I am sure that this is literally untrue. Figuratively, it may appear this way, especially in this type of unmoderated forum where all sorts of persons are free to hide behind anonymity and act out. The question could be reversed to include the opposite side of the issue just as easily.
I have taken a position that if a question is explicitly targeting "atheists", "non-believers" or something similar, that I will not answer (but may read for my own edification) the question since I obviously do not fit these labels.
Likewise, if a question is labeled "believers", "theists", “Moslems”, “Jehovah’s Witnesses”, etc., it would be polite if those not fitting the label would not respond unless the question specifically fits. I also ignore questions that obviously violate the new community guidelines posted at http://answers.yahoo.com/info/community_guidelines.php, and especially those that are flippant, hate-mongering, vapid preaching, or are just chatty.
It seems to me that only if a question is non-specific should responses be expected from any and all persons.
We all learned this behavior in kindergarten but seem to have forgotten how to play nice with one another. We were taught to not speak unless spoken to, answer the question asked, and be polite. We also have learned, as George Elliot noted, "Blessed is the person who, having nothing to say, abstains from giving us worthy evidence of the fact."
Why is it that when some are older they feel they can reject all semblances of politeness with shallow and strained arguments for free speech, just having fun, etc? In truth, these are not the salient issues, but only excuses for bad behavior.
The real issue is what enables these forums? The answer should be clear--it is the questioner. The questioner is the driving force in these forums and should be able to designate a specific population for the responses they are seeking. For if there are no questions, there is no reason for a Q&A type of forum. Thus, my focus on my response is what the asker thinks of my question, not any other answerers who may also respond. If the asker doesn’t like my answer I usually hear about it and learn from them. That said, I write cogent responses that I hope are useful to others who may take the time to read them.
I create my answers from an academic theologian’s perspective, as this is my “day job”. Yes, my answers are often wordy, but I honor the questioner with enough details to help them learn more. I believe that what a person sets into writing is a greater act of consciousness than what a person speaks from their mouths. So, when a person writes some of the vitriol that we see in this Forum, especially from self-professed believers, this person is giving deeper evidence of the state of their faith to others. In short, some may know the Word of the Lord, but they demonstrate by their actions that they do not know the Lord of the Word.
If we respect the questioner’s desires for specificity, this forum will be something worth spending our precious time in.
2007-03-23 06:06:54
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ask Mr. Religion 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Open forums are an important avenue of free speech that many people must avail themselves in order to have the opportunity to express themselves without interruption. In a live discussion group (and I participate in many of them) the meetings are usually dominated by one person who thinks that his ego has all the answers to all the questions. In a forum like YA such egomaniacs are tempered because they cannot control the group; therefore, their input is of no greater importance than that of anybody else. The expression of ideas and opinions is important for spiritual and intellectual growth. The exchange of information and ideas is the backbone of out Constitution and Bill of Rights and is the reason why America has a history that is pro-active rather than stagnant. The day we lose our freedom to express our ideas, no matter how inane they may be, is the day that we as a people cease to exist. This is why Islam and communism and neo-Nazism must be destroyed at all costs because these three element oppose the kinds of freedom that we enjoy.
2007-03-23 04:45:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by Preacher 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
ONLY if such based on "Christ": "is the end of the law".
For as foretold: false Christs shall arise: to DECEIVE.
Difference between J->C or C->J is as Life or Death.
http://www.godshew.org/ChristJesus.htm
The GRACE of our Lord J->C with you->all. Amen.
2007-03-23 04:45:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, it could.
However, it seems that many on this forum (not all) are either anti-Christian or anti-religion. So, I'm not sure if this is the best place.
2007-03-23 04:44:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bobby E 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
of course a person can come to christ when salvation is presented on a forum.
2007-03-23 20:47:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by robert p 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
no accepting christ is something someone has to do on their own, youcan lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink
2007-03-23 08:30:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by newbie ice hockey fan & TV serie 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
it would depend how the forum is slanted. Becouse u can't convert people overnight
2007-03-23 04:37:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by chuck h 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't you feel dirty when you lie to get people to join your religion, I mean it SAYS disguised in the name of the site!!!!
2007-03-23 06:40:10
·
answer #8
·
answered by XX 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I wouldn't be here otherwise if I didn't think that God could use this forum for His glory.
2007-03-23 04:36:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by primoa1970 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't know, but thanks for telling me about this website.
2007-03-23 04:38:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋