Psycho-Babble Faith Thread 736533

Shown: posts 1 to 22 of 22. This is the beginning of the thread.

 

Lou's request about the service and worship if God

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 17:56:23

Friends,
The faith forum is for the discussion of the service and worship of God. The posts can be of such as long as they do not put down those of other faiths.
There has been a change now that Dr. Hsiung and deputy AM have now given their approval to allow posts that could lead a Jew to feel put down or to have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings if the author prefaces the post with {I believe}.
I am asking you not to take advantage of their opening up this type of way to post about the service and worship of God even though it is now made available for you to do so.
I ask, could one here post a quote from {...The protocols...] and say that they believe it so thearefore it is civil? Could one post here from Hitler's ,[...Mien...] and say that they believe it so thearfore it is civil?
There are a collection of bible verse that have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings for centuries by what is known as {replacement theology}. I ask that you not quote them even if you belive them.
Let us use this thread then to discuss the service and worship of God and I ask to do so without using the verses that belong to the doctrine of replacement theology, for it is my belief that God has not replaced the Jews and that the grace of God is available to all.
I will start it off with a verse that I heard many years ago and would like to discuss that. I heard it many years ago through the ether. Yet today, I can still hear in the present what a Rider on a White Horse said to me that the past has not halted that I still believe. He said to me, "The Lord God is a sun and a shield; the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
Lou

 

Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God

Posted by spriggy on February 26, 2007, at 18:37:34

In reply to Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 17:56:23

I also believe completely that:
"the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."

If I understand, are you saying that you believe that God does not offer this grace to Gentiles?
Only to Jews?

 

Lou's reply to spriggy-- spriggy

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 20:17:41

In reply to Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by spriggy on February 26, 2007, at 18:37:34

> I also believe completely that:
> "the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
>
> If I understand, are you saying that you believe that God does not offer this grace to Gentiles?
> Only to Jews?

Spriggy,
You wrote,[...are you saying that you believe that God XXX?...].
Could you tell me why did you ask that? If you could, then I could have he opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
>
>

 

Lou's reply to spriggy--B

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 20:27:46

In reply to Lou's reply to spriggy-- spriggy, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 20:17:41

> > I also believe completely that:
> > "the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
> >
> > If I understand, are you saying that you believe that God does not offer this grace to Gentiles?
> > Only to Jews?
>
> Spriggy,
> You wrote,[...are you saying that you believe that God XXX?...].
> Could you tell me why did you ask that? If you could, then I could have he opportunity to respond accordingly.
> Lou
> >

Spriggy,
I do not see any part of the the grammatical structure of the statement in question that could be a foundation for your question. So if there is, could you specify such?. For I am not saying what you asked me if I was saying.
Lou
> >
>
>

 

Lou's reply to spriggy--C

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 21:04:16

In reply to Lou's reply to spriggy--B, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 20:27:46

> > > I also believe completely that:
> > > "the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
> > >
> > > If I understand, are you saying that you believe that God does not offer this grace to Gentiles?
> > > Only to Jews?
> >
> > Spriggy,
> > You wrote,[...are you saying that you believe that God XXX?...].
> > Could you tell me why did you ask that? If you could, then I could have he opportunity to respond accordingly.
> > Lou
> > >
>
> Spriggy,
> I do not see any part of the the grammatical structure of the statement in question that could be a foundation for your question. So if there is, could you specify such?. For I am not saying what you asked me if I was saying.
> Lou

Spriggy,
If this question of yours to me {are you saying}, is related to the statement that Dr. Hsiung and AM are approving, allow me to explain further.
The grammatical structure of that stetment has the potential to be interpreted various ways. That is why I asked the author so that she could have the opportunity to rule out what could be an interpretation.
The grammatical structure of that statement in question has the conjunction {but} which could have the potential to join the two statements together with
A. except for that there is this other fact
B. unless
C. Yet
D. with exception that
E who not
F other interpretations using the conjunction {but}
I feel inferior when I read that quote because of the grammatical structure having the potential IMO to have one think those questions that I asked the author to rule out .
I asked because it was unclear to me what interpretation the author wanted to be meant because there is the potential for the conjunction to mean various meanings.
But historically, the quote has been used to arrouse antisemitic feelings and has the potential IMO to lead a Jew to feel put down and I wanted to give the author the opportunity to refute any possible potential for someone else here to think that they could interptret it differntly from the author's intention.
It is the potential for the interpretation that is the issue. But as the quote stands by itself, it has the potential IMO to arrouse antisemitic feelings and the potential to lead a Jew to feel put down, because of the conjunction {but}, in the quote.
The quote could be put into a context that could not lead a Jew to feel put down and I could do that, but the rules here made to me by DR. Hsiung say that if I was to post the foundation of my faith, in relation that I have a commandment to me from my God to me, that that would be uncivil.
The statemnet in question using the conjunction {but}, could be IMO interpreted as being a foundation of that author's faith. And if the foundation of my faith can not be posted without sanction, then could not the foundation of that author's faith also not be posted without sanction?
Lou

> >
>
>

 

Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God Lou Pilder

Posted by zazenduckie on February 27, 2007, at 7:52:52

In reply to Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 17:56:23

> I will start it off with a verse that I heard many years ago and would like to discuss that. I heard it many years ago through the ether. Yet today, I can still hear in the present what a Rider on a White Horse said to me that the past has not halted that I still believe. He said to me, "The Lord God is a sun and a shield; the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
> Lou
>

What does it mean to walk uprightly?

What is the goodness of life?

Why do innocent children suffer pain and sorrow?

 

Lou's reply to ZZDuck-wlkupritly zazenduckie

Posted by Lou Pilder on February 27, 2007, at 16:02:38

In reply to Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God Lou Pilder, posted by zazenduckie on February 27, 2007, at 7:52:52

> > I will start it off with a verse that I heard many years ago and would like to discuss that. I heard it many years ago through the ether. Yet today, I can still hear in the present what a Rider on a White Horse said to me that the past has not halted that I still believe. He said to me, "The Lord God is a sun and a shield; the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
> > Lou
> >
>
> What does it mean to walk uprightly?
>
> What is the goodness of life?
>
> Why do innocent children suffer pain and sorrow?

ZZDuck,
The questions that you ask me above are good questions. Let us look at your first question,[...what does it mean to walk uprightly?...]
This is metaphorical grammatical structure that generally referrs as to that it has been revealed to me in relation to the God that I have service and worship to, as to the conduct of a way a person structures their life. The word {uprightly} generally referrs to a walk that has its focus on that the person'e thinking is meditating on what is honest,and true and just and pure or lovely or praisworthy and more.
There is much more to this that I could say, but that could be a start from me for if you would like to know more.
Lou


 

Re: Lou's reply to ZZDuck-gdns

Posted by Lou Pilder on March 3, 2007, at 18:52:05

In reply to Lou's reply to ZZDuck-wlkupritly zazenduckie, posted by Lou Pilder on February 27, 2007, at 16:02:38

> > > I will start it off with a verse that I heard many years ago and would like to discuss that. I heard it many years ago through the ether. Yet today, I can still hear in the present what a Rider on a White Horse said to me that the past has not halted that I still believe. He said to me, "The Lord God is a sun and a shield; the Lord will give grace and glory, and God will not withhold the goodness of life to them that walk uprightly."
> > > Lou
> > >
> >
> > What does it mean to walk uprightly?
> >
> > What is the goodness of life?
> >
> > Why do innocent children suffer pain and sorrow?
>
> ZZDuck,
> The questions that you ask me above are good questions. Let us look at your first question,[...what does it mean to walk uprightly?...]
> This is metaphorical grammatical structure that generally referrs as to that it has been revealed to me in relation to the God that I have service and worship to, as to the conduct of a way a person structures their life. The word {uprightly} generally referrs to a walk that has its focus on that the person'e thinking is meditating on what is honest,and true and just and pure or lovely or praisworthy and more.
> There is much more to this that I could say, but that could be a start from me for if you would like to know more.
> Lou
>
ZZ,
You asked,[...what is the goodness of life?...]
What I meant by the goodness of life is in particular to joy, peace,and love and other similar aspects of life.
There is much more to that, and this could be a start from me for if you would like to know more.
Lou
>
>

 

Re: please be civil spriggy

Posted by Dr. Bob on March 25, 2007, at 5:59:51

In reply to Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by spriggy on February 26, 2007, at 18:37:34

> are you saying that you believe that God does not offer this grace to Gentiles?

Please don't post anything that could lead others to feel accused. Implying that someone might be saying that God does not offer grace to others could lead them to feel accused.

But please don't take this personally, either, this doesn't mean I don't like you or think you're a bad person.

If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please first see the FAQ:

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#enforce

Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.

Thanks,

Bob

 

Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God Lou Pilder

Posted by fayeroe on March 29, 2007, at 19:19:03

In reply to Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 17:56:23

i feel that your request challenges my rights to my beliefs. you have your beliefs and i have mine.

i don't care what you believe and i'd rather you not care what i believe. i don't believe that it's either one of our business to poke around in something so personal.

i've watched this as long as i can and i would like to go on record in saying that i believe i have a higher power...........and i know that i don't have to remind you that i won't help you dissect something that i've said that is so direct........so, please don't ask me to......respectfully, pat

 

Lou's rsponse to aspects of fayeroe's post-

Posted by Lou Pilder on March 29, 2007, at 21:31:20

In reply to Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God Lou Pilder, posted by fayeroe on March 29, 2007, at 19:19:03

> i feel that your request challenges my rights to my beliefs. you have your beliefs and i have mine.
>
> i don't care what you believe and i'd rather you not care what i believe. i don't believe that it's either one of our business to poke around in something so personal.
>
> i've watched this as long as i can and i would like to go on record in saying that i believe i have a higher power...........and i know that i don't have to remind you that i won't help you dissect something that i've said that is so direct........so, please don't ask me to......respectfully, pat

Friends,
I believe in religious freedom. I make no request to anyone that they not believe something.
There are things that I am not allowed to post here, things that are the foundation of my faith that I believe. There are things posted here that DR. Hsiung has posted as not being acceptable to post even if it is the belief of the poster. There are examples on the opening page of the faith board as to what is and is not acceptable.
Please do not think that I have posted to say what you can or can not {believe}. All can believe what they would like,but not all beliefs can be {posted} here.
Lou

 

Lou's rsponse to aspects of fayeroe's post-B

Posted by Lou Pilder on March 29, 2007, at 21:54:57

In reply to Lou's rsponse to aspects of fayeroe's post-, posted by Lou Pilder on March 29, 2007, at 21:31:20

> > i feel that your request challenges my rights to my beliefs. you have your beliefs and i have mine.
> >
> > i don't care what you believe and i'd rather you not care what i believe. i don't believe that it's either one of our business to poke around in something so personal.
> >
> > i've watched this as long as i can and i would like to go on record in saying that i believe i have a higher power...........and i know that i don't have to remind you that i won't help you dissect something that i've said that is so direct........so, please don't ask me to......respectfully, pat
>
> Friends,
> I believe in religious freedom. I make no request to anyone that they not believe something.
> There are things that I am not allowed to post here, things that are the foundation of my faith that I believe. There are things posted here that DR. Hsiung has posted as not being acceptable to post even if it is the belief of the poster. There are examples on the opening page of the faith board as to what is and is not acceptable.
> Please do not think that I have posted to say what you can or can not {believe}. All can believe what they would like,but not all beliefs can be {posted} here.
> Lou
>
Friends,
It is written here,[..I believe in a higher power...].
That belief can be posted as being acceptable here just as Dr. Hsiung's example,[..I believe in the Father, the Son...].
The faith forum is about the service and worship of God or the supernatural.
Lou

 

Lou's rsponse to aspects of fayeroe's post-C

Posted by Lou Pilder on March 29, 2007, at 22:09:43

In reply to Lou's rsponse to aspects of fayeroe's post-B, posted by Lou Pilder on March 29, 2007, at 21:54:57

> > > i feel that your request challenges my rights to my beliefs. you have your beliefs and i have mine.
> > >
> > > i don't care what you believe and i'd rather you not care what i believe. i don't believe that it's either one of our business to poke around in something so personal.
> > >
> > > i've watched this as long as i can and i would like to go on record in saying that i believe i have a higher power...........and i know that i don't have to remind you that i won't help you dissect something that i've said that is so direct........so, please don't ask me to......respectfully, pat
> >
> > Friends,
> > I believe in religious freedom. I make no request to anyone that they not believe something.
> > There are things that I am not allowed to post here, things that are the foundation of my faith that I believe. There are things posted here that DR. Hsiung has posted as not being acceptable to post even if it is the belief of the poster. There are examples on the opening page of the faith board as to what is and is not acceptable.
> > Please do not think that I have posted to say what you can or can not {believe}. All can believe what they would like,but not all beliefs can be {posted} here.
> > Lou
> >
> Friends,
> It is written here,[..I believe in a higher power...].
> That belief can be posted as being acceptable here just as Dr. Hsiung's example,[..I believe in the Father, the Son...].
> The faith forum is about the service and worship of God or the supernatural.
> Lou
>
Friends,
The question becomes as to what can be posted and what can not to be acceptable here.
Statements that identify a person's concept of God or the supernatural or their affiliation are IMO civil in any forum.
Lou



>
>
>

 

Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God Lou Pilder

Posted by fayeroe on March 30, 2007, at 3:42:19

In reply to Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 17:56:23

The faith forum is for the discussion of the service and worship of God. The posts can be of such as long as they do not put down those of other faiths.
There has been a change now that Dr. Hsiung and deputy AM have now given their approval to allow posts that could lead a Jew to feel put down or to have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings if the author prefaces the post with {I believe}.

you could be right........

 

Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God Lou Pilder

Posted by greywolf on March 31, 2007, at 20:58:33

In reply to Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 17:56:23

> There are a collection of bible verse that have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings for centuries by what is known as {replacement theology}. I ask that you not quote them even if you belive them.
> Let us use this thread then to discuss the service and worship of God and I ask to do so without using the verses that belong to the doctrine of replacement theology, for it is my belief that God has not replaced the Jews and that the grace of God is available to all.
_____________________________________________


I wouldn't know a replacement theology verse if it hit me in the head.

Further, if one did hit me in the head, I suspect I'd find that the meaning of the verse isn't singularly related to replacement theology.

I suggest that it is not appropriate to prohibit the use of certain biblical language simply because some people relate its use to instances where others have used it for wrongful purposes. If the so-called replacement theology verses are quoted here in a manner intended to demean the Jewish faith, then the deputies can and should take action.

I truly believe most adults who post here are entirely capable of using the full range of language without intentionally hurting anyone else. And if unintentional slights occur, there are civil responses to those instances, too, and they do not require maintenance of a "banned verse" list.

Greywolf

 

Lou's response to aspects of greywolf's post-

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 1, 2007, at 4:54:08

In reply to Re: Lou's request about the service and worship if God Lou Pilder, posted by greywolf on March 31, 2007, at 20:58:33

> > There are a collection of bible verse that have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings for centuries by what is known as {replacement theology}. I ask that you not quote them even if you belive them.
> > Let us use this thread then to discuss the service and worship of God and I ask to do so without using the verses that belong to the doctrine of replacement theology, for it is my belief that God has not replaced the Jews and that the grace of God is available to all.
> _____________________________________________
>
>
> I wouldn't know a replacement theology verse if it hit me in the head.
>
> Further, if one did hit me in the head, I suspect I'd find that the meaning of the verse isn't singularly related to replacement theology.
>
> I suggest that it is not appropriate to prohibit the use of certain biblical language simply because some people relate its use to instances where others have used it for wrongful purposes. If the so-called replacement theology verses are quoted here in a manner intended to demean the Jewish faith, then the deputies can and should take action.
>
> I truly believe most adults who post here are entirely capable of using the full range of language without intentionally hurting anyone else. And if unintentional slights occur, there are civil responses to those instances, too, and they do not require maintenance of a "banned verse" list.
>
> Greywolf
>
Friends,
It is written here,[...if it hit me in the head...suspect..meaning..isn't singulary related to {replacement theology}...]
The policy here about what is acceptable or not to be posted is that unacceptable statements posted are under a policy.
This policy has been posted here on the opening page of the faith forum and its links by Dr. Hsiung and in the past practice with statements posted by Dr. Hsiung to clarify his actions and policy here to give IMO an indication as to how the policy has been carried out here.
I am unsure as to the new rules that were made here when I rejoined the forum as to if I can cite the past practice here. If anyone would like to see those posts , I could email them if you like.
If one would want to know more about {replacement theology} and do not want to do an internet search, another way could be that one could email me if they like and I could provide several links.
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
>

 

Lou's response to aspects of greywolf's post-B

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 1, 2007, at 5:55:30

In reply to Lou's response to aspects of greywolf's post-, posted by Lou Pilder on April 1, 2007, at 4:54:08

> > > There are a collection of bible verse that have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings for centuries by what is known as {replacement theology}. I ask that you not quote them even if you belive them.
> > > Let us use this thread then to discuss the service and worship of God and I ask to do so without using the verses that belong to the doctrine of replacement theology, for it is my belief that God has not replaced the Jews and that the grace of God is available to all.
> > _____________________________________________
> >
> >
> > I wouldn't know a replacement theology verse if it hit me in the head.
> >
> > Further, if one did hit me in the head, I suspect I'd find that the meaning of the verse isn't singularly related to replacement theology.
> >
> > I suggest that it is not appropriate to prohibit the use of certain biblical language simply because some people relate its use to instances where others have used it for wrongful purposes. If the so-called replacement theology verses are quoted here in a manner intended to demean the Jewish faith, then the deputies can and should take action.
> >
> > I truly believe most adults who post here are entirely capable of using the full range of language without intentionally hurting anyone else. And if unintentional slights occur, there are civil responses to those instances, too, and they do not require maintenance of a "banned verse" list.
> >
> > Greywolf
> >
> Friends,
> It is written here,[...if it hit me in the head...suspect..meaning..isn't singulary related to {replacement theology}...]
> The policy here about what is acceptable or not to be posted is that unacceptable statements posted are under a policy.
> This policy has been posted here on the opening page of the faith forum and its links by Dr. Hsiung and in the past practice with statements posted by Dr. Hsiung to clarify his actions and policy here to give IMO an indication as to how the policy has been carried out here.
> I am unsure as to the new rules that were made here when I rejoined the forum as to if I can cite the past practice here. If anyone would like to see those posts , I could email them if you like.
> If one would want to know more about {replacement theology} and do not want to do an internet search, another way could be that one could email me if they like and I could provide several links.
> Lou
> lpilder_1188@fuse.net
> >
>
>
Friends,
It is written here,[...not appropriate to prohibit the use of certain biblical language...in a manner {intended}..most adults that post here...do not require.. a "banned verse" list...].
The policy here, and actions taken by the administration in relation to the faith board address:
A. intent
B. belief
C. quoting others and bible verses
D foundations (tenets) of faiths that are not acceptable to be posted here.
The criteria for what is posted on the faith board, as to if it is acceptable here or not, are shown in various posts with clarification given by the administration.
There are criteria listed here that determine if a biblical passage is acceptable or not to be posted here. Is it not the policy here that even if one was to preface some statements with {my faith says} or { I believe} or {people of my faith believe}, that there are some foundations of some faiths that are unacceptable to be posted here regardless if they are prefaced by those?
I am unsure if I can post some of these past posts that show this due to that there were new rules made here when I rejoined the forum that may prohibit me from posting them. If anyone would like to see what I am spacifically referring to, they could email me if they like.
Lou
PS
I am asking that this be redirected to the administration board if it is now a discussion on policy and to include the post by Dr. Hsiung here of his action taken that has led to posts here concerning this.



 

Re: Lou's response to aspects of greywolf's post-B Lou Pilder

Posted by greywolf on April 1, 2007, at 10:08:53

In reply to Lou's response to aspects of greywolf's post-B, posted by Lou Pilder on April 1, 2007, at 5:55:30

Lou:

I'll be honest here. I read your last post and I don't have a clue what you're getting at.

My only point was that I don't think a community forum should operate on the premise that phrases or verses should be banned simply because they have the potential to be interpreted as offensive by any one person. I believe that the standard should instead be whether those phrases or verses are used in an uncivil way.

If you would like to educate me and others on why all "replacement theology" verses have ONLY ONE interpretation and show us how one can never quote such verses without intending to insult or demean those of the Jewish faith, I'd be interested in your analysis.

But if this is a just a continuation of your attempts to debate Dr. Bob's interpretation of the rules of his own site, I'd rather not participate.

Thanks.

Greywolf

 

Lou's reply to greywolf greywolf

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 1, 2007, at 11:23:49

In reply to Re: Lou's response to aspects of greywolf's post-B Lou Pilder, posted by greywolf on April 1, 2007, at 10:08:53

> Lou:
>
> I'll be honest here. I read your last post and I don't have a clue what you're getting at.
>
> My only point was that I don't think a community forum should operate on the premise that phrases or verses should be banned simply because they have the potential to be interpreted as offensive by any one person. I believe that the standard should instead be whether those phrases or verses are used in an uncivil way.
>
> If you would like to educate me and others on why all "replacement theology" verses have ONLY ONE interpretation and show us how one can never quote such verses without intending to insult or demean those of the Jewish faith, I'd be interested in your analysis.
>
> But if this is a just a continuation of your attempts to debate Dr. Bob's interpretation of the rules of his own site, I'd rather not participate.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Greywolf

Greywolf,
You wrote,[...Lou:...I don't have a clue...I don't think..should be banned..because they have the potential to be interpreted as..by any one person...standard ..instead be..used in an uncivil way...educate me.."replacement theology"...I'd be interested...interpretation of rules of his own site...].
As to how any statement in a post here is to be determined as acceptable or not has been as to if the statement [...{could lead} one of another faith to {feel} put down...]. There is a post by me that Dr. Hsiung uses to exemplify his rationale that I am unsure as to if I can post it here due to that there were new rules made here when I rejoined the forum that could have the potential IMO to mean that that post could be unacceptable to post here. I could email it if anyone would like to have me send it to them.
Lou
lpilder_1188@fuse.net
Lou

 

Lou's reply to greywolf-B

Posted by Lou Pilder on April 1, 2007, at 11:36:56

In reply to Lou's reply to greywolf greywolf, posted by Lou Pilder on April 1, 2007, at 11:23:49

> > Lou:
> >
> > I'll be honest here. I read your last post and I don't have a clue what you're getting at.
> >
> > My only point was that I don't think a community forum should operate on the premise that phrases or verses should be banned simply because they have the potential to be interpreted as offensive by any one person. I believe that the standard should instead be whether those phrases or verses are used in an uncivil way.
> >
> > If you would like to educate me and others on why all "replacement theology" verses have ONLY ONE interpretation and show us how one can never quote such verses without intending to insult or demean those of the Jewish faith, I'd be interested in your analysis.
> >
> > But if this is a just a continuation of your attempts to debate Dr. Bob's interpretation of the rules of his own site, I'd rather not participate.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Greywolf
>
> Greywolf,
> You wrote,[...Lou:...I don't have a clue...I don't think..should be banned..because they have the potential to be interpreted as..by any one person...standard ..instead be..used in an uncivil way...educate me.."replacement theology"...I'd be interested...interpretation of rules of his own site...].
> As to how any statement in a post here is to be determined as acceptable or not has been as to if the statement [...{could lead} one of another faith to {feel} put down...]. There is a post by me that Dr. Hsiung uses to exemplify his rationale that I am unsure as to if I can post it here due to that there were new rules made here when I rejoined the forum that could have the potential IMO to mean that that post could be unacceptable to post here. I could email it if anyone would like to have me send it to them.
> Lou
> lpilder_1188@fuse.net
> Lou
>
Greywolf,
You wrote,[..the Jewish faith...I'd be interested in your analysis...].
I would like to post here my analysis. I do not think that I could do so because for me to post my analysis, the foundation of my fiath could come into the posting of my analysis. If one reads all of what is on the opening page of the faith forum here and its links and discussion, this could be clearer. If one would like more clarification concerning this, I could email with them if they like.
Lou

 

Re: posts that could lead others to feel put down

Posted by Dr. Bob on July 11, 2007, at 11:00:28

In reply to Lou's request about the service and worship if God, posted by Lou Pilder on February 26, 2007, at 17:56:23

> Dr. Hsiung and deputy AM have now given their approval to allow posts that could lead a Jew to feel put down or to have the potential to arrouse antisemitic feelings if the author prefaces the post with {I believe}.

I don't consider it civil to post anything that could lead others to feel put down, including anti-Semitic statements. Still, I think it's inevitable that particular posters sometimes won't feel supported by particular posts.

Follow-ups regarding this should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration.

Thanks,

Bob

 

Redirect: administrative issues

Posted by Dr. Bob on July 25, 2007, at 1:29:00

In reply to Re: posts that could lead others to feel put down, posted by Dr. Bob on July 11, 2007, at 11:00:28

> Follow-ups regarding this should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration.

Here's a link:

http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20070702/msgs/768966.html

Thanks,

Bob


This is the end of the thread.


Show another thread

URL of post in thread:


Psycho-Babble Faith | Extras | FAQ


[dr. bob] Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD, bob@dr-bob.org

Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.