Open Question for Vic C & sheshisown

[nonbelieverforums]

As the two of you are forum moderators I would like to ask the following question:

I have been on hundreds of forums and in fact I own two vbulliten forums one christian the other business related.

Many of the preterists seem to have a problem when members who post media articles, blogs or do a cut and paste on content that has not been written by the member personally. Providing there is a writers credit it is perfectly with the rules of this forum (as I understand) or any forum I have ever been on.

This is an insane suggestion by the preterists in my view. It almost limits modern day views or free speech in the forum.

If such a rule was in place it would not be a discussion forum at all. The purpose of a forum is to be able to discuss any issue written by any person and to be able to discuss it, debate it, or argue it. Insuring a writers credit and perhaps the site it came from is usually the given rule.

From those of the modern day view of prophecy such a rule would limit or cut off our view on the forum entirely. How else are we able to discuss modern day events and show how it relates to scripture if for example we can not post media events or blogs from other Christians discussing our view.

I am not sure where you both are in the views of prophecy but I would like to confirm a fare playing field and ask that you perhaps make that clear to the preterists.

May I know if this site is actually owed by a preterist/s ??

Respectfully

Rob - nbf

Sample Forums:

http://www.rr-bb.com/
http://www.fulfilledprophecy.com/discussion/

 

[Drew]

Many of the preterists seem to have a problem when members who post media articles, blogs or do a cut and paste on content that has not been written by the member personally.

I have some empathy for this complaint about cut and paste. The problem is that it gives the strong impression that the person doing the cutting and pasting has non-critically accepted a position and is looking for sources that substantiate or endorse that position.

Yet one would think that the proper way to come to a view is to actually think it through for oneself. If that is done, then one can respond with one's own arguments.

Having said that, any arguments, wherever they come from, should be engaged.

 

[nonbelieverforums]

Ok well here is an example. I have just read an interesting article on Problems with Full Preterism
Philip B. Brown. I found it very helpful in my understanding of this view. I have posted it in the forum and I would like to hear from everyones reaction to it.

How do you feel about that? Do I have to write it to discuss it?

If people have a problem with the post I will remove it.

 

[Vic C.]

The first thing that came to mind was something Peter wrote:

1 Pet 3:15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:

To avoid long posts that nobody reads, we had to add this to the TOS:

9 - Please keep posts down to a respectable length and provide source and/or links for your info. We want to respect copyrighted material. Plus, you stand a better chance of getting your post read if it contains a link with an excerpt from source that's relative to your point.

It's very hard to digest long copy/paste posts. People get discouraged when they post long articles and then get little or no responses. If it was posted in segments, which allows other respond to just a few points, a more healthy dialogue results.

 

[nonbelieverforums]

May I have an answer to part 2 please??

May I know if this site is actually owed by a preterist/s ??

 

[Vic C.]

I don't know. I never did ask Greg what his End Times position is. Maybe he doesn't have one.

 

[sheshisown]

:waving nonbelieverforums~

I can say I have cut and pasted quotes quite often, especially of well known authors whose biblical exegesis I throughly agree with. News articles are also often refrred to by weblink since these are usually long. I have also noted a few website links when I thought it helpful.

I agree with Vic C. that keeping posts to a minimum in length is wise, although I am a wordy person and fail to do so, from time to time myself~

I would not say that is a hard and fast rule, and I believe Vic would agree~ just sound use of the forum. And concern for the discussion over concern for whether ones point is made throughly and all at once.

As far as not posting anything UNLESS it is your written opinion, well, then we would not be allowed to post websites that detail better our theology... Plenty of members do that. :D

And never being allowed to copy and paste your previously written theology... I would not be able to post at all if I had no opportunity to write my thoughts elsewhere BEFORE I pasted them in here. My PC has a habit of throwing me off the site. I would lose half of what I am in the middle of writing. I am no quick writer, I think slowly and carefully about what I will say, most of the time...

I believe that is a good thing. :yes

Also~ I have made the mistake of not including the source name once, needless to say it was embarrassing. You probably have not done that too often, seeing how it is not tolerated by some at all.

Finally~ I think it is wise to seek to comply as much as possible with those we are seeking to persuade over matters that are merely cemantical. The whole purpose is to edify and exhort one another with our discussions...:yes ? Where there is no way to comply, I am learning to graciously admit it, and ask for clemency. :shades

sheshisown

 

[nonbelieverforums]

Perfect !

Thank you..