Forum Guidelines: No Theology Debates

Halo Hound said:

Whatever name you need to call me in light of that, please feel free.

Evil-halo-hound-from-Hell.

Robert Pavich said:

Halo Hound said:

Whatever name you need to call me in light of that, please feel free.

Evil-halo-hound-from-Hell.

Who can argue with alliteration :-)

Chris Thompson said:

Bohuslav Wojnar said:

Yes, me. Do you have problem with it?

I had a bit of a problem seeing your halo...My Bad.

Chris,
I don't take your joke. IMHO you crossed the line. The way you
responded to Robert was anything but something I would call Christian. I tried to help
you to see Robert was right in saying "we". I thought you will apologize
but you just joke. OK. English is not my first nor the second language,
so I  might say  something not the way I should. I apologize for that in
advance.

In more than 30 years of my ministry, large part of it I did in
the persecution environment, as part of the underground church movement.
Now we try to help Christians who live in less advantageous parts of the
world where our brothers and sisters still pay the highest price for
being able to study Bible, to participate in the Christian life. Just
few days ago one of my highly respected friend, key minister in a less privileged country has been kidnapped. We don't know where he is so far. I am saying all of this just to
give you a chance how your words look like in some other
perspective. What are we talking here about? Our preferred Bible
software? Do we need to use so strong words in that matter? Do we need to accuse motives of other people?

I have
no clue what is the status of the word "kiss-ups" in English. In our
language it would be very rude and vulgar (meaning exactly what George described in his post). You can call me that way if you feel better but I
want you to know I have had a number of occasions I needed to stand up for truth in the
situations I had to pay a heavy price for that. I am nobodies fun just to
flatter or gain anything.

I like Logos and am thankful to God for
it (I still remember time of having no study materials under the
communist regime), I like Bob Pritchet's business plan and over-all
philosophy, I agree with his strategic plans, but... I have many things
I would like to see in Logos (like many more non-English Bibles). I
will communicate those wishes wherever it is appropriate but in this
thread Bob presented his big-picture-philosophy I happen to agree with wholeheartedly. Is it a problem to express it? Who made you judge of the motives of other people you don't even know?

If I misunderstood you, I will gladly apologize. I know my English is a barrier to me and it might cause a misunderstanding.

Bohuslav Wojnar said:

In more than 30 years of my ministry, large part of it I did in
the persecution environment, as part of the underground church movement.

Thank you for your labor of love for our Lord. it is both humbling and encouraging.

My profound apologies to Bob.

This is my first foray into the Logos forum and, to be frank, I am dismayed by the experience.

Sorry, Bob. I had no idea.

Bohuslav Wojnar said:

If I misunderstood you, I will gladly apologize. I know my English is a barrier to me and it might cause a misunderstanding.

I have to believe that you DO misunderstand me.... But I do not require an apology. We have two issues working against us. The language barrier does enter into it. The other thing is that we don't see eye to eye about constructive criticism. Whenever someone brings up an issue they feel needs attention, There is an element of the forums that gets their feathers ruffled. They think it crosses a line, and the person objecting is not a Christian. That group piles on the protester. They feel they need to defend Bob's honor. Why not let him speak for himself?

My heart goes out to you and your friend...everyone that situation affects. I have always hated injustice...wherever I see it. This whole conversation began over what I considered to be injustice. I stood up for what I believe. (as you say you have often done) The price for speaking up is enduring the wrath of "Bob's Vicars". Bob has long ago apologized, but the debate has now evolved into the question of whether or not one has the right to speak  his mind. I believe they do. I will continue to speak when I feel the need. But for today, I will digress and let someone else have the floor. ...God Bless

Chris Thompson said:

I will continue to speak when I feel the need.

If you understood me that I am against the free speech, I apologize. That was not what I meant. We are free to speak. But we have to remember our words are evaluated by others... For me that is a sobering fact. Not even speaking about the Scriptures like Matthew 12:36-37...

Mark W. Gaither said:

My profound apologies to Bob.

This is my first foray into the Logos forum and, to be frank, I am dismayed by the experience.

Sorry, Bob. I had no idea.

Dear Mark,

I just wanted to say that although I share your dismay regarding this thread, it is unrepresentative of the general discussions found on this forum.

It seems to me that the forum in general has been under attack by trolls (perhaps just one or two individuals using different user accounts). Unfortunately, they have gravitated to posts like this one (no doubt sensing controversy).

The absence of an avatar, biography and a low post count is, in many cases, most telling. The few posts that they do have to their account are universally negative and critical.

For what it is worth, I am truly sorry that your experience has been negative, but wanted to assure you that there are many people who participate in the forums with the sole intention of helping others study the Scriptures and grow in their knowledge of Him.

I hope you stick around as I am sure your participation would be a true blessing to many.

God bless,

Andy

Andy Evans said:

I hope you stick around ...

I'm all for straight talk. I stand by the substance of my comments, but had I seen how personal and nasty a thread can become, I would have been less harsh with my criticism.

The standards remain high for president because his words carry so much weight, and as an official voice for the company, it's crucial he communicate in a manner that reduces the potential for misunderstanding. That said, however, I can appreciate the humanity of his outburst even as I suggest he be more temperate in his postings.

Regardless, I will probably lurk more than contribute, simply because I have more to learn than teach--at least as far as the deeper technical aspects of Logos are concerned.

 

 

Halo Hound said:

Thank you for your labor of love for our Lord. it is both humbling and encouraging.

I would like to echo this sentiment.

Living in America and having the abundance of bibles and bible study material available anytime I need it... it's easy to forget what our brothers and sisters go through in other countries...and what they have to go through to get what we take for granted every day.

 

Thank you Bohuslav, thank you...God bless your efforts.

Chris Thompson said:

You Win ! I Quit ! I have been accused of
being a troll, of saying things I didn't say, and being people I have
never met. Finally My Christianity was brought into question. It may
well be that I don't live up to that name, But I Know enough to realize
Who will make that judgment. This debate (or one like it) will linger
long after I'm dead. I simply don't have the will to swim upstream
anymore. Have it your way. Have a great life. I sincerely apologize for
any hard feelings I have contributed to. ...... God Bless.

 

Chris,

Accountability requires truth-telling.

These are your words, offered as a response to a fellow poster here: http://community.logos.com/forums/thread/267147.aspx

“Have a great day. I have better things to do than engage in mental warfare with an unarmed man.”

 

Or, how about the following posts -- again, your words -- offered in the current thread:

“Could it be the only reason Mark is sorry is that he hasn't found a way to get Logos to sell his book? Maybe standing up for Bob might just be what's needed to start the ball rolling? I suggest Bob check out other forums and see what Mark really thinks of him.”

“The price for speaking up is enduring the wrath of "Bob's Vicars".”

 

As I see it, the issue your fellow posters have raised, Chris, has not been about your right to your opinions, or your freedom to disagree with the rhetoric or vision of Logos management, and certainly not about your Christianity. The issue has been about the manner in which you have repeatedly chosen to express yourself.

When you could have said, "I agree that continuing our disagreement will not be a productive use of our time," you instead chose to critique the intelligence of the person with whom you disagreed via the caustic phrase, "an unarmed man."

When you could have chosen to refrain from all judgment about the motives of another Logos user, you instead chose to impute to him greed and disingenuousness.

When you could have said, "My posted disagreements with Logos seems often to meet with fervent opposition from other posters," you instead chose to refer to those other posters as "Bob's vicars."

And when you could have written, "I apologize for the ways my postings have hurt people," you instead chose to lament what I guess you see as your victimization, and then to close with language whose sincerity, in such a context, is almost immediately questioned:

"Have it your way. Have a great life. I sincerely apologize for
any hard feelings I have contributed to. ...... God Bless."

 

There is a significant difference between disagreeing and demeaning. Disagreement is about ideas and opinions. Demeaning is about people. No one here protests your disagreements. We protest the demeaning tone and content of your words (you will no doubt recall the post in which you referred to those with whom you disagree as the "cultured elite").

Have others engaged in demeaning posts, perhaps in response to you? Yes. Sadly, demeaning rhetoric is often a perpetual motion machine. Those who demeaned you or anyone else, were wrong and should apologize.... Not excuse their rhetoric. Not cry foul for the posts that prompted their outbursts. They -- we all, and you -- should simply apologize, repent (change), and then move on.

You had your chance to do just that, Chris. You chose not to take it. I hope you will now.

Bill

Paul Oertly said:

 

Edwin Bowden said:

It was totally uncalled for.

 

I deleted the post. I would have deleted the others but it appears too much time has passed. On my way out I just cant help but wonder why you could not overlook my post, but you were not offended by this exchange.

 

Robert Pavich said:

Halo Hound said:

Whatever name you need to call me in light of that, please feel free.

Evil-halo-hound-from-Hell.

 

That was simply a joke between two friends.

Chris Thompson said:

...The other thing is that we don't see eye to eye about constructive criticism. Whenever someone brings up an issue they feel needs attention, There is an element of the forums that gets their feathers ruffled. They think it crosses a line, and the person objecting is not a Christian. That group piles on the protester. They feel they need to defend Bob's honor. Why not let him speak for himself?

My heart goes out to you and your friend...everyone that situation affects. I have always hated injustice...wherever I see it. This whole conversation began over what I considered to be injustice. I stood up for what I believe. (as you say you have often done) The price for speaking up is enduring the wrath of "Bob's Vicars". Bob has long ago apologized, but the debate has now evolved into the question of whether or not one has the right to speak  his mind. I believe they do. I will continue to speak when I feel the need. But for today, I will digress and let someone else have the floor. ...God Bless

 

I will stand by and defend the word I used -"kiss up,"  which is defined very well in Chris's post above:

"There is an element of the forums that gets their feathers ruffled. They think it crosses a line, and the person objecting is not a Christian. That group piles on the protester. They feel they need to defend Bob's honor. Why not let him speak for himself?"  

The remaining part of the definition for "kiss up" would be one who tries to flatter a superior, owner, president, etc. in order to get special attention.  

I take no shame nor have any regrets for speaking the truth.  

This forum has plenty of people who are gracious, and amazing at helping people   This does not enter into this particular post neither.  This thread is talking about "Forum Guidelines" and having a rule that says "NO KISS UPS" is totally relevant.  

Righteous opposition is an amazing healthy thing.... HONOR THIS!  We don't need politically correct Christians who are afraid to offend.  The Gospel is an offensive thing.  The world nailed Jesus to a tree for what he said and did.  

This post should not have turned into a persecuted Christian thread either... This has nothing to do with the thread and this should be discussed elsewear in another post.  But, I am sure this comment will not be well received either.

 

I also stand by this :  “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called sons of God” (Matthew 5:9)

 Passivity is not the answer; activity is. “Peacemaking” is an action word, implying that the Christian is to make peace. There are many Christian who love and want peace and few who are willing to work for it.  Peace does not mean give in or give up or simply agree.

James says that evil desires within are the source of conflict (James 4:1-2). People are at war with other people because they are not at peace with themselves, and they are not at peace with themselves because they are at WAR with God.

Make peace with God and you will be at peace with yourself!

 

 

Only 2 things in response;

14 Do everything without grumbling or arguing, 15 so that you may become blameless and pure, “children of God without fault in a warped and crooked generation.” u Then you will shine among them like stars in the sky 16 as you hold firmly to the word of life. 

 

The New International Version. 2011 (Php 2:14–16). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 

 

The New International Version. 2011 (1 Co 13:4–7). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Protestants:  Our customer base is still 95% protestant, and we are targeting a 5% Catholic group.  You know that there are some Catholics passionate about the truth of scripture.  In past history they were so passionate they burned people at the stake, who did not bow to the Pope and authority of the Roman Catholic Church.  They stole land, impronsoned and tortured countless people for their zeal for God.  Some of these Catholics are out-of-control people and are not good with getting along with others who do not worship the Pope  That's why the Catholic church is basically one large church that claims all protestants are outside of Orthodox Christianity.  While there are some  protestant church splits due to doctrinal issues that need to be addressed, the Catholic Church has unified around false doctrines and will defend those false doctrines vehemntly.  Protestants, I know the attacks historically have been painful and unkind coming from the Roman Cathlolic Church,  but please understand that you're "surrounded" by people who traditionally are more likely to burn you at the stake, issue a Papal Bull, or call down an anathama on those who do not bow to Roman Catholocism. In the Catholic mindset there is a single authority figure alone who is to be respected as the Mediator between God and man, the Pope. 

 

I wonder how the forum would have went if Bob attacked the catholics as he did the protestants.   And he is the president of Logos??????????

Jolly Troll said:

If Logos was serious ...

Doesn't the screen name say it all (combined with the low post count)?

Bob Pritchett said:

Keith Larson said:

Your characterization of Protestants was very unfair.

See, this is why I hate these arguments... I'm in over my head. :-)

I've heard a few people (here, and on blogs) saying I've "thrown protestants under the bus" or gone "anti-protestant." That certainly wasn't my intention at all, and I apologize if I was somehow unfair to protestants, among whom I number myself.

This is a case of writing too quickly and posting without enough thought, in the heat of the moment. I wasn't trying to make any bold statements about Catholics and protestants; I actually thought I was making a mildly clever point in response to calls for someone to "step in and settle things," by pointing out that protestant churches don't have the hierarchy of the Catholic church. When protestants disagree on doctrine, they rarely kick the issue upstairs for an authoritative answer from the church hierarchy; they just split the church. I was trying to make the point that it was harder to get people so inclined to ever "settle down and get along" when they believe they are arguing a theologically important point. I thought that the request for someone to "set the rules" reflected a perspective that might be informed by experience in a more hierarchial church structure.

This was obviously too subtle a point and too gross a simplification, and probably too informed by my own experience in small non-denominational churches, all too many of which seem so split over trivial stuff.

Even my use of split wasn't a reference to departing "away from the true church." I meant splitting as in Tom, Mary, and their small group are leaving to start a new church down the street where we will use harmonicas during worship....

I apologize for the confusion, and for my flippancy. I plead jet-lag (last week) and too many simultaneous fires.

-- Bob

Bob, I think it would be helpful if you added an "EDIT" to your opening post with the words of the post quoted above.

And I frankly have little idea about the controversial threads which brought all this about. Whenever I see a "train wreck" about to happen, I go to a more helpful thread.

 

Jolly Troll said:

If Logos was serious about this Bob would remove his initial attack and slander against Protestant Christians and close this forum.  But the fact remains that he seems to want this to go further since he has not removed the post.  When you stab someone in the back and then apologize, it really is not taken to seriously when you refuse to pull the knife out of the persons back after you apologize.

This poster should be ignored, at best this posters intent appears to only try and fan the flames.  I for one stand up for all righteous opposition, but this does not represent righteous opposition.  Poster if you have the boldness to post such harshness, you should be bold enough to use your real name, or fill out a Bio, and certainly not use a username that represents mockery.  This post does nothing to solve anything, and only causes further separation.  Bob has apologized and I for one think he was sincere.

MJ. Smith said:

To those who say not responding to this thread is the wisest action, I say that I've just proved that I am not wise

                                                                                [^o)] HHHMMMmmm~~~ [^o)]

[I][H]“Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.” St. Augustine

MJD said:

“Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.” St. Augustine

Do you have a reference for that?  I have heard quotations supposedly by Augustine which I have been unable to locate -- this is one of them.

From wikiquotes...

• Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and
  courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do
  not remain the way they are.
  • As quoted in Spirituality and Liberation: Overcoming the Great Fallacy (1988) by Robert McAfee Brown, p. 136

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo

After looking at all the other Google results I bet this resource fails to quote where it came from as well.

This wonerful quote came over the fence to me:

MJD said:

“Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.” St. Augustine

To better understand what it means when spoken by those "over there", I leaned over the fence straining my ear and heard this:

"Hope has two beautiful daughters', said St Augustine. 'Their names are anger and courage: anger at the way things are and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are.'

What a challenge! How can we keep these two gifts of God dancing in harmony? How do we clarify our convictions and passions and translate them into effective actions? Ignatius Loyola offered us a seemingly simple daily exercise which can reconcile these powerful movements of our hearts and let them flower as hope. Nowadays we call it the ‘consciousness examen', and it goes along these lines:

"Begin by recalling God's presence
Look at the day with gratitude
Ask the help of the Spirit to review the day

We ask God:
When did I see you today?
When did I love you today?
When did I not see you?
You were there but I could not get a grasp of who you were and where you were.
Where, how, did I miss seeing you?

Was I called to be an instrument of reconciliation and peace and healing?
Did I hear that call?
Did I respond to that call with openness? "

I am glad I lent mine ear to Mark Raper SJ.    For he  understands St. Augustine better than I.

Peace to you, Michael!

               *smile*

                                 Thank you for your reply.....              I was wondering if that quote really came from St. Augustine.

                          While I don't really disagree with anything you are saying, I do find what you are saying a wee bit "fuzzy" over against what to have righteous anger toward .....   and what changes to what need to be made.        

          It reminds me of the Canadian writer -- Stephen Leacock -- who wrote in one of his novels, "Lord Ronald said nothing; he flung himself from the room, flung himself upon his horse and rode madly off in all directions."

Once our orientation is clear, then perhaps we might apply the anger and courage.  Of course we need the Holy Spirit's Guidance for that!    *smile*