Posted on 03/27/2002 10:38:26 AM PST by malakhi
I've reviewed the critiques and suggestions from Thread 2, have incorporated those I could, and have come up with the following Topic list. One point that was questioned by a number of people were the names of the Denominational Topics categories. I have tried to stay with names that are in common use, and/or are preferred by members of those groups. If you suggested a change here and I did not put it in place, that is probably why.
What I would like to do is to have all interested parties vote a straight up or down on the topics as they stand. If over half of the voters oppose the present list, then we'll reopen it for further changes. If the majority is in favor of the present list, then this is what we'll go with. Keep in mind that additions to the list are always possible down the road.
I will be offline from sunset tonight until Saturday night for the first two days of Passover and then for Shabbat. That will give everyone a chance to weigh in and vote. I'll tally the votes Saturday night, and let Jim Robinson know the results.
Thanks for your participation and the many great suggestions!
General Topics
Activism Opportunities to make your voice heard. Apologetics Defense of doctrine. Current Events Religion or religion-related news of the day. Ecumenism Pertaining to discussion, cooperation and understanding among denominations. History History of religion, religion and secular history, tradition, sacred texts. Humor If at first you don't succeed, don't skydive. Ministry/Outreach Pastoral issues, proselytization, missions. Moral Issues Abortion, divorce, sexuality, social justice, ethics. Prayer Requests for prayer, articles about prayer, spirituality. Religion & Culture Religious critique of secular culture, influence of religion on culture. Religion & Politics Church/state issues, legislation, court cases, 1st amendment, the political process. Religion & Science Creation, evolution, ethical issues posed by scientific advances. Theology Nature of God and religious truth, rational inquiry into religious questions. Worship Methods of worship, liturgy, communal prayer.
Denominational Topics This is not intended to be a complete list, but rather to indicate broad categories. Catholic Latin rite, Eastern rites. Charismatic Christian Assemblies of God, pentacostalism, charismatic movement. Eastern Religions Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, Taoism. Evangelical Christian Baptist, sola scriptura, non-denominational, independent fundamentalist Bible believers. Islam Sunni, Shiite, Sufism, Wahhabism. Judaism Orthodox, Conservative, Reform, Reconstructionist, Karaite. Mainline Protestant Anglican, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Methodist, Presbyterian, Unitarian, UCC. Orthodox Christian Greek, Russian, Armenian, Antiochian etc. Other Christian 7th Day Adventist, Churches of God, Messianic Christians, LDS, etc. Other non-Christian Baha'i, Zoroastrianism, animism, Wicca, etc. Skeptics/Seekers Agnosticism, atheism, secular humanism, etc.
It fits the textbook definition of the word.
There is a specific "test" for traditional Christianity it is called a creed..If a church does not adhere to one of the Christian creeds they are not ChristianYou hit the nail right on the head, mama!
Jim Robinson:
Let me say in the first place that, after much reflection, I heartily approve of the new "Religion" Forum. One of the main reasons I participate in FR and contribute to FR is that you have provided a Forum in which the classic "forbidden topics" which "polite society" does not discuss at cocktail parties -- POLITICS and RELIGION -- may be freely discussed here. I am ecstatic that you have decided not to censor Religious discussion at FR.
I make no bones about my motivations. I want religion to be discussed. I believe that a hearty Church makes for hearty Churchmen, who earnestly contend for "good government", and that is a Good Thing. I believe it, and the Founders believed it.
And it is obvious that some Religious discussions are a "house topic", suitable for the dedicated Religion Forum. If RN should post a "Pray for my daughter" thread, that is not necessarily a "News/Activism" topic. But by the same token, a "Pray for Bush to veto this damnable CFR bill" is both Religious and Political. It is a Christian Duty to pray for our Magistrates (1 Timothy 2:1-2); but because they are our Magistrates, those prayers may be VERY political!!
Cross-over is unavoidable.
By the same token, some "Veteran's News" is also "Breaking News", and belongs by Right in both Forums!! Likewise the "Campaign" stuff.
So, I have to ask.... would it be POSSIBLE to establish for users the Option of posting a thread to Multiple Forums, with the Moderators holding a "Veto Power" to "banish" the thread to a single Forum if they adjudge it to be a thread of purely-parochial interest?
As such, "Prayers for Bush" or "Veterans March" threads could be posted in Multiple Forums, but if the Moderators adjudged a Thread to be inappropriate for "News/Activism", they would have the right to restrict that thread to the "Religion" Forum or the "Veterans" Forum, as appropriate.
Food for thought?
Do you Calvinists realize that you are the only ones posting in this negative way? You are showing everyone your true colors!
Okay, so what you are telling me is -- in the post-modern age of ECT ecumenicism, Calvinists are the last true Defenders of Biblical Orthodoxy.
Yo, homey, we're cool with that.
We have borne this particular cross before.
Heretics try to pervert and subvert Biblical Orthodoxy....
....Calvinists rise to defend it.
As it has always been, so it shall ever be.
"I am going to ask you," says Froude, "to consider how it came to pass that if Calvinism is indeed the hard and unreasonable creed which modern enlightenment declares it to be, it has possessed such singular attractions in past times for some of the greatest men that ever lived; and how — being as we are told, fatal to morality, because it denies free will — the first symptom of its operation, wherever it established itself, was to obliterate the distinction between sins and crimes, and to make the moral law the rule of life for States as well as persons. I shall ask you, again, why, if it be a creed of intellectual servitude, it was able to inspire and sustain the bravest efforts ever made by man to break the yoke of unjust authority. When all else has failed, — when patriotism has covered its face and human courage has broken down, — when intellect has yielded, as Gibbon says, 'with a smile or a sigh,' content to philosophize in the closet, and abroad worship with the vulgar, — when emotion, and sentiment, and tender imaginative piety have become the handmaids of superstition, and have dreamt themselves into forgetfulness that there is any difference between lies and truth, — the slavish form of belief called Calvinism, in one or other of its many forms, has borne ever an inflexible front to illusion and mendacity, and has preferred rather to be ground to powder like flint than to bend before violence or melt under enervating temptation."
I must correct you here, Terry. The creeds were not written by apostles or prophets and are not inspired. They are fine, though, so long as they take a back seat to the Word of God and not attempt to add to it or take away from it or be a colored lens through which you read it.
There is a specific test for Christianity. It is the Word of God. The Old and New Testaments define Christianity. (I would say more, but that is for another thread.)
No more need be said; a single word past Revelation 22:21 is blasphemy against God, whether it be called "Koran" or "Mormon".
yes we is
This broken board is giving me fits so I ask again if they call themselves Jews will that make them Jews...question mark does not work *grin*..but it is a vaid question...the creed has always been the marker of a Christian,you remember that ange
It should be perfectly obvious to anyone that I am not telling you that. This is the spin you are pleased to put on it.
As it happens, my "spin" enjoys the virtue of being true.
At its base, your slur boils down to this: "You Calvinists are not Ecumenical!!"
To which I can only say: Granted.
Indeed, we happily admit the charge.
We are Biblical.
Ecumenicism is pig-slop.
Polytheism is not Christianity,and you have a muliti god religion...the creeds were written for the express Purpose of defining WHAT a Christian believed. You do not even believe the book you claim as verification . It is full of errors corrected by your books.......what year did the Mormons decide they no longer wanted to be called saint and wanted to be called Christians
This isn't about individual FReepers. This is about organized religions and denominations, and letting FReepers who belong to them have input on the classification instead of letting the Calvinists decide whom to exclude from what.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.