What's new
  • This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.
  • Do not use Chrome Incognito when registering as it freezes the registration page.
  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses

Feedback Discussion of conspiracy theories is prohibited. (ToS 2.2)

Status
Not open for further replies.

questdriven

resident geek
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
10,146
Gender
Female
Christian
Yes
#21
I think they can be a legitimate topic, though are often (usually?) based on misinformation. In any case, they have caused a lot of division and so as noted by others are not helpful to the purposes of the site.
 
B

Brother Mike

Guest
#22
Just another thing. We haven't allowed Catholic doctrine on here for at least 7 years now. Similar reasons to the conspiracy stuff - it divides and almost wrecked the site actually. But Catholic doctrine discussions are discussing the Bible. This alone doesn't mean we need to discuss it here. As I said, it almost wrecked both community and staff in half.

Some things are better discussed in certain places and not others.
Is it a problem the staff is not all on the same page, or is it the community? Who is in control here? Just because some staff hold Catholic doctrines and cause issue among the staff on how such threads should be regulated is no indication the community is having issues.

I get banned (Twice now) in the past on discussions on the Trinity doctrine, which happens to be a Roman Catholic Doctrine, no doubt there, As Rome Came up with the Nicene Creed and the Athasian Creed. Normally it's butting heads with Free about it. Yet this site is Supposedly holding a Trinity type doctrine, though it's clearly worded Oneness.

It's not the Doctrine that wreaks the community, it's those in charge not being on the same page.

My thread had no members having issues with any members. I posted clear scriptures that if taken literally point to a flat and stationary Earth with no counter scriptures. We were examining this idea that we could have been lied to and brainwashed. Nobody was giving absolutes, as I am on the fence about the whole thing, but I take scripture literal.

So who decides?
If the TOS says Oneness (1914) "One God that manifest in 3 persons" yet Staff Claim Trinity (Roman Catholic) "3 divine beings that are One" And we can't discuss Roman Catholic, something is very seriously wrong here.

I can't help staff is not on the same page, someone very anointed and knowledgeable about all the different doctrines should be setting some standards here for Staff to follow, and Staff should not be so quick to get involved in discussion but moderate.

That last Trinity thread, my post were deleted, and I got a point. Why? I brought up Rome. Well, you can't talk about Rome, despite the fact they wrote the stinking doctrine. I get into it with Free again on the subject, but now the argument is one sided because I can't use the origin of the Doctrine, nor can I use scripture because the doctrine states is a mystery of Christian faith, not scripture.
That is just an example of why these rules need worked out, and only moderators without emotional ties so some sacred doctrine be allowed.

I suggest the Mod team discuss some changes around here. I fully believe my thread was fine, and based on many scriptures that was a doctrine against NASA, not other scriptures.

I suggest the Mod team discuss on how they get involved with Discussions. How to avoid emotional attachment to doctrine types, even setting themselves out and asking for help if needed.

This is a great forum, very lenient toward belief's unlike most other Christian forums. I think that coming together and setting some different standards that make it more easy for people to discuss their feelings and ideas without feeling threatened by some Mod posting would be more healthy.
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
15,450
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#23
Dear everyone,
I do not want to step on toes, and i do not know the whole history of this site,
including the reasons to make a ban on the discussion of conspiracies prohibited by ToS.

I however would like to address this in respectful manner, because it is a topic that concerns us all.
Assuming we all believe in free speech and even more importantly, Truth, the word of God.

My point is this: there are conspiracies in the world, they factually , provably exist.
By prohibiting any discussion about a possible conspiracy (thus : a conspiracy theory) we limit ourselves,
and it is irresponsible to do so, considering that Conspiracy is a Biblical topic.







How can we avoid speaking about conspiracies, when the Lord God does so, and we are to study the word ?

or , as i said, in attempt to explain my sentiments on this to Brother Mike this evening:


what say you all ?
That rule is a very good one. I say this as a former moderator from two other sites. Conspiracy Theories are theories because they lack fact. If your avatar is akin to mine and is a small photo of you I see the problem you are resented with.

If you are that young a substantial portion of your education in Science is a lie!I In the world of the scientist a theory loses that, hanging, tag when or/and it is proven with evidence that has repeated over and over. At the age your avatar places you in, you were taught the Theory of Evolution as a fact but I am seventy and that theory being fact is a lie that has only been spoon fed to you kids for the last two generations. It's new and it is a horrible lie.

The same is true of all Conspiracy Theories. They are not theory if there is any evidence and without evidence they are canon fodder for the weak minded and these folks want us to be scriptural and to grow up to act like adults.

Can you see my point?
 

questdriven

resident geek
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
10,146
Gender
Female
Christian
Yes
#24
I don't believe any of the current staff is Catholic. Eora is speaking of a HUGE, site-wide division that took place a few years ago. Before most of the current staff were even members. They tried all kinds of things, even setting a forum aside for Catholics only I think(?). In the end more strict restriction was proven necessary.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
6,568
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#25
...So.....

A) Someone got a little upset, understanding all the scientific evidence that support the scripture on this and deleted my whole post.

B) Someone thinks we are all just a bunch of immature brats who can't handle discussing scripture on certain topics.

C) Someone deleted my post with no regard to the fact I used plain and easy to understand scriptures, and who does not believe the Word in a literal way. (I guess it's all figurative when it comes to something I don't want to believe. Seems to be the case)

...
You know this is not true and it was clearly explained to you in your TWTS thread, however you refused to listen to that.


I agree, but if we are to take the Bible literally , as Brother Mike pointed out,
and substanciate our findings with scripture, as he did...
And THIS is where a lot of things start to fall apart. Not every word in scripture was intended to be taken literally. Serious, rational, educated Bible scholars do not follow this idea. I spent time as a Bible major in a respected Christian university with professors whose names many of you would recognize, and not one of them ever subscribed to anything even close to the idea that every word in scripture was meant literally. Some parts of scripture are literal, of course, but other parts are obviously not literal but use other writing forms to convey a concept. They all recognized this. To say otherwise defies logic and reason. Our God is not a fool.

If someone tells me it's raining cats and dogs and I adamantly insist that there are literally cats and dogs falling from the sky, that this is not just a common figure of speech, even though I'm standing outside and I can see there is nothing but water drops falling from the sky... well, I'm just in need of serious help in the mental department. Likewise, if scripture refers to something like "corners of the earth" but I am on an airplane that just left New York and flys westbound without ever changing direction over the land, and in time arrives back in new york from the opposite direction in which it left, I have to understand that the earth doesn't literally have corners nor is it flat. I have to understand that in that particular scripture the author is using a figure of speech that most people would understand.

By the way, I'm glad someone moved this out of A&T (I seem to not be able to find any record of how or when that happened). Not only does this subject fall far outside of anything that should ever have been posted in A&T, but now I can respond to it without worrying about it compromising my integrity.
 
Last edited:
B

Brother Mike

Guest
#26
The same is true of all Conspiracy Theories. They are not theory if there is any evidence and without evidence they are canon fodder for the weak minded and these folks want us to be scriptural and to grow up to act like adults.

Can you see my point?
Bill, my thread was about a flat earth, and I posted scripture after scripture that God said it's the sun the moves, the earth does not, the Earth has corners, it has edges. If you take the scripture literal for God's word, then the Earth has to be flat. Do you believe several scriptures would indicate there might be holes into what NASA has fed us all these years without looking at scientific data that proves them wrong also?

The only Data we have about space is from our government.



This is a NASA composite image Bill. In Fact, there are no pictures of earth that are not composite images. Even NASA's own web site says that every image is a computer generated. Don't take my word for it. This image was made from several images and computer enhanced. A composite image is a image made from multiple sources, like all NASA images of earth except one they had taken on the APOLLO mission they claim. Notice it's on a Matte as they removed the stars from the background.

Scripture alone is enough, we not even gotten into the evidence like this. There are suppose to be 1,000's of Satellites out there, but not one can take a picture of earth without being edited and enhanced. Not one. Don't take my word for it, google it.

Would you call this a conspiracy theory that we should ignore along with scriptures, or would this in your opinion need to be looked into more? I am still on the fence about this.

Taken from NASA's Best pictures of Earth
http://www.wired.com/2014/12/nasa-best-earth-from-space-2014/
All composites, all fake.

Be blessed Brother Bill.

Mike.
 
B

Brother Mike

Guest
#27
You know this is not true and it was clearly explained to you in your TWTS thread, however you refused to listen to that.


And THIS is where a lot of things start to fall apart. Not every word in scripture was intended to be taken literally. Serious, rational, educated Bible scholars do not follow this idea. I spent time as a Bible major in a respected Christian university with professors whose names many of you would recognize, and not one of them ever subscribed to anything even close to the idea that every word in scripture was meant literally. Some parts of scripture are literal, of course, but other parts are obviously not literal but use other writing forms to convey a concept. They all recognized this. To say otherwise defies logic and reason. Our God is not a fool.

If someone tells me it's raining cats and dogs and I adamantly insist that there are literally cats and dogs falling from the sky, that this is not just a common figure of speech, even though I'm standing outside and I can see there is nothing but water drops falling from the sky... well, I'm just in need of serious help in the mental department. Likewise, if scripture refers to something like "corners of the earth" but I am on an airplane that just left New York and flys westbound without ever changing direction over the land, and in time arrives back in new york from the opposite direction in which it left, I have to understand that the earth doesn't literally have corners nor is it flat. I have to understand that in that particular scripture the author is using a figure of speech that most people would understand.

By the way, I'm glad someone moved this out of A&T (I seem to not be able to find any record of how or when that happened). Not only does this subject falls far outside of anything that should ever have been posted in A&T, but now I can respond to it without worrying about it compromising my integrity.
I understand your concerned. When I heard it yesterday, I spent 12 hours before posting thinking these people were nuts.
Problem is, if you take all the scripture literal, then there are no counter scriptures to the Earth being flat.
In fact, many use these same scriptures to prove the bible false, because everyone knows that the Earth is a globe. Site after site using the same scriptures to put God down.

However, if you ever been in a airplane and noticed, no matter how high you go, the earth's horizon always meets your eye level with no curvature. Don't take my word for it, look it up.

Then I realized that since I was a young boy, I had a globe in my class room. The same folks that taught me about the Globe, also told me that dinosaurs evolved, and died out 25 million years ago.

Who told us the Earth is a Globe? Where you get that information? I had to answer honestly, it's what Media and school taught me all my life. The same folks that taught me evolution is true, and the earth is 4 billion years old.

What scripture do we take literal? Think about it, why choose not to take something God said literal. God plainly states himself the earth does not move in Psalms.

I am asking these questions right now, and I am not liking what I find. Problem is, after scripture, I have to sift through the nonsense on both sides, but it's not looking very good for NASA right now. I don't know, I just wanted to discuss it.

Please think about it.

Be blessed.
Mike.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
14,530
Gender
Male
#28
Is it a problem the staff is not all on the same page, or is it the community? Who is in control here? Just because some staff hold Catholic doctrines and cause issue among the staff on how such threads should be regulated is no indication the community is having issues.
The staff are on the same page on this issue.

On the topic of Catholic discussions, even a united staff was not enough to contain the havoc that happened in the community. In an attempt to satisfy the hunger to discuss the topic, a special RCC forum was created, with a Catholic staff member to moderate it. Terrible idea. This then caused a rift in the staff.

I get banned (Twice now) in the past on discussions on the Trinity doctrine, which happens to be a Roman Catholic Doctrine, no doubt there, As Rome Came up with the Nicene Creed and the Athasian Creed. Normally it's butting heads with Free about it. Yet this site is Supposedly holding a Trinity type doctrine, though it's clearly worded Oneness.

It's not the Doctrine that wreaks the community, it's those in charge not being on the same page.

My thread had no members having issues with any members. I posted clear scriptures that if taken literally point to a flat and stationary Earth with no counter scriptures. We were examining this idea that we could have been lied to and brainwashed. Nobody was giving absolutes, as I am on the fence about the whole thing, but I take scripture literal.
Nice try. We're not going into the specifics of your cases with the staff. That would be against the Terms of Service.

Those in charge are on the same page. Every staff member that has spoken to you about this has said the same thing.

And the staff have the authority to decide what can and cannot be discussed here - as per the ToS. This is not a government, there is no freedom of speech. If you want that, perhaps take a look at the 4chan forums.

So who decides?
If the TOS says Oneness (1914) "One God that manifest in 3 persons" yet Staff Claim Trinity (Roman Catholic) "3 divine beings that are One" And we can't discuss Roman Catholic, something is very seriously wrong here.
I'm not getting dragged into a Trinity debate here. Start another thread about that.

I can't help staff is not on the same page, someone very anointed and knowledgeable about all the different doctrines should be setting some standards here for Staff to follow, and Staff should not be so quick to get involved in discussion but moderate.

That is just an example of why these rules need worked out, and only moderators without emotional ties so some sacred doctrine be allowed.

I suggest the Mod team discuss some changes around here. I fully believe my thread was fine, and based on many scriptures that was a doctrine against NASA, not other scriptures.

I suggest the Mod team discuss on how they get involved with Discussions. How to avoid emotional attachment to doctrine types, even setting themselves out and asking for help if needed.

This is a great forum, very lenient toward belief's unlike most other Christian forums. I think that coming together and setting some different standards that make it more easy for people to discuss their feelings and ideas without feeling threatened by some Mod posting would be more healthy.
There are moderator guidelines, one of which is to not moderate a discussion you are part of. We are encouraged to ask for help or advice if needed, and many things are discussed before being done. When a thread is "closed for moderator review", that review does actually happen. In fact, the moderator forum has 56,000 posts. That's one of the biggest forums on the site.

The rules, and moderator guidelines etc are constantly reviewed and updated as needed.
 
B

Brother Mike

Guest
#29
"Composite" does not mean fake. This isn't a valid assumption.
Your 100% correct. a picture made up of who knows what does not mean it's fake. A composite means put together from several things as they admit.

What is missing everywhere is the snapshot of earth that is not a composite. There are none, but One NASA Claims. So it's not the image itself, it's the lack of the images that are not composites.

Be blessed.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
14,530
Gender
Male
#30
Brother Mike We are here to discuss conspiracy theory policy on the site. Any more posts containing conspiracy theories will be deleted.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
6,568
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#31
I understand your concerned. When I heard it yesterday, I spent 12 hours before posting thinking these people were nuts.
Problem is, if you take all the scripture literal, then there are no counter scriptures to the Earth being flat.
In fact, many use these same scriptures to prove the bible false, because everyone knows that the Earth is a globe. Site after site using the same scriptures to put God down.

However, if you ever been in a airplane and noticed, no matter how high you go, the earth's horizon always meets your eye level with no curvature. Don't take my word for it, look it up.

Then I realized that since I was a young boy, I had a globe in my class room. The same folks that taught me about the Globe, also told me that dinosaurs evolved, and died out 25 million years ago.

Who told us the Earth is a Globe? Where you get that information? I had to answer honestly, it's what Media and school taught me all my life. The same folks that taught me evolution is true, and the earth is 4 billion years old.

What scripture do we take literal? Think about it, why choose not to take something God said literal. God plainly states himself the earth does not move in Psalms.

I am asking these questions right now, and I am not liking what I find. Problem is, after scripture, I have to sift through the nonsense on both sides, but it's not looking very good for NASA right now. I don't know, I just wanted to discuss it.

Please think about it.

Be blessed.
Mike.
Sorry, you may have spent 12 hours thinking about this (as you've pointed out many times here and elswhere) but I spent years. Your logic here is simply irrational and much of it simply not true. You have shown an unwillingness to listen to reason so I'm not going to engage you on the details.
 
R

Rick W

Guest
#32
I don't believe any of the current staff is Catholic. Eora is speaking of a HUGE, site-wide division that took place a few years ago. Before most of the current staff were even members. They tried all kinds of things, even setting a forum aside for Catholics only I think(?). In the end more strict restriction was proven necessary.
Correct.
First and foremost. I have no animosity toward Catholics. Debate around the RCC isn't something I get engaged in.
Some years ago nearly every forum had turned into Catholic debate one way or another. Fierce debate. Whether or not the staff was "on the same page" (whatever that means) opinions were voiced during debates (more like arguments) from members and staff alike. A rift developed due to differing opinions among the staff. Some left. We lost some very good people including a lot of very good members and Catholics as well, the majority of which were patient and enduring in other discussions.

It was decided that one forum would be dedicated to Catholic discussion and even at that some thought it inappropriate for the site to "host" a Catholic stronghold. Well, that's how they saw it.

It was me that modded that one. Being that I rarely joined in discussions I got beat up pretty badly from BOTH sides of the fence. I was modding for behavior. The members wanted me to mod for doctrine and that wasn't going to happen. In the end I had enough of the endless emails, PMs and posts calling on me to do things, to believe things, to say things I had no intention of doing. Some were rather, well, let's just say less than complimentary. To tell the truth I'd not seen such intense arguing from those professing to know Christ in the the years I'd been online including the textual BBSs. And the time required to get things at least calmed to a low roar was above and beyond what anyone should be asked to give. There is no way I could possibly expect another to endure it and you can bet I won't make the same mistake twice to think Catholic discussion can be done respectfully.
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
47,083
Gender
Female
#33
I remember some of the conspiracy stuff.. one member so so angry about his wanting freedom to say what he wanted it was one of the reasons he started his own site.. Guess what here is a surprise .. He would not stand for any one disagreeing with him at his site.. Funny how people are like that
 
B

Brother Mike

Guest
#34
Sorry, you may have spent 12 hours thinking about this (as you've pointed out many times here and elswhere) but I spent years. Your logic here is simply irrational and much of it simply not true. You have shown an unwillingness to listen to reason so I'm not going to engage you on the details.
I can be reasoned with. Just because something is one way, does not indicate falsehoods. Reading on Why NASA just can't show us a full picture of the earth, they state they have no Satellites far away enough to take a full picture, so all the Pictures of Earth except Apollo are put together and photoshopped, colored and clouds added to fill in the composites that would be blank. That came from NASA.
It does not indicate they are Trying to deceive. They seem to be very honest about things when asked.

For me, that's a possible reasonable explanation that can't be refuted either way. We move one to the next.

Anyway, enough about Flat Earth. My point is I am also looking at answers, I did not post to tell everyone like it is, and believe this or else.
If it's reasonable, then I am OK with that.

Correct.
First and foremost. I have no animosity toward Catholics. Debate around the RCC isn't something I get engaged in.
Some years ago nearly every forum had turned into Catholic debate one way or another. Fierce debate. Whether or not the staff was "on the same page" (whatever that means) opinions were voiced during debates (more like arguments) from members and staff alike. A rift developed due to differing opinions among the staff. Some left. We lost some very good people including a lot of very good members and Catholics as well, the majority of which were patient and enduring in other discussions.

It was decided that one forum would be dedicated to Catholic discussion and even at that some thought it inappropriate for the site to "host" a Catholic stronghold. Well, that's how they saw it.

It was me that modded that one. Being that I rarely joined in discussions I got beat up pretty badly from BOTH sides of the fence. I was modding for behavior. The members wanted me to mod for doctrine and that wasn't going to happen. In the end I had enough of the endless emails, PMs and posts calling on me to do things, to believe things, to say things I had no intention of doing. Some were rather, well, let's just say less than complimentary. To tell the truth I'd not seen such intense arguing from those professing to know Christ in the the years I'd been online including the textual BBSs. And the time required to get things at least calmed to a low roar was above and beyond what anyone should be asked to give. There is no way I could possibly expect another to endure it and you can bet I won't make the same mistake twice to think Catholic discussion can be done respectfully.
The criminal court systems think like this Rick.

I have never told on a Member, Never P.M'ed a moderator about someone who had false doctrine, not one time bothered any Moderator about anyone since I joined in 2008. Stitches are for snitches is what I learned.
There are lots of cry babies here, for sure, and they normally cry to Mods when you chew their doctrine up and and make them eat it afterwards because they are not versed enough to be part of the discussion. I get told on all the time, but I don't do the telling or bothering anyone.

So because people want to tell you what to believe, tattle tale like little school girls, cry like baby's to you. I and others like myself get thrown in the same category because YOU don't know how to deal with the children?

A simple answer is a grown man ought not to be telling like a baby, and prove your point in love on the forum. You will also not tell me what to believe, or tell me how to moderate my forum. If you don't like it, find another forum to post in.

It should not be since one kid stole a cookie, the other kids don't get cookies.

You have to cut off the trolls, and the rude, but you don't have to put up with the school girls and children. right?
Be blessed.
Mike.
 
B

Brother Mike

Guest
#35
I remember some of the conspiracy stuff.. one member so so angry about his wanting freedom to say what he wanted it was one of the reasons he started his own site.. Guess what here is a surprise .. He would not stand for any one disagreeing with him at his site.. Funny how people are like that
As I stated, I am glade this site is not like that. I am on the fence about this crazy flat earth idea. I can be reasoned with. I have an issue not reading the scripture literal though. I am thankful for your kindness to me when it should have been the frying pan to the head.

:)
Mike.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
14,530
Gender
Male
#36
It should not be since one kid stole a cookie, the other kids don't get cookies.
Except when many kids are stealing cookies all the time and it causes divisions, it's a lot more pleasant for all if there are no cookies. Have some fruit instead :)
 
R

Rick W

Guest
#37
Brother Mike
Would be a lot easier if all members could be pigeon-holed as childish, rude, disrespectful, kind, patient or any other trait one cares to bring up.
But most people aren't so pure in their constitution. Some subjects bring out things in people never seen before. Good and bad.
Keep them away from certain subjects and their posts are worth reading, worth thinking about.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time with this. Each mod volunteers their time as they see fit and I take that as attestation of their generosity and belief in the name they profess. I won't mince words here. On the boards I'll back a mod's decision 100%. If there needs to be some "refinement" then that's done with total confidentiality. I will not admonish a mod in public or in the staff's spaces if there's an action taken by a mod I disagree with. That matter is handled one-on-one and nobody, not the members, nor the rest of the staff will be privy to any actions taken on my part or on the part of the mod I speak with to bring an issue to resolution.Except of course revisions publicly made to a post or discussion.

At one time the admins generally handled grievances between members and moderators. Again, confidentially. But the formation of "Talk With The Staff" has been held consensually as a useful tool by the staff. Whatever helps them do their job I'll support. I don't have to like it but if it helps them then so be it.
Take it to TWTS.
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
15,450
Gender
Male
Christian
Yes
#38
Bill, my thread was about a flat earth, and I posted scripture after scripture that God said it's the sun the moves, the earth does not, the Earth has corners, it has edges. If you take the scripture literal for God's word, then the Earth has to be flat. Do you believe several scriptures would indicate there might be holes into what NASA has fed us all these years without looking at scientific data that proves them wrong also?

The only Data we have about space is from our government.



This is a NASA composite image Bill. In Fact, there are no pictures of earth that are not composite images. Even NASA's own web site says that every image is a computer generated. Don't take my word for it. This image was made from several images and computer enhanced. A composite image is a image made from multiple sources, like all NASA images of earth except one they had taken on the APOLLO mission they claim. Notice it's on a Matte as they removed the stars from the background.

Scripture alone is enough, we not even gotten into the evidence like this. There are suppose to be 1,000's of Satellites out there, but not one can take a picture of earth without being edited and enhanced. Not one. Don't take my word for it, google it.

Would you call this a conspiracy theory that we should ignore along with scriptures, or would this in your opinion need to be looked into more? I am still on the fence about this.

Taken from NASA's Best pictures of Earth
http://www.wired.com/2014/12/nasa-best-earth-from-space-2014/
All composites, all fake.

Be blessed Brother Bill.

Mike.
Mike, you're feeding her idea of Conspiracy Theories being good subject matter but you have made me laugh a good deal tonight, thank you... flat earth with four corners... government conspiracy!
 
Joined
Dec 23, 2010
Messages
47,083
Gender
Female
#39
Excuse me but this is enough of giving a platform for such disrespect

Reba closed the thread... and i may move it..

Added this closure was not because of your post Bill
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.