We agree on many things. We just don't usually focus on them
I do have to disagree somewhat. I think that if people coudl behave, certain closed threads could be beneficial. For instance, if Catholics want to discuss what we gave up for Lent, ther is no need for a thread of that nature to turn into the usual mess.
Ditto if you Calvinists want to talk about something internal. But it does require people to act civilized.
SD
Then you see where we're driving. Good.
It is perfectly rational for trinitarians to discuss objections to trinitarianism. It would be a common discussion in seminary, catechism, etc. There's nothing confrontational about that.
Likewise, the title is not confrontational. If it said, "All Non-Trinitarians are going to hell" then I'd consider that confrontational.
However, if within the conversation someone voiced a common trinitarian belief that non-trinitarians are going to hell, then that would not void the thread group-specific nature. In fact, they could even slam other groups, imho, and that would be common conversation that you'd find in any seminary class, sunday school class, sermon, or group discussion.
We are in a free speech zone provided there is no threatening or seditious language.
Did you ever hear " give them an inch and they will take a mile"? Soon every other thread will be closed..and it will move to complete seperation..
There are a ton of "RC Forums " out there where you could all agree to such a discussion without the threat of interference..I just see this as a slippery slope
I have found a decent Christian forum..each topic is seperate ..so it would be possible to more or less have an inside discussion..or Ange has a seperate form that you all could use
A seperation could allow ANY group to proselitize without comment from the mainstream church.
I believe the religious forum should be allowed to die if this idea comes into usage..it will be nothing but a chat room...
BTW if you really want a private conversation you could try the SBR no one goes there willingly:>)