How Threads Become Unedifying

[robert derrick]

It's not the only reason, I am sure, but I have seen three different threads shut down for the same reason, and I agree with it.

The Catholics invade the thread without any regard to the topic at hand, and begin arguments about Catholicism, and the mudslinging begins.

That's why I don't acknowledge them anymore.

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

When one of them enters a thread, watch and see for yourself.

I don't see any others so consistently doing that. Even when there is disagreement, it is usually on topic.

Now, if they want to start a thread entirely about the Catholic religion and faith, then that might be different.

The only thread they stay on topic is Mary, Queen of Scots. I mean, the Blessed Virgin 'Mary'.

 

[amadeus]

It's not the only reason, I am sure, but I have seen three different threads shut down for the same reason, and I agree with it.

The Catholics invade the thread without any regard to the topic at hand, and begin arguments about Catholicism, and the mudslinging begins.

This is certainly Not confined to Catholics and their arguments about Catholicism.

Very similar things happened with the 2020 U.S. Presidential election discussions and again with the Covid-19 discussions.

Mudslinging is a people thing. To try to confine to Catholics alone or even primarily to Catholics appears to be based on opinions rather a something based on evidence acceptable to all parties. We all do things based on our opinions and sometimes we even decide that our opinions must coincide with God's.

What is the mind of God on this? According to Him, what is edifying?

 

[robert derrick]

This is certainly Not confined to Catholics and their arguments about Catholicism.

Very similar things happened with the 2020 U.S. Presidential election discussions and again with the Covid-19 discussions.

Mudslinging is a people thing. To try to confine to Catholics alone or even primarily to Catholics appears to be based on opinions rather a something based on evidence acceptable to all parties. We all do things based on our opinions and sometimes we even decide that our opinions must coincide with God's.

What is the mind of God on this? According to Him, what is edifying?

Once again. I don't overthink things, and don't really care about politics nor the politicking of a flu.

I am talking about this forum only, and three separate threads have been shut down by a Catholic takeover, and the brawl that follows.

Maybe if I get to be 77, I'll be more speculative and contemplative about things. Right now, I just stick with the facts and deal with them accordingly.

They need to start their own thread about the amazing wonders and 'Scared' glories of Catholicism and let the fun begin.

 

[APAK]

It's not the only reason, I am sure, but I have seen three different threads shut down for the same reason, and I agree with it.

The Catholics invade the thread without any regard to the topic at hand, and begin arguments about Catholicism, and the mudslinging begins.

That's why I don't acknowledge them anymore.

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

When one of them enters a thread, watch and see for yourself.

I don't see any others so consistently doing that. Even when there is disagreement, it is usually on topic.

Now, if they want to start a thread entirely about the Catholic religion and faith, then that might be different.

The only thread they stay on topic is Mary, Queen of Scots. I mean, the Blessed Virgin 'Mary'.

There is a lot of truth in what you have said. It happened recently to one of my threads that I started in 2018. It became out of control by a few immature posters.

Catholics generally do not do scripture to edify per se. They use scripture to conform or mold it to their traditional needs and truths. And many Protestants should also do better than just list scripture without understanding, elaboration, in ignorance. There is no edification in this as well.

 

[robert derrick]

There is a lot of truth in what you have said. It happened recently to one of my threads that I started in 2018. It became out of control by a few immature posters.

Catholics generally do not do scripture to edify per se. They use scripture to conform or mold it to their traditional needs and truths. And many Protestants should also do better than just list scripture without understanding, elaboration, in ignorance. There is no edification in this as well.

I agree. Ignorant understanding and elaboration is not good.

The problem is knowing the difference between true understanding and elaboration and ignorant ones.

I believe I will start a thread on it: Private Interpretations of Scripture.

So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

 

[amadeus]

Once again. I don't overthink things, and don't really care about politics nor the politicking of a flu.

I am glad to hear this. Not many on this forum actively agree with you from what I have seen. Too many, I believe, would rather politic about such things than to get more directly into God's purposes for the hearts of people or to visit the prayer forum and provide encouragement and prayer to those really expressing needs.

I am talking about this forum only, and three separate threads have been shut down by a Catholic takeover, and the brawl that follows.

I do not doubt that this has happened, but my point is that it also has happened in other areas including the two I mentioned. When and if such a thing does happen and it is your thread ask for moderator intervention. If they will not, then ask that they shut down the thread and start a new one. Not a very good solution? Perhaps not, but if we have to work within the framework we have, what will work? God does allow things. We can complain to someone sometimes, but complaints do not always fix things, do they?

Maybe if I get to be 77, I'll be more speculative and contemplative about things. Right now, I just stick with the facts and deal with them accordingly.

They need to start their own thread about the amazing wonders and 'Scared' glories of Catholicism and let the fun begin.

Fun? Hmmm, I do wonder about that. Some people seeming enjoy the heated debates or simply striving to "win" an argument as if anything can be won like that. Only God gives any real and meaningful increase. He may work through people, but I would always want to be the right hand of God working and never the left... Who is leading us?

Give God the glory!

 

[robert derrick]

I am glad to hear this. Not many on this forum actively agree with you from what I have seen. Too many, I believe, would rather politic about such things than to get more directly into God's purposes for the hearts of people or to visit the prayer forum and provide encouragement and prayer to those really expressing needs.


I do not doubt that this has happened, but my point is that it also has happened in other areas including the two I mentioned. When and if such a thing does happen and it is your thread ask for moderator intervention. If they will not, then ask that they shut down the thread and start a new one. Not a very good solution? Perhaps not, but if we have to work within the framework we have, what will work? God does allow things. We can complain to someone sometimes, but complaints do not always fix things, do they?


Fun? Hmmm, I do wonder about that. Some people seeming enjoy the heated debates or simply striving to "win" an argument as if anything can be won like that. Only God gives any real and meaningful increase. He may work through people, but I would always want to be the right hand of God working and never the left... Who is leading us?

Give God the glory!

I am in the heated debates category, so long as Scripture is being relied upon as our source for the debate.

It's called disputing in the Scriptures, which the Stephen, Paul, and Apollos did.

Vain and unedifying arguments are personal disputes about the things of God, without any regard for Scripture.

Like the unsaved arguing about God while getting drunk, or people of different religions reduced to name-calling only.

I.e. a true dispute in Scripture is nothing personal, it's just about Scripture.

It's the same kind of productive arguments between historians over interpretations of historic evidence.

It's the evidence that ought be primary in the dispute.

 

[amadeus]

I am in the heated debates category, so long as Scripture is being relied upon as our source for the debate.

I am not against debate or discussion of the scriptures, but I am against what I call mudslinging. A lot of that happens here. I try to avoid such threads, but sometimes it happens.

When I see people getting too personally offensive without any real argument based on anything remotely edifying I sometimes have reported them even if I was not in the conversation.

I know the moderators are not perfect, but usually they are reasonable and they will certainly intervene many times when intervention is needed. Sometimes I don't agree with moderation decisions, but that is another thing, which cannot be discussed on the open forum.

It's called disputing in the Scriptures, which the Stephen, Paul, and Apollos did.

Vain and unedifying arguments are personal disputes about the things of God, without any regard for Scripture.

Edification in the God and things of God is a key...

Like the unsaved arguing about God while getting drunk, or people of different religions reduced to name-calling only.

I.e. a true dispute in Scripture is nothing personal, it's just about Scripture.

Yes.

It's the same kind of productive arguments between historians over interpretations of historic evidence.

It's the evidence that ought be primary in the dispute.

When there is no acceptable evidence according to both parties, perhaps the discussion should be ended... right? Amicably, of course!

 

[robert derrick]

I am in the heated debates category, so long as Scripture is being relied upon as our source for the debate.

It's called disputing in the Scriptures, which the Stephen, Paul, and Apollos did.

Vain and unedifying arguments are personal disputes about the things of God, without any regard for Scripture.

Like the unsaved arguing about God while getting drunk, or people of different religions reduced to name-calling only.

I.e. a true dispute in Scripture is nothing personal, it's just about Scripture.

It's the same kind of productive arguments between historians over interpretations of historic evidence.

It's the evidence that ought be primary in the dispute.

One day I may get old as you, and say, "You know, you were more on target than I thought."

There is a certain peace in having our minds stayed on God, and not arguing over every little detail of things.

Even if it is Scripture.

Maybe I'll get there by 67. If I get to be 67.

For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

 

[amadeus]

One day I may get old as you, and say, "You know, you were more on target than I thought."

There is a certain peace in having our minds stayed on God, and not arguing over every little detail of things.

Even if it is Scripture.

Maybe I'll get there by 67. If I get to be 67.

For that ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live, and do this, or that.

All of our biblical knowledge is fine, but then what are we doing with what we know?

I believe that God is watching what we are doing with what we have received [including biblical knowledge] rather than what we have received. God has given us in one way or the other everything that we have. He knows if we are materially poor or rich; well educated or illiterate; born in modern technologically advanced nations or very backward nations. He knows our parents were the devil's own offspring or devoutly sincerely children of God. God knows exactly the totality of our circumstances and He is watching carefully to see what we are doing with what is available to us.

Jesus speaks, I believe, of this means by which God is judging each one of us here:

"But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." Luke 12:48

Simply stated: Much is given, much is required!

 

[Mungo]

There are two reasons for Catholics to enter a thread:
1. To defend doctrinal truths as we are supposed to do.
2. To correct false claims about the Catholic Church.
3. To rebuke the lies and insults directed at Catholics.

The OP is a good example of uncessary insults with it's last line.

The OP also says:
" I don't see any others so consistently doing that. Even when there is disagreement, it is usually on topic."

Take the thread "What is Mariology"
A simple request from facetoface for a Catholic to provide information on that topic.
It wasn't long before others piled in to take it off topic.

And the insults, this time from quietthinker
"Mariology is nothing more than a construct of men.
It is an attempt marry pagan views with the message of the Gospel."

This is why threads get derailed and get heated.

 

[robert derrick]

There are two reasons for Catholics to enter a thread:
1. To defend doctrinal truths as we are supposed to do.
2. To correct false claims about the Catholic Church.
3. To rebuke the lies and insults directed at Catholics.

The OP is a good example of uncessary insults with it's last line.

The OP also says:
" I don't see any others so consistently doing that. Even when there is disagreement, it is usually on topic."

Take the thread "What is Mariology"
A simple request from facetoface for a Catholic to provide information on that topic.
It wasn't long before others piled in to take it off topic.

And the insults, this time from quietthinker
"Mariology is nothing more than a construct of men.
It is an attempt marry pagan views with the message of the Gospel."

This is why threads get derailed and get heated.

Your example is false.

This thread is not about getting heated in argument and disagreement. That in itself does not get threads shut down.

The OP is a good example of uncessary insults with it's last line." I don't see any others so consistently doing that. Even when there is disagreement, it is usually on topic."

A necessary fact for this thread. And you do not reject it as true.

The three examples I gave were specifically of Catholics entering into a thread and making it about something else: Catholicism.

Which then got heated, and was shut down.

A thread about the Blessed Virgin Mary got plenty heated, and still remains to comment on.

And the insults, this time from quietthinker "Mariology is nothing more than a construct of men.
It is an attempt marry pagan views with the message of the Gospel."

And now, you are doing it again on this thread, trying to make it about Catholicism, when it is about zealous Catholics taking over threads for their won purposes.

(P.s. the insult is Mariology to the gospel. Not defending the gospel from Mariology.)