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?
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.
So, is it proper to misquote someone in order to make a point? [^o)]
This all brings to mind the song from Frozen, "Let it Go."
/quote] 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;
/quote]
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;
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.
MJ,
Thanks for your timely response. Forgive me, for my delayed response. Let me say first. If the “majority” of the Christians users of this forum, know the rules and abide by them, why must you become the Nudger-In-Chief of rule # 6? You don’t have faith in the behavior of the majority of Rule Abiding Forum Users to welcome the newcomers and set the tone for general behavior?
In your enthusiastic quest to implement rule # 6, could it be that you’re pulling up the “wheat” in removing the “tares”? I know you mean well, but sometimes, all that is right is not always expedient.
As for the “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” is this privileged knowledge or something most rational people can discern with encounter? You seem to be hinting at warning newcomers to the forum and/or publicly addressing those professionally labored with mental issues.
Is there something inherently wrong if this forum reflects the “real world” and people that attend our churches? Remember, we’re not in heaven.
Americans seem to have more respect for things they have a say in; thereby, giving them a sense of ownership or “skin in the game.” This is what I had in mind in reference to the rules being “mutually agreed upon.” With some input, they will affirm and accept the appointed or elected authority.
Yes, Logos has the right to “set requirements for participation”, but who enforces the rules is another story. He who makes the rules, obey the rules, are to enforce the rules. All users may not exercise equal self-discipline nor be responsible to the expectation of others. You don’t think the majority of adult mature Christians can’t absorb extreme behavior of the few in this forum? Are you taking on too much, for too many, too often?
You said, “I do take the guidelines seriously and, like the past several Popes, take the plight of the underdog seriously.” Does this mean you like Pius IX of the First Vatican Council, on December 8, 1869, claiming the July 18, 1870, dogma of Papal Infallibility? To do so in a figurative way, could this be the possible reason for your "police" image on the forums.
I am in no position to tell you what to do or how to behave. I don’t know all that you know or don’t know and probably, never will. As for now, I’m just seeking to understand who appears to be well-read.
In addition, MJ, you appear to be a passionate, enthusiastic, long time, frequent user of the Logos product and the forums. If you or anyone chooses to change, it would be your choice, on your timetable and from within. God made us all free moral agents. We are free to choose to do or not to do. Shouldn’t this be applicable to the forums too?
As for Forum rule # 6, “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”, this can be interpreted in as many ways as there are users.
Until then, consider the lyrics (Johnny Mercer):
“You've got to ACCENTUATE THE POSITIVE
Eliminate the negative
LATCH ON TO THE AFFIRMATIVE
Don't mess with Mister In-Between
You've got to SPREAD JOY UP TO THE MAXIMUM
Bring gloom down to the minimum
HAVE FAITH or pandemonium
Liable to walk upon the scene
(To illustrate his last remark
Jonah in the whale, Noah in the ark
What did they do
Just when everything looked so dark)…”
In conclusion, you have a place in the forums. Many have and will benefit from your insights on the Logos Product and its functions. Keep sharp! Do and be what you want others to be and do. Recalibrate your “fallacy detector” for your own comfort and peace of mind in using the forums. Encourage the “good” sayings and things. “More bees are caught with honey than with vinegar.”
Oh, MJ, in the real world (outside the forums) expectations of others, are better caught than taught. CM
Those who need some slack are either obvious to a reasonable person or have explicitly identified themselves as such - I can think of one case where it was the individual's wife who requested the slack and gave the reason. It's relevance is not that anyone in the forums would tell others but that it often explains charges of unfairness.
You don’t have faith in the behavior of the majority of Rule Abiding Forum Users to welcome the newcomers and set the tone for general behavior?
In general yes; and in general it is not newcomers who are problematic. But consider what has happened in this case. I did not and had no intention of responding to the OP. What he said was borderline but well within the general tenor of the forums. My first post was to abondservant where I misunderstood abondservant's post - a point he corrected and I apologized for - twice. Why did I respond to abondservant? Because he is a long term, valued member of the community. Then someone took a pot shot at Jehovah's Witnesses ... not exactly the topic of the thread.
You don’t think the majority of adult mature Christians can’t absorb extreme behavior of the few in this forum?
My concern is based upon the people who have explicitly left the forums or have mentioned in the forums that they are uncomfortable in or visit rarely because of the forum tone - not on an abstract notion of fairness but in terms of real people with real needs.
And poor old Fallacy hound ... he comes out only for serious fallacies ... strictly logical not moral or belief based as some seem to believe. And even then only when the fallacy is so blatant that I assume most will recognize the fallacy by the mere appearance of the hound. As in this exchange:
I do take the guidelines seriously and, like the past several Popes, take the plight of the underdog seriously.
Does this mean you like Pius IX of the First Vatican Council, on December 8, 1869, claiming the July 18, 1870, dogma of Papal Infallibility?
Sorry but that was just too great a fallacy to not bring out the hound since you had mentioned him (called him from his perspective). [:D] (I wish they had a bigger grin emoticon - a hound sized one.)
I will seriously consider what you have said and adjust behaviour accordingly if deemed appropriate. And yes I will try to bear in mind both the rural community in which I was raised and the city (Seattle) in which I spent most my life are noted for politeness and nonconfrontational styles.
Thanks again for your response. Your willingness to be willing is a start for many others to reflect upon themselves for a ground-swell of changes here in the forum. Self-examination for improvement is most effective than others demanding you (or me) to change. A new or a fresh tone in the forum begins with the individual (prayer and reflection). Since we are discussing books, system functioning, making suggestions, occasional resource preferences, and/or general awareness of pertinent information, there is no reason to be unkind.
Besides, is it too much to ask or expect Christians to be Christian in this forum? We all have our bad days and misspeak from time to time, but that should be the exception and not the rule. Just to hear of the above principles, many will return to the forum. Loving kindness spread by word-of-mouth is most powerful than all of your American laws.
Correct me if I am wrong, is it true that most people in the Seattle area are liberal, generous and kind? [;)] Keep the Hound in its pen or at least on a leash, this is the impression given by those who love this area. CM
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. So, is it proper to misquote someone in order to make a point?
So, is it proper to misquote someone in order to make a point?
at first I read "mesquite" . . . I guess that is akin to getting "hot under the collar? [:@][:P]
Let me say first. If the “majority” of the Christians users of this forum, know the rules and abide by them, why must you become the Nudger-In-Chief of rule # 6?
If MJ stopped acting on Rule #6, either someone else would take on that role, and fall subject to the same criticisms that she has to deal with, or the application of Rule #6 would be greatly weakened and the forums would suffer. Rule #6 exists for good cause.
Few of the regular posters in the forums, and almost none of the people who visit the forums, consider themselves able to and feel comfortable acting on Rule #6. Those of us who are willing and able to act on Rule #6 almost without exception would prefer not to do so in the instances when this may cause conflict, and we may delay in the hope that someone else will act on Rule #6 instead.
I, for one, appreciate when MJ (and others) act on Rule #6 in situations when it's called for because that usually means that I can stay entirely out of potentially and actually acrimonious threads and do more pleasant things instead, ones that are less likely to get established forumers upset with me (again).
Well said.
Well said, again.
Few of the regular posters in the forums, and almost none of the people who visit the forums, consider themselves able to and feel comfortable acting on Rule #6. Those of us who are willing and able to act on Rule #6 almost without exception would prefer not to do so in the instances when this may cause conflict, and we may delay in the hope that someone else will act on Rule #6 instead. I, for one, appreciate when MJ (and others) act on Rule #6 in situations when it's called for because that usually means that I can stay entirely out of potentially and actually acrimonious threads and do more pleasant things instead, ones that are less likely to get established forumers upset with me (again).
Rule # 6 is not the most important thing among the rules nor is it in this forum. “Let’s keep the main thing, the main thing.” The rules are to serve as a fence, not as a box or a prison. When you focus so much on the problem, all you would have is the problem.
Why is it that the majority of the Christians can’t govern themselves on this forum and have the greater influence? Let’s not put that task or burden on MJ or anyone else, even if s/he wants to do it. Don’t be like many USA Governmental Officials, declare war, but don’t send their sons and daughters to fight in it. Or they want to lock up large number of criminals, but don’t want the prison down from their community. Further shame, is that they don’t want to pay for it with increased taxes.
Allow people to be, and you, be what you are. Remember the saying, “birds of a feather, flocks together.” Unkind people don’t and won’t hang out with Christians very long. However, long they do, just be kind to them.
When it’s all said and done, let’s consider seriously what Melancthon said: "In essentials, unity. In non-essentials, liberty. In all things, charity." C M
Rule # 6 is not the most important thing among the rules nor is it in this forum.
That is a straw man. Neither I, nor MJ, nor anyone else have said that it is.
When you focus so much on the problem, all you would have is the problem.
Neither MJ, nor I, focus on the problem, never mind "so much". That is also a straw man.
Why is it that the majority of the Christians can’t govern themselves on this forum and have the greater influence?
The majority of the Christians on this forum do govern themselves. That is why Rule #6 does not need to be acted on (by anybody) in most threads. As to why a disruptive minority can exercise an out-sized influence on the life of a community, you will have to consult the social sciences. That disruptive minorities can do this in all communities is well borne out by history and current events around the world. That disruptive minorities can do so in this forum is borne out by the history of this forum.
Let’s not put that task or burden on MJ or anyone else, even if s/he wants to do it.
As advice to everyone, if you want to lessen the workload of MJ and others who act on Rule #6, there are two things that you can do: avoid violating Rules #1-5, and act on Rule #6.
Unkind people don’t and won’t hang out with Christians very long. However, long they do, just be kind to them.
There have been and still are many unkind Christians, as well as Christians who, though generally kind, sometimes lose their tempers and at other times make imprudent decisions. Rule #6 exists so that the disruptive effects of such failings will be minimized. As MJ has noted a number of times, and I myself am witness to, over the years a good number of kind posters in the forums have either left them entirely or largely refrained from posting (and even reading) due to the very things that Rule #6 exists to minimize.
Hence Rule #6. [:)]
Doesn't anybody find it distubing that this thread is still going? 😂😜😇
And even more disturbing is the fact that you and I are still reading it [:P]
Doesn't anybody find it distubing that this thread is still going? 😂😜😇 And even more disturbing is the fact that you and I are still reading it
And even more disturbing is the fact that you and I are still reading it
And even more disturbing that you guys are still posting in it [:P]
Don’t be like many USA Governmental Officials, declare war, but don’t send their sons and daughters to fight in it. Or they want to lock up large number of criminals, but don’t want the prison down from their community. Further shame, is that they don’t want to pay for it with increased taxes.
Where did that come from? FYI: It violates rules #1 & #2.
I could go on all day about governmental abuse, presidential candidates, minimum wage, and trans-gender bathrooms. But these forums are NOT the place for that.
Thank you kindly, Charles, for not going there.
You are right and so is James 😂😆😜
https://community.logos.com/forums/t/6836.aspx?PageIndex=1
Despite some misunderstandings, the seemingly fear of change, and the cry to end this thread, I agree it needs to be put to bed. Much have been “said”, and I am “done.” I will see you on another topic in a different thread. CM
Yes, this is the paragraph I was paraphrasing in a satirical manner.
Wow. That's an interesting way to justify a straw man argument, by calling it "satire."
Perhaps you would see it as similar "satire" someone said of you, "MJ says she and the Pope are the only people in the world who stand up for the plight of the underdog..."
My guess is, you would see that as an unfair mis-characterization of what you said.
No.
