Given recent ugly events on the board in which I was a participant I have given a lot of consideration to my participation and role in this forum. I have decided that it is in the best interest of the group that I no longer participate here. In honest retrospect I must admit that I have been part of many of the blowups that have occurred on the site since I have been here. While I'm not the only guilty party I am honest enough to recognize and admit that I am obviously a problem child. I must concede that my participation in this group is often counterproductive to its intended purpose. Therefore, I am going to join the ranks of such folks as Guitarhero, Never again, Chrisso, and ACU, who have taken their leave of this group. I apologize to the group for the drama and ugly behavior I participated in. I never meant to offend or harm anyone. I wish you all the best.
ZEEK
Farewell
Farewell
"All things are difficult before they are easy."(found in a fortune cookie)
"We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the oppressed. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Forgetting isn't healing." Elie Wiesel
"We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the oppressed. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Forgetting isn't healing." Elie Wiesel
-
FinallyFree
- Posts: 2370
- Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2015 3:29 pm
- Location: Southaven, MS
Re: Farewell
I am not mad at you, Zeek. I forgive you.
Re: Farewell
Farewell
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
Re: Farewell
Zeek, I don't participate much here anymore, but I have never considered you a negative influence in any way. The board is much more peaceful and civil these days than in a few times past, and you just added your own unique gifts to the mix. Sometimes it's healthier for the group when someone leaves; however, I don't see that being true in your case.
Best wishes to you on your journey.
Best wishes to you on your journey.
~Stone Cold Ivyrose Austin~
Re: Farewell
While we all have some things in common, we are not all alike. We don't all agree with everything. We can't - and shouldn't - make agreeing on all/most topics a requirement for this board.
Sometimes that means people are going to disagree strongly enough to start arguing about it (whatever 'it' is). Most of us never learned 'healthy' arguing in the coc, so how do we - as a group - think we should handle that sort of thing? Suggestions? Ideas? Comments?
The recent clarification of the sections of the board (support versus discussion) is an attempt to at least contain discussion/argument and keep it out of the support areas. But the idea of a support group - really - is to wean people OFF support, eventually, and that includes learning to disagree (even strongly) without blowing up.
So what can the group do? what can/should the moderators do? How far should we sit back and watch, and when should we intervene (and how)?
Sometimes that means people are going to disagree strongly enough to start arguing about it (whatever 'it' is). Most of us never learned 'healthy' arguing in the coc, so how do we - as a group - think we should handle that sort of thing? Suggestions? Ideas? Comments?
The recent clarification of the sections of the board (support versus discussion) is an attempt to at least contain discussion/argument and keep it out of the support areas. But the idea of a support group - really - is to wean people OFF support, eventually, and that includes learning to disagree (even strongly) without blowing up.
So what can the group do? what can/should the moderators do? How far should we sit back and watch, and when should we intervene (and how)?
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
Re: Farewell
Just like the board proscribes acceptable behavior in the support forums, so should there be an expectation in all forums of behaviors towards other members and reference to members. There should be a baseline expectation of not going negative, not assuming or imputing negative motives to others, no name calling, no personal attack. Basically the expectation should be civility.
Instead there seems to be a notion that people need to vent and show emotion as some sort of healing process. But this is allowed to include outburst and personal attacks towards other members. And then that negative behavior is lumped in with the need "to vent" and it all becomes expected, ignored, and allowed by the Mods and Owner. But when the police pull back from enforcing codes of conduct in order to not provoke people, the town ends up burning down. Peaceful expression, protest, and presentation should be the expectation and only acceptable behavior.
There can be no "sitting back" when people are flicking lit matches around the hay barn. Now tell them kids to play nice or they are going to the corner.
Instead there seems to be a notion that people need to vent and show emotion as some sort of healing process. But this is allowed to include outburst and personal attacks towards other members. And then that negative behavior is lumped in with the need "to vent" and it all becomes expected, ignored, and allowed by the Mods and Owner. But when the police pull back from enforcing codes of conduct in order to not provoke people, the town ends up burning down. Peaceful expression, protest, and presentation should be the expectation and only acceptable behavior.
There can be no "sitting back" when people are flicking lit matches around the hay barn. Now tell them kids to play nice or they are going to the corner.
Isn't the world wonderful...I am all for rational optimism and I am staying positive.
Re: Farewell
I have just learned not to say anything that might lead to anyone jumping on me. There have been many topics on here that I wanted so badly to comment on, but I have withheld because I did not want to get another a** chewing. It makes life a little boring, but I can still come on here, read what everyone else has said and feel safe enough to sit here at my computer and say things like "You tell them, Agri!" or "Way to go, BH!" or "Are you out of your mind! (no name attached to this one)". My husband would call this a chicken S**t mentality, but it works for me.agricola wrote:Suggestions? Ideas? Comments?
Think for yourselves, and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too."-- Voltaire, philosopher and historian
Re: Farewell
Well that's just not what we'd like for you, though! Do you think this new 'division' of the board will ease that a bit?katisha wrote:I have just learned not to say anything that might lead to anyone jumping on me. There have been many topics on here that I wanted so badly to comment on, but I have withheld because I did not want to get another a** chewing. It makes life a little boring, but I can still come on here, read what everyone else has said and feel safe enough to sit here at my computer and say things like "You tell them, Agri!" or "Way to go, BH!" or "Are you out of your mind! (no name attached to this one)". My husband would call this a chicken S**t mentality, but it works for me.agricola wrote:Suggestions? Ideas? Comments?
History is the fiction we invent to persuade ourselves that events are knowable and that life has order and direction. That's why events are always reinterpreted when values change. We need new versions of history to allow for our current prejudices.
-
Cootie Brown
- Posts: 3997
- Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:34 pm
- Location: TN
Re: Farewell
Yeah, I get it. The herd definitely doesn't like controversy or independent thinkers. I discovered that a long time ago. I've had trouble fitting in since then. I've signed on and off of this site many times since finding it in 2005. It's kind of like the hotel California. You can check in but you can never leave and that makes this site just a tad eerie.
I originally left the c of c in June 2005. I'd been a member since 1978. I was a proselyte from the Southern Baptist Church via a Bible Study. My departure was not pleasant. I was an elder at the time and my "liberal" views had become a problem. I was "encouraged" to resign. I willingly accepted the invitation to step down because I knew I could not longer pretend that I believed that "restoration theology" was the only way to be a Christian. That as well as a number of other tenets embraced by the traditional Churches of Christ and steadily become problematic for me.
Like many here I found this site by googling Church of Christ. That was in Sept 2005. I hung around here for about eight years using different screen names because my evolving religious views became more and more controversial. I really wanted to fit in and I did my best to be congenial but the more I tried to fit in the less success I had.
I'd taught bible classes for about thirty years by that time and I became aware of a lot of biblical inconsistencies and outright contradictions beginning as far back as the late 90's. I tried to pretend they weren't there but that didn't work because I knew they were. My teaching began to reflect my true understanding of the bible and that was a problem because my views on such things as grace were not compatible with Church of Christ teaching and beliefs.
Well, anyway, back to the topic. I respect Teresa and Agricola and feel like they are almost old friends now, but Teresa and I see things very differently. Agricola and I are pretty much on the same page theologically, well almost, but we are not perfectly aligned. I totally left Christianity in 2012 after years of studying the origins and evolution of both the Bible and Christianity. That study convinced me the Bible has purely human origins and there is nothing supernatural or divine about it. Basically, the evidence I examined convinced me the Bible is simply a collection of fictional stories, some would call them myths, with fictional characters. Yeah, unfortunately, that includes Jesus too.
I posted here for awhile a few months ago, but left because clearly a non-believer doesn't fit into any of the "Believers" clubs. People who have views that challenge Christian "beliefs" and I emphasize "Beliefs" because there is not one shred of evidence that has ever been discovered that would validate any of the tenets embraced by Christians. That is why Christianity is based on "beliefs" even Christians knowingly or unknowingly realize there is no evidence that validates their "beliefs", but that isn't a problem because religion is based on faith, which, of course, is belief without evidence. How convenient. And of course lack of faith is a sin unto death. Again, how convenient. Believe what we tell you or God will send you to hell. And Billions of people do just that. Using you mind, examining evidence, and thinking for yourself is a mortal sin as far as Christianity is concerned. Belief without evidence outside of religion is usually referred to as ignorance but Christians overcomes that thinking be declaring intelligence,independent thinking. and requiring evidence to validate doctrine to be a mortal sin unto death and people willingly buy into that. In some circles that is called brain washing, but it's called faith when religion does it.
Anyway, I confess that the purpose of this site still eludes me after all these years. The rules are basically a whole lot of religious PC from my point of view. The number one rule seems to be don't "offend" anyone else or challenge their "beliefs". My 47 year association with religion has made me cringe every time I hear someone say. "I'm offended". Even as a Christian I wanted to say "So What?" What makes you so special that people need to be on guard around you so that you aren't offended. Well, you being offended offends me. Grow up and at least pretend to be an adult.
I've been participating on a site dedicated to those who have left the Christian faith. I like their rules, because basically they don't have any. Freedom of speech is encouraged not restricted and isn't that the way ideas are truly exchanged and debated? Occasionally a mod will have to just put an end to an argument because it isn't going anywhere but that is rare.
It seems to me having been on both sides of the Christian fence now that Christians fear any truth that is not their truth. A running joke among former believes is the defense Christians typically use. The bible said it, I believe it, and that settles it. End of discussion. That would be a defense if the Bible was actually literally true and historically accurate but it isn't. So, the idea the Bible is the standard of truth for the entire world is an indefensible claim. That belief is based on faith not reality, or evidence, and certainly not history.
I suppose the intent of this site is simply to provide a place for former members of the Church of Christ to share their stories and to confirm others have come to similar conclusions about the Church of Christ. Humans after all are a tribal species. We crave to be part of the herd. That is where we find comfort and companionship and that is enormously important but that comfort comes with a price. We have to embrace group think and not become a problem. The herd does not like troublemakers. This site seems to me like it really buys into that herd concept.
Well, I just dropped by to stir the pot a little. Carry on debating baptism, grace, OSAS, the bible says thus and thus and if you don't believe that you'll go to an imaginary place called hell. I can't begin to tell you folks what a relief it is to get away from all of that nonsense.
CB my current screen name among many of my other pseudonyms, alias', and fictional identities.
I originally left the c of c in June 2005. I'd been a member since 1978. I was a proselyte from the Southern Baptist Church via a Bible Study. My departure was not pleasant. I was an elder at the time and my "liberal" views had become a problem. I was "encouraged" to resign. I willingly accepted the invitation to step down because I knew I could not longer pretend that I believed that "restoration theology" was the only way to be a Christian. That as well as a number of other tenets embraced by the traditional Churches of Christ and steadily become problematic for me.
Like many here I found this site by googling Church of Christ. That was in Sept 2005. I hung around here for about eight years using different screen names because my evolving religious views became more and more controversial. I really wanted to fit in and I did my best to be congenial but the more I tried to fit in the less success I had.
I'd taught bible classes for about thirty years by that time and I became aware of a lot of biblical inconsistencies and outright contradictions beginning as far back as the late 90's. I tried to pretend they weren't there but that didn't work because I knew they were. My teaching began to reflect my true understanding of the bible and that was a problem because my views on such things as grace were not compatible with Church of Christ teaching and beliefs.
Well, anyway, back to the topic. I respect Teresa and Agricola and feel like they are almost old friends now, but Teresa and I see things very differently. Agricola and I are pretty much on the same page theologically, well almost, but we are not perfectly aligned. I totally left Christianity in 2012 after years of studying the origins and evolution of both the Bible and Christianity. That study convinced me the Bible has purely human origins and there is nothing supernatural or divine about it. Basically, the evidence I examined convinced me the Bible is simply a collection of fictional stories, some would call them myths, with fictional characters. Yeah, unfortunately, that includes Jesus too.
I posted here for awhile a few months ago, but left because clearly a non-believer doesn't fit into any of the "Believers" clubs. People who have views that challenge Christian "beliefs" and I emphasize "Beliefs" because there is not one shred of evidence that has ever been discovered that would validate any of the tenets embraced by Christians. That is why Christianity is based on "beliefs" even Christians knowingly or unknowingly realize there is no evidence that validates their "beliefs", but that isn't a problem because religion is based on faith, which, of course, is belief without evidence. How convenient. And of course lack of faith is a sin unto death. Again, how convenient. Believe what we tell you or God will send you to hell. And Billions of people do just that. Using you mind, examining evidence, and thinking for yourself is a mortal sin as far as Christianity is concerned. Belief without evidence outside of religion is usually referred to as ignorance but Christians overcomes that thinking be declaring intelligence,independent thinking. and requiring evidence to validate doctrine to be a mortal sin unto death and people willingly buy into that. In some circles that is called brain washing, but it's called faith when religion does it.
Anyway, I confess that the purpose of this site still eludes me after all these years. The rules are basically a whole lot of religious PC from my point of view. The number one rule seems to be don't "offend" anyone else or challenge their "beliefs". My 47 year association with religion has made me cringe every time I hear someone say. "I'm offended". Even as a Christian I wanted to say "So What?" What makes you so special that people need to be on guard around you so that you aren't offended. Well, you being offended offends me. Grow up and at least pretend to be an adult.
I've been participating on a site dedicated to those who have left the Christian faith. I like their rules, because basically they don't have any. Freedom of speech is encouraged not restricted and isn't that the way ideas are truly exchanged and debated? Occasionally a mod will have to just put an end to an argument because it isn't going anywhere but that is rare.
It seems to me having been on both sides of the Christian fence now that Christians fear any truth that is not their truth. A running joke among former believes is the defense Christians typically use. The bible said it, I believe it, and that settles it. End of discussion. That would be a defense if the Bible was actually literally true and historically accurate but it isn't. So, the idea the Bible is the standard of truth for the entire world is an indefensible claim. That belief is based on faith not reality, or evidence, and certainly not history.
I suppose the intent of this site is simply to provide a place for former members of the Church of Christ to share their stories and to confirm others have come to similar conclusions about the Church of Christ. Humans after all are a tribal species. We crave to be part of the herd. That is where we find comfort and companionship and that is enormously important but that comfort comes with a price. We have to embrace group think and not become a problem. The herd does not like troublemakers. This site seems to me like it really buys into that herd concept.
Well, I just dropped by to stir the pot a little. Carry on debating baptism, grace, OSAS, the bible says thus and thus and if you don't believe that you'll go to an imaginary place called hell. I can't begin to tell you folks what a relief it is to get away from all of that nonsense.
CB my current screen name among many of my other pseudonyms, alias', and fictional identities.