That Vyrso would sell something from a cult leader. Here - https://vyrso.com/products/search?Author=17446|Mike+Bickle are books that are from Mike Bickle who is the founder and leader of the cult group IHOP(International House Of Prayer). Here are some info on IHOP:
http://www.apologeticsindex.org/1212-international-house-of-prayer-ihop
http://www.solasisters.com/2011/06/former-ihop-member-explains-why-ihop.html
https://carm.org/ihop
Can anyone explain this to me? Why would FL promote and sell material from a cult leader?
They sell primary religious texts for many groups from the bhagavad gita to the quran, to JW works, and I think watchman nee stuff. Just because we disagree with them doesn't mean they don't have value in our libraries, and further one mans trash is anothers treasure. Just glad that its in Vyrso, not logos.
Just because we disagree with them doesn't mean they don't have value in our libraries, and further one mans trash is anothers treasure.
Well glad someone saw something that I didn't thanks for that and you have a point. So do you think I overreacted?
So do you think I overreacted?
No, you did not overreact. You just have a different view on what the website should carry.
Not sure about that, but I have noticed the dichotomy whereby positive suggestions / appraisals of resource are generally approved of, while their negative counterparts are generally not; even though both approaches are usually expressions of theology, which are not allowed on the Forums.
Interesting post. I guess the way I look at it is in this way. I personally don't think Bickle is a cult leader. My thinking is if we are to combat heresy or any other type of teaching that goes against the Word we need to know what those who we oppose teach.
I can not simply say "you're wrong" and leave it at that. An informed, intelligent and respectful dialogue must take part between two opposing viewpoints or nothing will be gained.
I should know, no, I must know the opposing view and see how it views Scripture and then weigh that teaching with my own set of beliefs.
How can I intelligently dialogue with the Jehovah's Witness if I don't know what they teach? I can't. The conversation will always end with nothing resolved. How can I faithfully share the gospel if I don't know what others believe? I can't.
So, I'm glad that resources are available that I don't agree with. I'll buy them, read them and hopefully I'll have a better understanding of those I Biblically oppose and who knows I may have to adjust some of my beliefs while doing so.
The arrogant and useless man is one who says "you're wrong" and can't prove it intelligently and Biblically.
Just my two cents worth.
mm.
That Vyrso would sell something from a cult leader. Here - https://vyrso.com/products/search?Author=17446|Mike+Bickle are books that are from Mike Bickle who is the founder and leader of the cult group IHOP(International House Of Prayer). Here are some info on IHOP: http://www.apologeticsindex.org/1212-international-house-of-prayer-ihop http://www.solasisters.com/2011/06/former-ihop-member-explains-why-ihop.html https://carm.org/ihop Can anyone explain this to me? Why would FL promote and sell material from a cult leader?
Just because we disagree with them doesn't mean they don't have value in our libraries, and further one mans trash is anothers treasure. Well glad someone saw something that I didn't thanks for that and you have a point. So do you think I overreacted?
Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone.
Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it.
Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone. Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it.
I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000. However excepting that premise, you do realize that book is fictitious. Just in my few years here that rude title has been leveled at everyone from the independent fundamentalists, to baptists, to N.T. Wright, Daryl Bock, the Catholics, SDA, and the pentecostals (and several of their various waves) just to name a few. If the community can handle that, and we have, an individual saying they like a book by a certain author is unlikely to cause offense. Unless that book is Bram Stokers Dracula. Then all bets are off.
Grampa I think would take offence with your last line...
Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone. Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it. I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000. However excepting that premise, you do realize that book is fictitious. Just in my few years here that rude title has been leveled at everyone from the independent fundamentalists, to baptists, to N.T. Wright, Daryl Bock, the Catholics, SDA, and the pentecostals (and several of their various waves) just to name a few. If the community can handle that, and we have, an individual saying they like a book by a certain author is unlikely to cause offense. Unless that book is Bram Stokers Dracula. Then all bets are off.
for me it is disturbing that you called a "cult leader". if we start sensor religious books based on our premises than we will have empty library.
What is more disturbing is that MVP is saying that James didn't over reacted. A word to MVP - do u really want me to step up and say who is according to my beliefs are heretics? Do you really want a war in the forums? We have here Catholics, Orthodox, Baptists, Pentecostals, Charismatics, and etc. let's love and respect everyone.
Wild Eagle. MVPs are not employees of FL and will have differing opinions. I am not 100% sure I would have the time or the energy to list as the books I have an issue with in the FL universe. But I do not feel the need to either. While it is out of place in these forms to discuss theology it happens somewhat from time to time. I know of at least one MVP that left the forum after what might be called hate filled rhetoric being tossed around the forums after one lady requested a resource that some people found very objectionable. I can see in MCJ reply a placation in that he was saying in a way he understood the objection. Christian discourse is the spot to go for those wanting to hold a heated debate over the minutia of faith details. I truly understand how one persons minutia is someones else's key argument. It is not for me or any in this forum to argue over theses things. There are times and places for such things. All I will say is I hardily agree with the person suggesting that Satan is never happier than when people of faith argue, for where there is heated discussion often love lessens.
-Dan
Wild Eagle. MVPs are not employees of FL and will have differing opinions. I am not 100% sure I would have the time or the energy to list as the books I have an issue with in the FL universe. But I do not feel the need to either. While it is out of place in these forms to discuss theology it happens somewhat from time to time. I know of at least one MVP that left the forum after what might be called hate filled rhetoric being tossed around the forums after one lady requested a resource that some people found very objectionable. I can see in MCJ reply a placation in that he was saying in a way he understood the objection. Christian discourse is the spot to go for those wanting to hold a heated debate over the minutia of faith details. I truly understand how one persons minutia is someones else's key argument. It is not for me or any in this forum to argue over theses things. There are times and places for such things. All I will say is I hardily agree with the person suggesting that Satan is never happier than when people of faith argue, for where there is heated discussion often love lessens. -Dan
[Y]
Well said brother [Y]
I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000.
I disagree ... it in the past it has only taken one or two individual to create uproar. The vast majority of the users know to be civil but a few bad eggs can keep users away - not getting the help they need and deserve.
you do realize that book is fictitious.
There is a lot of bad writing, bad logic and bad theology ... including pure fiction and flagrant lies - in Logos. I choose not to name names. As for schismatic and heretical texts ... why that covers most the library although we would all disagree as to precisely which texts those are. Whether or not they get "called out" seems to depend upon how close they are to the "in group".
that rude title has been leveled at everyone
So .. one doesn't have to stoop to the lowest common denominator.
So do you think I overreacted? Not sure about that, but I have noticed the dichotomy whereby positive suggestions / appraisals of resource are generally approved of, while their negative counterparts are generally not; even though both approaches are usually expressions of theology, which are not allowed on the Forums.
Exactly!
I find this disturbing. Or, at least, Disturbed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9Dg-g7t2l4
I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000. I disagree ... it in the past it has only taken one or two individual to create uproar. The vast majority of the users know to be civil but a few bad eggs can keep users away - not getting the help they need and deserve. you do realize that book is fictitious. There is a lot of bad writing, bad logic and bad theology ... including pure fiction and flagrant lies - in Logos. I choose not to name names. As for schismatic and heretical texts ... why that covers most the library although we would all disagree as to precisely which texts those are. Whether or not they get "called out" seems to depend upon how close they are to the "in group". that rude title has been leveled at everyone So .. one doesn't have to stoop to the lowest common denominator.
Sorry I thought you were saying that the book mentioned by the original OP was fictitious.
I realize I made a mistake and did not mean to start a firestorm so I apologize to the good folks here for starting this thread [:(]
Please, bring Dracula back! :[ If FL sells Ratsinger The Quitter's stuff, why not Dracula? Very inconsistent on FL's part!
I realize I made a mistake and did not mean to start a firestorm so I apologize to the good folks here for starting this thread
No firestorm, I'm not mad. Just got my feelings hurt a little by MJ is all. If it's the view of the MVP's that I'm a bad egg, maybe it's time I make an exit.
I'm sorry for hurting your feelings and apologize if I misread your post ... I took it as condoning name calling as along as it was individual not group name calling.
As for being a bad egg, I consider you to be a positive source of information in the forums ... even if I question your logic now and then. I am aware that we sometimes fail to understand each other ... but in a way that I attribute to differences in age, geography and interests. Please do not make an exit.
P.S. for the less than a handful of people whom I feel incapable of communicating with, I express it by leaving their posts for others who can speak their language to answer.
Maybe I should have said it differently. I could have said "James, you should love and respect everyone." Or I could have scolded James saying, "You have overreacted." Then everyone would attack my judgmental attitude. I chose instead to be understanding of the differences in perspectives found in the forums. I am very tolerant of those differences.
I am heavily invested in Logos. I have the top level of every base package offered by Logos (and Verbum). I don't run around branding "cult leaders." To me IHOP is a pancake restaurant.
If it's the view of the MVP's that I'm a bad egg, maybe it's time I make an exit.
On the contrary, this MVP thinks you are a tremendous asset to these forums. Stay with us.
Anyone with a cute doggie as avatar cannot be a bad egg [;)].
in a word NO..
All teaching needs to be weighted against scripture, the good absorbed, the poor/bad discarded, regardless of teacher or denomination, the problem is when you discard everything immediately, you often are the poorer for it, as the saying goes "a broken clock is right twice a day", there will be nuggets of truth that can be mined and applied, even if there is a lot of dross you need to discard in extracting them, yes core values should never be compromised, but we may not see the whole picture/revelation of God's grace and have to be willing to ask the question "What if my viewpoint needs expanded..?"
The question is, not should something be released, but are you strong/grounded enough in the truth of the word to absorb the good and reject the rest..?
I rather find that carm website disturbing. They claim Roman Catholicism is a cult, SDA is a cult, the Orthodox Church is a cult.
I'm still looking for some statement "everyone is a cult but me..."
Ahh, not all others are cult. My church movement according to carm is only "a church with some serious problems". Boy am I relieved I didn't fall for a cult! [:^)]
I rather find that carm website disturbing. They claim Roman Catholicism is a cult, SDA is a cult, the Orthodox Church is a cult. I'm still looking for some statement "everyone is a cult but me..." Ahh, not all others are cult. My church movement according to carm is only "a church with some serious problems". Boy am I relieved I didn't fall for a cult!
Ahh, not all others are cult. My church movement according to carm is only "a church with some serious problems". Boy am I relieved I didn't fall for a cult!
As far as cults go, JW's are a cult, but some people don't realize that JW's and SDA are very similar since Russell used to be an Adventist, but due to "disagreements" he went and started his own little group which changes their way they interpret Scriptures more times than I change socks in a week. But anyway, I always wondered why there aren't any JW's here, maybe because some believe using the internet is a sin. At least that's what some Spanish speaking JW's I've encountered say. The English speaking seem to be more updated on their things, because according to them they receive updates from the tower. I told that to the Spanish JW's and they claim the English ones must be wrong...LOL...go figure. I thought that was really funny!
DAL
First, looking at your resources, I'm not sure I'd call these guys a cult, though these resources do point to some cult-like tendencies. The very fact that they tell their people that "this isn't for everyone," and if people are uncomfortable, they are allowed to freely leave and seek other church communities separate them from an actual cult in my eyes. Whether what they are teaching is heretical is another discussion all together.
As far as Faithlife carrying their stuff, you've gotten some good input on that. Faithlife long ago made the decision to carry resources that are outside of what I believe is owner's personal, solidly Evangelical belief system. That is what it is.
I think Logos is still primarily marketed to Evangelicals, though they have added resources to attract a wide range of people in the "Christian" community. I believe this is why they have added denominational categories to their base packages. Logos is already extremely expensive. I would assume that they would have a hard time selling expensive packages, where a large part of the resources aren't useful to the buyer. In this way, people can buy base packages that generally fit their belief systems, and then are free to buy other resources that may or may not line up with their basic beliefs.
To your question of whether it is disturbing to me, not really. If I owned the company, I imagine that I would have made different choices, and focused more on tools designed for a more limited audience than Faithlife has. It seems to me that Faithlife has tried to distance themselves from the idea of existing primarily for the purpose of furthering the work of the church (from an Evangelical perspective), while at the same time, wanting to provide tools that will be helpful to Christians, and to the church ("not a Christian company"). Given this, I expect them to provide resources that I might consider heretical.
Long ago, when I chose Logos, it was the best tool for what I was doing (Seminary, Pastoral ministry). In some ways, I got somewhat locked in. If I were starting today, I might make a different choice. For me, the software and resources have grown so expansive that at some level it hinders what I use it for. However, it is still extremely useful to me, and I haven't yet felt the need to jump to a competitor.
For what it's worth...
I absolutely disagree with this statement. There was nothing wrong with you asking the question you did.
On one hand, this is just a software forum, focused on how to use a software that is used by a diverse group of people within the loose definition of "Christian" (and likely a few outside that category). This means that there is a diverse group of people who frequent this forum from that same loosely defined group.
On the other hand, this software is largely marketed to Evangelical Christians, is likely used mainly by Evangelical Christians, and I'm fairly certain that the company is owned by Evangelical Christians. So, assuming that you are coming from that same Evangelical perspective, to come here and ask, "Does anyone else find this a bit troubling" is not inappropriate, uncouth, or socially unacceptable.
A somewhat spirited conversation is likely to come from such a post, as there are many people who contribute to this forum who are coming from a different theological, "denominational" place. There's nothing wrong with that, either. The fact that a misunderstanding arises of motives or attitudes, or even genuine disagreement, doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the question, or that it shouldn't have been asked.
Thanks Al for your wonderful post but I feel now that I've become hypocritical. Hypocrisy and Pride are the two sins(outside the unpardonable sin)that I fear the most and feel like I commit them(or at least hypocrisy)because I can listen to the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's Christmas stuff and it relaxes me but on the same token I consider Mormonism heresy and maybe a cult or I can listen to Gregorian chants which are Catholic liturgical prayers but as a Protestant I'm against Catholic theology.
What does that say about my character? I do feel like I didn't think things through and just rushed in starting this thread not thinking that maybe there is some value to those books of his. I did have some of his material bookmarked for possible future purchases because they looked interesting and might have helped with my spiritual growth but when I found out about IHOP I took them off my bookmarks. So as you can see I seem to be a hypocritical dolt that just has a nasty habit of not thinking things through and jumping the gun to quickly.
May God have mercy on this poor soul!
some people don't realize that JW's and SDA are very similar since Russell used to be an Adventist, but due to "disagreements" he went and started his own little group
Not that I am wanting to start WW3 but .... To be precise, attending a meeting in an SDA church made Russell re-think his biblical understandings but he never became an SDA to be able to have disagreements and leave the SDAs. That is one thing that both SDAs and JWs agree upon!! Apparently SDAs were the one denomination that he never condemned. A distinctly dubious compliment to SDAs though! I would disagree with "are very similar" and replace with "have similarities".
told that to the Spanish JW's and they claim the English ones must be wrong...LOL...go figure. I thought that was really funny!
Why can't everyone think like me?
So as you can see I seem to be a hypocritical dolt that just has a nasty habit of not thinking things through and jumping the gun to quickly. May God have mercy on this poor soul!
Asking Questions is never wrong, however you will get a myriad of viewpoints.
There is nothing to ask forgiveness for here and I don't see you needing mercy, please don't condemn yourself - I don't anyhow..
As far as cults go,
In technical terms, all religious movements begin as a cult - which is not a derogatory term when used technically. If it becomes established socially it grows out of the "cult" phase and into a full fledged religion. Given the sociological forces on cults which normally have a high percentage of marginalized people seeking a place to belong, it usually takes a few generations to know if a group will persist. When I dated an African in college I was surprised to discover how much his father's conversion to Christianity fit the cult theory of religious origin. When I worked with a woman who was a devout and active X, I inadvertently insulted her when trying to explain why X is the classic contemporary example of the life cycle of a cult that doesn't make it to the next stage. So as the proud member of an ancient Jewish Cult ...all grown up now into a real religion ...
Making fun of JW [Corrected as per DAL] Insulting JW by calling them a cult and telling derogatory stories about them is not acceptable behavior. They, like any other group, ought to be able to use Logos and come onto the forums for assistance without fear of being abused.
And as for the poster who essentially said "hey, if you're an Evangelical, you're in the in-crowd, so your free to say anything you want about the out-crowd".
Given the degree to which Jesus was willing to be with the worst - Samaritans even and even conversed nicely with them and used one as a example of stellar behavior; tax collectors who were not only traitors but extortionists, politely healed the daughter of a pagan occupying soldier .... I find it astonishing that a group claiming to be Christian finds it so difficult to be polite and charitable. It makes it very difficult not to fall into the fallacy of attributing to the group what rightly belongs to the individual.
What does that say about my character?
Seems to me it says you are human and do human things. Beating yourself up over it does no good. Learning from it does. Figure out the next step needed for change, thank God for disclosing another flaw, and ask God for assistance in changing.
Yes, during Lent when "Hallelujah" is not said in church, I had the audacity to preach a penance service sermon on "Hallelujah, I'm a sinner" with 7 priests in the congregation. My point was thank God you're Christian enough to recognize your sins.
Oops, I think I just crossed the line into theology and better drop it.
Maybe I should have said it differently. I could have said "James, you should love and respect everyone." Or I could have scolded James saying, "You have overreacted." Then everyone would attack my judgmental attitude. I chose instead to be understanding of the differences in perspectives found in the forums. I am very tolerant of those differences. I am heavily invested in Logos. I have the top level of every base package offered by Logos (and Verbum). I don't run around branding "cult leaders." To me IHOP is a pancake restaurant.
I am sorry Matthhew for overreacting. I noticed in Logos community many times attacks against Charismatic authors and that was disturbing to me. As I said before, we should love and respect everyone. Everyone of us will stand before God and give accountability for our own choices.
Dear MJ nobody made fun of JW's or said they couldn't use Logos. What I stated concerning them changing their doctrines was a fact not making fun of them (e.g., some doctrines rejected at one point and others brought back even if it meant the lives of people and their health are at stake). It's been well documented the horrors about their fallacies in teaching the Bible (you should know these things since you're the fallacy detector and are so well versed in Logic). I even wondered why we never saw any JW's in the forums, but never said they cannot come in...reading too much into a post again? check mate
why we never saw any JW's in the forums, but never said they cannot come in
For the same reasons that we've had Bereans, Mormons, gays ... be around for years before they were willing to identify themselves. There is at least one user I have reason to suspect may be JW or a closely related group.
That Vyrso would sell something from a cult leader. Here - https://vyrso.com/products/search?Author=17446|Mike+Bickle are books that are from Mike Bickle who is the founder and leader of the cult group IHOP(International House Of Prayer). Here are some info on IHOP: Can anyone explain this to me? Why would FL promote and sell material from a cult leader?
Is there a mutually agreed definition or standard for a cult? Is a cult defined by its leader, size, teachings, a combination of these or some behavior outside the norms of society? Who makes that call?
Is there a fear in the forums that biblical truth will be lost if books and authors not in the main stream are made available to logos or Christian readers? My last understanding is the Logos users still have the freedom to purchase or to read what her or she wills. CM
That Vyrso would sell something from a cult leader. Here - https://vyrso.com/products/search?Author=17446|Mike+Bickle are books that are from Mike Bickle who is the founder and leader of the cult group IHOP(International House Of Prayer). Here are some info on IHOP: Can anyone explain this to me? Why would FL promote and sell material from a cult leader? Is there a mutually agreed definition or standard for a cult? Is a cult defined by its leader, size, teachings, a combination of these or some behavior outside the norms of society? Who makes that call? Is there a fear in the forums that biblical truth will be lost if books and authors not in the main stream are made available to logos or Christian readers? My last understanding is the Logos users still have the freedom to purchase or to read what her or she wills. CM
Read MJ's posts for some insight on the technical use of the word
Thanks Al for your wonderful post but I feel now that I've become hypocritical. Hypocrisy and Pride are the two sins(outside the unpardonable sin)that I fear the most and feel like I commit them(or at least hypocrisy)because I can listen to the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's Christmas stuff and it relaxes me but on the same token I consider Mormonism heresy and maybe a cult or I can listen to Gregorian chants which are Catholic liturgical prayers but as a Protestant I'm against Catholic theology. What does that say about my character? I do feel like I didn't think things through and just rushed in starting this thread not thinking that maybe there is some value to those books of his. I did have some of his material bookmarked for possible future purchases because they looked interesting and might have helped with my spiritual growth but when I found out about IHOP I took them off my bookmarks. So as you can see I seem to be a hypocritical dolt that just has a nasty habit of not thinking things through and jumping the gun to quickly. May God have mercy on this poor soul!
We all have our good days and our bad days. [;)]
It is an understandable question, but, as others have pointed out, it then becomes a matter of who gets invested with the authority to parse out heresy from authentic Christian doctrine. I'd rather Faithlife recuse themselves from that role. My motivation is mainly selfish seeing as how I'm Catholic and most of my library would probably disappear if Faithlife did do that. [:P]
...as others have pointed out, it then becomes a matter of who gets invested with the authority to parse out heresy from authentic Christian doctrine. I'd rather Faithlife recuse themselves from that role...
I believe the Bible as it reveals the Logos (John 1:1), Jesus, the Christ, as the authority to reveal, to all men everywhere, what is truth. His life and teachings "parse out heresy from authentic Christian doctrine."
Without fail, the next battle ground will be which translation, interpretation, and presuppositions, when it comes to God's will and revelation. All observant students of the Word know, this why there are so many denominations. Books and commentaries have their places, but the Bible is the standard guide for "authentic Christian doctrines." Has it not been said, that to discern a counterfeit, study the original?
I guess this might not be a good time to bring up the Temple cult (or cultus for the more squeemish).
And as for the poster who essentially said "hey, if you're an Evangelical, your in the in-crowd, so your free to say anything you want about the out-crowd".
I'm assuming that you are talking about me, as I think I'm the only one who used the word "Evangelical" in this thread, so I'll address this one.
MJ, I've noticed that most of the time when you say things like, "...the poster who essentially said..." this usually means what is coming is going to be a significant mis-characterization of what the person says, so you have something to attack, which is precisely what you did here (a classic "straw man" argument).
What I did in my post was answer the question, "Does anyone else find this disturbing..." and the statement that "I should not have started this thread." What I "essentially said" was, "I DO NOT think it is inappropriate for you to go to a forum where the majority of people probably have very similar convictions and beliefs as you, that exists to support software designed for people with similar beliefs as you, by a company owned by people with similar beliefs as you, and ask if anyone else is concerned about the company offering a resource that you think deceptively presents heretical, cult-like views."
This would be contrasted with someone with beliefs similar to the OP who goes to go to a forum of mainly, let's say, Catholics, or Jehovah's Witnesses (since they've been brought up here), or maybe IHOP people, and that person were to post something similar, "essentially saying," "These resources represent beliefs similar to yours. Does anyone here find it disturbing that resources are being offered here that don't fit well with my beliefs, but do fit well with yours...?" You could assume that this would be considered uncouth, and socially unacceptable.
I'm not sure how you would get from my statement that, "In a forum with these circumstances, it is not inappropriate to ask such a question, but no, I don't find it disturbing," that I might be saying "hey, if you're an Evangelical, your in the in-crowd, so your free to say anything you want about the out-crowd." (Your exact accusation.) However, I suspect that you knew I wasn't saying what you claimed. In fact, I didn't say anything vaguely like that.
I'm guessing that I've been visiting this forum for a year or more. In that time, I've noticed significant defensiveness from you, along these lines. I've also noticed that regulars on this forum regularly go out of their way to support you when these things come up, and to try to make you (and others) feel welcome here. My observation is that they don't do this because you do, or do not believe the same way as many/most of the people here. They try to support you because:
1. You have excellent working knowledge of Logos.
2. You are kind and gracious enough to take the time to help people who come here with problems using Logos, as well as regularly helping people who are not having problems, but could perhaps do some things better.
3. You (and 10 or 15 other regulars who invest a lot of time in this forum) add your distinctiveness to this forum, by interacting with both factual, use-based questions, and more conceptual, philosophical, theological questions like this one. This forum would absolutely be different without your active interaction.
Having said that, this doesn't change the fact that the majority of people who visit this forum are likely Evangelical theologically, because that HAS BEEN the primary target customer, and I would wager that the vast majority of people who still purchase the software (and thereby have questions about how to use it, so visit this forum) fit that description as well. Even so, no one would condone people being "free to say anything they want about the out-crowd," and I certainly didn't say anything like that.
Given the degree to which Jesus was willing to be with the worst - Samaritans even and even conversed nicely with them and used one as a example of stellar behavior; tax collectors who were not only traitors but extortionists, politely healed the daughter of a pagan occupying soldier .... I find it astonishing that a group claiming to be Christian finds it so difficult to be polite and charitable.
I might not say that I have ever been "astonished," but I have been disappointed with the tone of posts on this forum from time to time. I would guess that if the same group of people were to hold these same discussions, about the same topics, face to face, the tone would be very different. Some of this is definitely the nature of forums, and quickly conceived statements and responses written by, and to, people that will likely never have a face to face conversation. Add to that the fact that it is really easy to "misread" things that are written. Still, I would expect it to be more friendly here than it sometimes is.
Perhaps significantly misrepresenting what people say in their responses, and attacking that misrepresentation doesn't add to a better tone either, though.
Al, MJ almost always finds my posts, and disagrees. I'm exagerating.
But in this instance your description of what you said, and her description of what a poster said, look surprisingly similar. When in safe territory, ones comments concerning the unwashed tend to increase.
Quite often I criticize the evangelicals as anything but, knowing they'll grit their teeth concerning the stupid lady.
Yes, this is the paragraph I was paraphrasing in a satirical manner. It essentially says "hey we evangelicals are the real market of Logos so we can talk as if the forums were Evangelical - ignore all those people with different beliefs - Logos isn't really for them". I am deliberately exaggerating a portion of the message in you statement because I don't believe that you are aware that that is the message sent & received. I do not bother to "call people out on it" who I believe are doing it deliberately and know precisely how it will be perceived.
I've noticed significant defensiveness from you, along these lines.
Absolutely and deliberately. I was active in the forums when there were a number of people who had no bounds of courtesy, politeness, or theological extremism. I saw a number of people refuse to ask for help because of the tone of the forums. I saw helpful, knowledgeable people leave the forums because they considered it inappropriate for a pastor to be associated with such vitriol. I was thrilled when a Berean posted that he finally felt safe to disclose his affiliation. And, yes, I am passionate about keeping the forums safe for everyone.
This includes not letting Evangelicals assume everyone is evangelical ... or even Calvinist[;)]. The last time I ran the Logos numbers, drawn from the web site, only 29.6% of the resources were tagged as Evangelical. That does not translate directly into users or investors but only a few years ago it was nearer 50%. FYI: 30.8% of the resources are ACELO (Anglican-Catholic-Eastern Orthodox-Lutheran-Oriental Orthodox) which implies that there are a substantial number of users in this sphere.
Absolutely and deliberately. I was active in the forums when there were a number of people who had no bounds of courtesy, politeness, or theological extremism. I saw a number of people refuse to ask for help because of the tone of the forums. I saw helpful, knowledgeable people leave the forums because they considered it inappropriate for a pastor to be associated with such vitriol. I was thrilled when a Berean posted that he finally felt safe to disclose his affiliation. And, yes, I am passionate about keeping the forums safe for everyone. This includes not letting Evangelicals assume everyone is evangelical ... or even Calvinist.
This includes not letting Evangelicals assume everyone is evangelical ... or even Calvinist.
MJ,
Since the matter is on the "table", did you made the forum rules or you just a self-appointed "police" or "enforcer" of the established forum rules or decorum? I think some users, if not expressed, may wondered under who's authority do you operate? In your quest to bring or "keep order", are your doing what you are trying to prevent-- driving people away?
To have mutually agreed rules on one hand, should not we, on the other hand, have mutually agreed enforcers? Is it the job of the MVPs or yours, solely? Do I perceive your task on this forum, beyond contributing your views and helping when you can, that Christians are incapable or unwilling to control/govern themselves?
MJ, I have no "beef" with you, just questions. Peace, until next time. CM
Please abide by the following guidelines as you interact on our forums. Please keep your discussions focused on Logos Bible Software: our software, products, websites, company, tools, etc. Please do not discuss or debate biblical, theological, or other controversial topics. Use one of the many web forums intended for these kinds of discussions. Please treat each other with the love, courtesy, respect, and kindness that you would if you were sitting in your living room together. Please do not use our forums to sell or give away anything or link to anything you’re selling or giving away—including Logos products promote or link to competitors point people to other places that sell Logos-compatible products advertise yourself, your business, your ministry, your website, etc. (a tasteful link in your forum signature is acceptable) post Logos Coupon Codes. If you are aware of a special promotion Logos is running online, you are welcome to link directly to the promotion. Please search before posting. It’s likely that someone has already asked your question. Please help others follow these guidelines. If the problems continue after you’ve given a gentle reminder of these expectations, please click “Report Abuse” under “More” or send an email to forums@logos.com. Thank you for your cooperation. Enjoy discussing and learning about Logos Bible Software.
Please abide by the following guidelines as you interact on our forums.
Thank you for your cooperation. Enjoy discussing and learning about Logos Bible Software.
I neither created the forum guidelines nor appointed myself police or enforcer as neither are roles I enjoy. However, I do take the guidelines seriously and, like the past several Popes, take the plight of the underdog seriously. When others step in, I quite willing bow out. When others appear to encourage going outside the guidelines, I step in. As I have said before, people who know me personally break out laughing at the incongruity of the "police" image on the forums. My concern is specifically making the outlier groups feel welcome or at least willing to use the forums to ask questions and learn.
May I ask you, why do you think guidelines should be mutually agreed upon as opposed to Logos set requirements for participation? Do you take the 6th guideline seriously - if so, how do you exhibit it. perhaps I can get some hints to improve my image;
Christians are incapable or unwilling to control/govern themselves?
The vast majority do; a few have never checked the rules but get the idea quickly from the behavior of others or a gentle nudge; a few explicitly state that they don't have to control/govern themselves ... and occasionally stir up others; a few have medical reasons that they should be cut some slack.
Quick addition: I remember a time when a forum member used a very offensive term for Catholics that had always be used in a derogatory sense. They were quite surprised and embarrassed when called on it (by an Anabaptist). I prefer to assume that most exclusionary or prejudicial statements are made with as much innocence, in part through limited exposure to the broader Christian community outside their own and closely related traditions.
Grampa I think would take offence with your last line... Saying "I like the book "first book on the heresy" by johny heretic. Is unlikely to offend anyone. Well actually it is - there is such a diverse group using Logos that there likely are people who follow johny heretic and consider your view as following jimmy joe blasphemy.. If you don't want to be called on your blasphemy don't accuse others of heresy ... or even cult except in a technical sense. We have reached the point where most users feel safe disclosing their religious orientation ... don't ruin it. I think a single individual is unlikely to ruin a community of pretty close to 200,000. However excepting that premise, you do realize that book is fictitious. Just in my few years here that rude title has been leveled at everyone from the independent fundamentalists, to baptists, to N.T. Wright, Daryl Bock, the Catholics, SDA, and the pentecostals (and several of their various waves) just to name a few. If the community can handle that, and we have, an individual saying they like a book by a certain author is unlikely to cause offense. Unless that book is Bram Stokers Dracula. Then all bets are off.
. . . but only if she had ended with all bats are off . . .
[:D]
