption. Which is souring this place.

The protestants (the generic umbrella term, since I can't really list all the different groups) are welcome in this thread. I've never tried to push anyone away.
If I make a generic comment or express an opinion over protestantism as a whole, again because I can't list all the groups of it -> Who isn't called out by the specific comment, obviously wasn't meant to be the one getting addressed by the comment or opinion.

Likewise, since the protestants(in general) are welcome, it could help to build a discussion, if they(generic) didn't too often run away or throw a tantrum every time they aren't appeased into everything they say or hold.

The same, I think, should apply to anyone who ever was critical about other christian groups. A critic is meant to start a discussion, not to shame others.

See, when you make an apology and then throw in some condescension of Protestants like this, it just makes everyone doubt the sincerity of it.

Lost Memories wrote:

Lord Dominator wrote:Genesis lists the first act of creation as God saying 'let there be light' as well

Because the word of God, is not the same as the words of man.

The pagan belief of "magic words", is to believe the words of humans do have the same importance or power over reality as the words of God have.
Which that, is not a christian belief.

Those Pagans who believe in those words are just as real to them as your prayers are to your god.

To say otherwise is insensitive to other religions, customs, and cultures around the world.

The Archregimancy wrote:But Sundiata, LM is passive-aggressive or overtly aggressive towards almost everyone who posts in this thread; but particularly the non-Catholics who disagree with him or try and clarify different perspectives. I'm sorry you don't see it, but it's also impacted my activity in the thread in the last couple of months.

I see, I am very sorry to hear that.

Lost Memories wrote:Given all that. What do you suggest Archregimancy I should do? What would be the best way to speak, while not offending anyone?
Because, it's looking to me, correct me if I'm wrong on this, the only choice others have been repeatly giving me, is to don't speak at all.

Just be nice, man. It's really not that complicated, and it's really not that hard. Lumi is no less devout a Catholic than you, I warrant, and yet she manages it almost all the time. So does Sundiata. Be kind, polite, courteous, nonjudgmental, nondefensive; more ready to learn than to criticize, to find common ground than to highlight division. Don't pick fights, and don't brand others as cowards when they refuse to get into those fights with you. I, and a lot of other Protestants, are not trying to attack your faith, or prove you wrong, or demonstrate that you are a blight upon the Church. So don't do that to us; treat me with the same courtesy and respect with which I try to treat you. Be nice. And if you really can't do that - if what you have to say is genuinely incompatible with even that modicum of decent humanity - then yeah: I guess you should consider the old wisdom that "if you ain't got anything nice to say, don't say anything at all."

Been a long time since I posted here and, from the looks of things, I'm starting to remember why I stopped in the first place.

Sundiata wrote:

Bienenhalde wrote:Also, I have thought about posting here more often, but I get nervous because I know there are some people here who seem more knowledgeable and articulate.

Fortunately for you I am little more than a fool.

I mean I post here every now and then and I'm probably the least knowledgeable person here.

Lost Memories wrote:Given all that. What do you suggest Archregimancy I should do? What would be the best way to speak, while not offending anyone?
Because, it's looking to me, correct me if I'm wrong on this, the only choice others have been repeatly giving me, is to don't speak at all.

You're free to speak your mind but others are also free to push back if they disagree.

It doesn't always work but try to affirm the person before expressing disagreement. I don't want to suggest that I'm always right but I do think that I generally do this well. It helps discourse when you genuinely try to love the person you disagree with. If you get angry, stop to pray for yourself and the person with whom you disagree.

Not everyone's going to like church teaching but kindness goes a long way when it gets difficult to find the right words. There's a lot we can do with the mad that we feel.

The New California Republic wrote:

Lost Memories wrote:To clear one other wrong assumption. Which is souring this place.

The protestants (the generic umbrella term, since I can't really list all the different groups) are welcome in this thread. I've never tried to push anyone away.
If I make a generic comment or express an opinion over protestantism as a whole, again because I can't list all the groups of it -> Who isn't called out by the specific comment, obviously wasn't meant to be the one getting addressed by the comment or opinion.

Likewise, since the protestants(in general) are welcome, it could help to build a discussion, if they(generic) didn't too often run away or throw a tantrum every time they aren't appeased into everything they say or hold.

The same, I think, should apply to anyone who ever was critical about other christian groups. A critic is meant to start a discussion, not to shame others.

See, when you make an apology and then throw in some condescension of Protestants like this, it just makes everyone doubt the sincerity of it.

Quite.

The discrepancy between 'The protestants ... are welcome in this thread. I've never tried to push anyone away' and then making this statement almost immediately conditional on them not 'running away' or throwing 'a tantrum every time they aren't appeased into everything they say or hold' is telling.

Again, it's not a moderation issue; nor is it a language issue. It's a matter of common courtesy towards people who disagree over issues of theology.

Of course we're going to disagree; if 2000 years of Christian theology and apologetics have been unsuccessful in getting us all to agree, then this thread certainly isn't going to succeed. But that doesn't mean we can't watch our tone while disagreeing.

@Sundiata Archregimancy
You are misunderstanding one thing, in what you just said.

I have no issue with people disagreeing with me. I've been, more and more times, trying to bring topics to discuss over, topics about christianity, and to see different views about them. I want to see the point of view others have. And for that purpose, I've been, more and more times, sharing by own point of view, as a first contribution to the discussion, for others to share their own views. If not at other times, expressing a point of view I myself are unsure about, to get some direction from others.

What I can't agree with, is people twisting what I say, by turning either the topic, or my own point of view, backward. I've been trying to correct the misunderstandings, everytime they presented themselves. Though, to not much success, as people wrongly believe there is no misunderstanding at all, and would rather dictate what I say or supposedly said.
Which incidentally, most often, the twisting of words, goes in pair with not engaging into discussion over the topic. But rather redirecting the discussion over personal attacks.

It would be nice for everyone to try harder to engage in discussion, rather than getting distracted by kneejerk emotive reactions.
Otherwise, some topics about christianity are never going to be talked about. For the peace of mind of everyone.
Maybe fluff news, or trite politicized points, are what most really want to hear and talk about. I find those staples disatisfying, and superficial.

Celritannia wrote:

Lost Memories wrote:Because the word of God, is not the same as the words of man.

The pagan belief of "magic words", is to believe the words of humans do have the same importance or power over reality as the words of God have.
Which that, is not a christian belief.

Those Pagans who believe in those words are just as real to them as your prayers are to your god.

To say otherwise is insensitive to other religions, customs, and cultures around the world.

I mean I'm not of the particular opinion that a religion should merit respect by default. Respect people is one thing, respecting their beliefs is another. I don't respect Islam but I do respect Muslims and will leave them to worship as they please. But I'll openly state that I have an extremely negative opinion of Islam and will proudly and regularly criticize it without reservation. If Muslims choose to take offense to my criticism then that's their prerogative.

The only religions I can say I respect are Zoroastrianism and Sikhism. I can also respect Agnosticism and, to a lesser extent, Atheism. Other religions I view either indifferently due to a lack of sufficient knowledge of them or I hold with contempt. More of the former than the latter.

I will still respect the right of their believers to believe whatever they choose, but that doesn't mean I'll respect their faith itself - nor should I. I respect religions based on the content of their teachings, just as I do ideologies and philosophies.

Reverend Norv wrote:Just be nice, man. It's really not that complicated, and it's really not that hard. Lumi is no less devout a Catholic than you, I warrant, and yet she manages it almost all the time. So does Sundiata.

I imagine she manages to be kind far more than myself, but thank you nonetheless.