And, CW, I reckon it does prove the point that PFAL adherents will not engage in a doctrinal discussion.
They'll change the subject, question the question, attack the poster, but they will not engage in a discussion about an actual issue questioning their doctrinal beliefs. I already know that the people who post in the Doctrinal section are intelligent, confident in their beliefs and able to offer proof, validation and enlightening discussion on the topic. It's those PFAL adherents that I was hoping would post on your thread.
I suspect we'll not see them down there to have a real discussion. Any visits to your thread by them will be much of the same that we already saw on page 1.
Tom - I've wondered how some of it didn't stay outta the Soap Opera forum, myself...
Someone here said that it's a more logical (for the most part) forum. I'm paraphrasing here, so nobody get your nickers in a knot, k? (I'm sick of getting smacked on the nose because someone thinks paraphrasing = twisting what was written.... But the forum has a lot of strong, opinionated people posting there who each think their views are THE view. (That's my nod to THE, okay?) It's a great place to post if you like getting the snot beat out of you when you disagree with someone (i.e. Momentus wasn't that bad...)....
That being said...
I would like make a motion that we have a PFAL section for those people who want to play on that field and basically separate PFAL from the Doctorine forum. Maybe we could call it the Quadrinity Forum (you know, God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and VPW)...
I would like make a motion that we have a PFAL section for those people who want to play on that field and basically separate PFAL from the Doctorine forum. Maybe we could call it the Quadrinity Forum (you know, God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and VPW)...
Y'all have some great points. And I think a few of us agree that the trouble makers won't last in Doctrinal no matter where it's positioned in the Index.
Y'all have some great points. And I think a few of us agree that the trouble makers won't last in Doctrinal no matter where it's positioned in the Index.
As to casual drop ins in post. I don't think that will be a problem. That is a respectful and logical place to dwell and one would feel as if they had their underwear on their head before too long and just bow out.
That's a good point, CK. ;)
(With the exception of Mike (nothing casual there) ---
I would like make a motion that we have a PFAL section for those people who want to play on that field and basically separate PFAL from the Doctorine forum.
I would agree, with the exception being that any thread that "the Mike" hijacks, should immediately go to the soap opera section.
I wasn't talking about you and Cynic when I mentioned dreams and scrawls on subway cars being the inspiration for doctrinal threads. Sorry, poor sentence structure. I was obliquely referring to one of our number who starts discussions about flying whales in Genesis, or posts 'words of prophecy'.
Recommended Posts
Belle
And, CW, I reckon it does prove the point that PFAL adherents will not engage in a doctrinal discussion.
They'll change the subject, question the question, attack the poster, but they will not engage in a discussion about an actual issue questioning their doctrinal beliefs. I already know that the people who post in the Doctrinal section are intelligent, confident in their beliefs and able to offer proof, validation and enlightening discussion on the topic. It's those PFAL adherents that I was hoping would post on your thread.
I suspect we'll not see them down there to have a real discussion. Any visits to your thread by them will be much of the same that we already saw on page 1.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
Yeah. So true. Sigh. So I guess the issue isn't the Doctrinal Forum so much as why is my thread there? LOL
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
I wonder how they determined it should go to the Doctrinal section as opposed to the Just Plain Silly section? Anybody know? :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
Tom - I've wondered how some of it didn't stay outta the Soap Opera forum, myself...
Someone here said that it's a more logical (for the most part) forum. I'm paraphrasing here, so nobody get your nickers in a knot, k? (I'm sick of getting smacked on the nose because someone thinks paraphrasing = twisting what was written.... But the forum has a lot of strong, opinionated people posting there who each think their views are THE view. (That's my nod to THE, okay?) It's a great place to post if you like getting the snot beat out of you when you disagree with someone (i.e. Momentus wasn't that bad...)....
That being said...
I would like make a motion that we have a PFAL section for those people who want to play on that field and basically separate PFAL from the Doctorine forum. Maybe we could call it the Quadrinity Forum (you know, God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, and VPW)...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
A lot shorter name would be "Mike's Place"...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Y'all have some great points. And I think a few of us agree that the trouble makers won't last in Doctrinal no matter where it's positioned in the Index.
I still vote for up closer to the top myself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
well chattingkathy... I've lasted down there...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Don't take this personal dear man but when I think of trouble makers you don't come to mind. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
That's a good point, CK. ;)
(With the exception of Mike (nothing casual there) ---
Uhhh -- what was my point??? :unsure:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom Strange
Dave... don't call her CK... she doesn't like that. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
MEA CULPA!!! :(
dang --- I just realized --I am so sowwy. :(
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Yup, there's another CK amongst us now and we're a tad different.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jardinero
From Chas:
I would agree, with the exception being that any thread that "the Mike" hijacks, should immediately go to the soap opera section.
J.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
I'll drink to that!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Garth:
I wasn't talking about you and Cynic when I mentioned dreams and scrawls on subway cars being the inspiration for doctrinal threads. Sorry, poor sentence structure. I was obliquely referring to one of our number who starts discussions about flying whales in Genesis, or posts 'words of prophecy'.
Carry on
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
as one who frequents the dungeon, i am somewhat torn on this one
for one, a lot of doctrinal stuff goes on in all forums anyway, it seems
its almost like there are multiple doctrinal forums going on
also, ive always kinda liked the doctrinal forum being at the fringe at the bottom of the GSC robe
so as to avoid posting things in ex-way mainstreet that gets you buried under a pile of hypertextual rocks
but that being said...sometimes i would prefer a little stirring up of passions
to getting little to no response
also...it seems as if the atmosphere of the forums has changed a bit over the years
i think it might be good to move doctrinal more up front
especially if we can find better ways to compare doctrinal maps without devolving to accusations of possession,
such healthier dialogical demonstrations might actually help people grow beyond the exclusivity taught in twi
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.