Disgusting comment from moderator.

[Ken123456]

Edited July 12, 2020 by Ken123456

[swansont]

And? What was the “disgusting” part?

[Phi for All]

We make the distinction here that people can open idiotic threads, but it's uncivil and inaccurate to call someone an idiot. One doesn't imply the other, so that can't be the disgusting part.

Also, "beliefs" in this context are ideas you're unable to support with reason and proper methodology, including evidence. We make it VERY clear that we consider such to be essential to meaningful discussion. Nothing disgusting about that.

Admonishing members about breaking the rules and requiring them NOT to do it again is one of a moderator's duties. If you find this disgusting, there are TONS of sites with little or no supervision, where you can make up anything you like. We aren't one of those, that's all. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

9 hours ago, swansont said:

And? What was the “disgusting” part?

In his mind I suspect it was the "...idiotic thread. We don't care about you beliefs" part.

Accurate or not (I looked at the thread) it could be interpreted as rude and intended to dehumanize him.

Just sayin'.

[iNow]

But not disgusting. Someone’s obviously just here to stir the pot and rake the muck

[pzkpfw]

I saw a thread that started with a question but became preaching. That's disgusting.

[swansont]

7 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

In his mind I suspect it was the "...idiotic thread. We don't care about you beliefs" part.

Accurate or not (I looked at the thread) it could be interpreted as rude and intended to dehumanize him.

Just sayin'.

I suspect that as well. But here's the thing: the thread was idiotic, and more to the point, it was dishonest, as a question was being leveraged to push an agenda and preach, which violates two of our rules. This happened with the second post by Ken123456. It wasn't even subtle. 

"We don't care about your beliefs" is policy. As far as the moderation is concerned, we  don't  care. This manifests itself in two ways.

1. It doesn't matter what religion you follow; we're not going to take that into account when applying the rules (IOW, no religion gets a pass, no religion is singled out, when applying the rules) and

2. You can't preach/proselytize. 

If someone doesn't like that, they can go elsewhere.

[Ken123456]

20 hours ago, swansont said:

And? What was the “disgusting” part?

Stupidity going wild.

20 hours ago, Phi for All said:

We make the distinction here that people can open idiotic threads, but it's uncivil and inaccurate to call someone an idiot. One doesn't imply the other, so that can't be the disgusting part.

Also, "beliefs" in this context are ideas you're unable to support with reason and proper methodology, including evidence. We make it VERY clear that we consider such to be essential to meaningful discussion. Nothing disgusting about that.

Admonishing members about breaking the rules and requiring them NOT to do it again is one of a moderator's duties. If you find this disgusting, there are TONS of sites with little or no supervision, where you can make up anything you like. We aren't one of those, that's all. 

Religion does not include Christianity? 

10 hours ago, iNow said:

But not disgusting. Someone’s obviously just here to stir the pot and rake the muck

You.

9 hours ago, pzkpfw said:

I saw a thread that started with a question but became preaching. That's disgusting.

Where was the preaching? Please quote and identify the supposedly preaching.

2 hours ago, swansont said:

I suspect that as well. But here's the thing: the thread was idiotic, and more to the point, it was dishonest, as a question was being leveraged to push an agenda and preach, which violates two of our rules. This happened with the second post by Ken123456. It wasn't even subtle. 

"We don't care about your beliefs" is policy. As far as the moderation is concerned, we  don't  care. This manifests itself in two ways.

1. It doesn't matter what religion you follow; we're not going to take that into account when applying the rules (IOW, no religion gets a pass, no religion is singled out, when applying the rules) and

2. You can't preach/proselytize. 

If someone doesn't like that, they can go elsewhere.

You need to go somewhere with your lying and saying I was proselytizing. Look up the definition of proselytize and shutup.

[swansont]

44 minutes ago, Ken123456 said:

Where was the preaching? Please quote and identify the supposedly preaching.

The better question is "where weren't you preaching?"

This is not an exhaustive list:

Quote

The earth was given over by Adam to Satan and God chose not to override the choice between Adam and Satan. He had to die to allow humans salvation. Presently Satan owns the earth and all who do not wish God to be their savior.
...
God is my Lord.
...
God also sends destruction to His children who turn to evil ways. Such as the ones who seeked occults for help, He was jealous and sent an evil group to destroy them.
...
He gave the creation power to His children who create by faith given by Him.

Remember the question before us was "Could God use a scientist to help save the world from a devastating destruction but the scientist was not a believer in God?"

I don't see how any of the above was used in context of discussing answers to that question.

 

Quote

You need to go somewhere with your lying and saying I was proselytizing. Look up the definition of proselytize and shutup.

Where did I say you were proselytizing? (hint: I didn't. I explained that preaching and proselytizing were against the rules, in a broad statement about the rules of this board, in a post that was not a direct response to you. Thou doth protest too much, methinks.) (also: Bearing false witness is a sin.)

As far as "shutup" goes, that's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for you.

 

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Ken123456 said:

Religion does not include Christianity? 

I've re-read our exchange several times now and fail to see how this relates to your topic here? Did I supposedly say this? Is this somehow referring to your exchange with Strange, and not this thread? We're trying to get to the bottom of your complaint here, and would appreciate some help with clarity.

[Ken123456]

1 minute ago, Phi for All said:

I've re-read our exchange several times now and fail to see how this relates to your topic here? Did I supposedly say this? Is this somehow referring to your exchange with Strange, and not this thread? We're trying to get to the bottom of your complaint here, and would appreciate some help with clarity.

Sorry, will ask the question on the platform.

[Phi for All]

8 minutes ago, Ken123456 said:

Sorry, will ask the question on the platform.

I don't know what that means either. 

I suppose we take it for granted here that there is a big difference between saying, "As a Christian, I believe what the Bible says about the devil corrupting men's souls if they turn away from God", and making an unsupported, preachy assertion like, "Presently Satan owns the Earth and all who do not wish God to be their savior". Can you see the difference? The first is clearly a statement about religious beliefs, and the second is claiming something is true no matter what anybody else thinks.

We don't like assertions here that you can't back up with reason and evidence. They stop a good discussion in its tracks. And while Christianity is certainly a religion, and shares certain scriptures with other major religions, in scientific terms they all make claims that are considered supernatural. Science is focused on the natural world, but we've found religious topics can be discussed somewhat reasonably as long as nobody is standing on their soapbox claiming to know the Truth. Does that make sense to you?

[Ken123456]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

The better question is "where weren't you preaching?"

This is not an exhaustive list:

Remember the question before us was "Could God use a scientist to help save the world from a devastating destruction but the scientist was not a believer in God?"

I don't see how any of the above was used in context of discussing answers to that question.

 

Where did I say you were proselytizing? (hint: I didn't. I explained that preaching and proselytizing were against the rules, in a broad statement about the rules of this board, in a post that was not a direct response to you. Thou doth protest too much, methinks.) (also: Bearing false witness is a sin.)

As far as "shutup" goes, that's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it works out for you.

 

ONLY rules apply, not broad statements.

27 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

I don't know what that means either. 

I suppose we take it for granted here that there is a big difference between saying, "As a Christian, I believe what the Bible says about the devil corrupting men's souls if they turn away from God", and making an unsupported, preachy assertion like, "Presently Satan owns the Earth and all who do not wish God to be their savior". Can you see the difference? The first is clearly a statement about religious beliefs, and the second is claiming something is true no matter what anybody else thinks.

We don't like assertions here that you can't back up with reason and evidence. They stop a good discussion in its tracks. And while Christianity is certainly a religion, and shares certain scriptures with other major religions, in scientific terms they all make claims that are considered supernatural. Science is focused on the natural world, but we've found religious topics can be discussed somewhat reasonably as long as nobody is standing on their soapbox claiming to know the Truth. Does that make sense to you?

Thanks for a specific request for a reference of which I asked moderators for before with out them giving a reference but shutting down the thread. 

Adam followed Satan's suggestion to eat the apple. Mankind and the earth became Satan's  slaves. Satan owns the earth even today. Three references of many more: 

1 John 5:19 ESV / 27 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.

2 Corinthians 4:4 ESV / 27 helpful votes 

In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

1 Peter 5:8 ESV / 26 helpful votes 

Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

Satan Rules Earthhttps://www.openbible.info/topics/satan_rules_earth

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Ken123456 said:

Adam followed Satan's suggestion to eat the apple. Mankind and the earth became Satan's  slaves. Satan owns the earth even today. Three references of many more: 

1 John 5:19 ESV / 27 helpful votes Helpful Not Helpful

We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.

2 Corinthians 4:4 ESV / 27 helpful votes 

In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

1 Peter 5:8 ESV / 26 helpful votes 

Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.

Satan Rules Earthhttps://www.openbible.info/topics/satan_rules_earth

OK, that's your interpretation of the passage. Stop implying it's the only one that's true in your arguments. Stop using language that asserts these things as fact, when in reality it's part of your religion, and is no more valid in this regard than any other religion. Even your views on Christianity aren't shared across all 9000+ sects recognized as practicing Christians. Again, does this make any sense to you at all?