Ethics4

[loDebar]

Just need to clarify the rules for discourse.

If one am having trouble communicating with a post or member, our Christian brothers should not be called @#$%&&%$##@ even if they are ##$$%^@#$%,Christian Brothers Just use titles like Calvinist etc.

Can calling one crude anatomical names be allowed, after all it is evident to all ifour dear Chruistian Brother is a just a elbow. Can they be called an elbow


Maybe we should add designations to our denominations listed in our info page, Baptist- Stubborn, but ignorant.
This would inform everyone what type of poster we are dealing with, It could even be a temporary designation, Baptist-Short tempered today only, regular Baptist when I get feeling better, You know it gives others a opportunity to understand and how to answer

just asking for a little direction

 

[JonC]

I suggest something like a mood ring.

My, brother, you seem to be a little orange today.

 

[loDebar]

Are you implying Clemson orange?

 

[JonC]

Are you implying Clemson orange?

Yes. That is a happy color. Not like angry Alabama.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Just need to clarify the rules for discourse.

I realize this post was largely in jest; however, I do feel that some clarification may be good for some.
Jesus said in Matthew 7:20, "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" (KJV).

It doesn't take long at all to determine the type of poster one is debating. Almost instantly you can tell if he/she is sarcastic, obstinate, condescending, prideful, etc. Equally true is the fact that you can tell, almost instantly, if he/she is civil, courteous, honest, humble, etc. The interesting things about this is, there are very intelligent people on both sides of this aisle in this matter.

That being said, I, personally, quickly determine with whom I will and will not interact. I believe that in all the years I have been here I have only put one member on my ignore list. I simply choose, based upon replies and posts, with whom I want to enter into discussions. I rather enjoy discussing topics about which we may disagree. I consider that "iron sharpening iron."

As I have stated many times in the past, this is an enjoyable pastime - nothing more. If I am in a discussion that turns a direction I no longer enjoy, or posters begin exhibiting qualities that make the thread no longer enjoyable, I simply step away. I feel no obligation whatsoever to respond to any post, or member, even if directly asked a question. Some may take silence as ignorance; but, silence can be, many times, the avoidance of foolishness.

So, even if we disagree, we can still have a civil, non-condescending discussion. I would rather have an enjoyable conversation than to illustrate the truth of I Corinthians 8:1, "Knowledge puffeth up..." I do, however, want to illustrate the last part of the verse, "...but charity edifieth."

You may be the smartest guy in the room (thread), but if you have a caustic, vitriolic demeanor, you've lost all credibility. We often forget that "gentleness" is a fruit of being filled with the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22).

 

[37818]

Resorting to any kind of ad hominem only means one has lost the argument even if the ad hominem is true and accurate stament. As for being ignorant we all are of somethings. And there is the ignore option.

Personnally I do not mind being told I am wrong. I do not like false accusations in any form. But when I am told I am wrong, I would prefer a clear explanation, not just being told I am wrong.

Just saying.

 

[loDebar]

Resorting to any kind of ad hominem only means one has lost the argument even if the ad hominem is true and accurate stament. As for being ignorant we all are of somethings. And there is the ignore option.

Personnally I do not mind being told I am wrong. I do not like false accusations in any form. But when I am told I am wrong, I would prefer a clear explanation, not just being told I am wrong.

Just saying.

how do you feel if you explain a posters' error repeatedly and why they are wrong and yet continue to repeat error?

 

[JonC]

how do you feel if you explain a posters' error repeatedly and why they are wrong and yet continue to repeat error?

Crimson.

 

[Rob_BW]

how do you feel if you explain a posters' error repeatedly and why they are wrong and yet continue to repeat error?

How do you feel when a poster repeatedly explains to you how your dearly held and sincere beliefs are error?

We seem to work better as a group when we spend our time explaining why we ourselves believe things, instead of telling others that their beliefs are wrong (even if we feel that they are wrong).

 

[tyndale1946]

Resorting to any kind of ad hominem only means one has lost the argument even if the ad hominem is true and accurate stament. As for being ignorant we all are of somethings. And there is the ignore option.

Personnally I do not mind being told I am wrong. I do not like false accusations in any form. But when I am told I am wrong, I would prefer a clear explanation, not just being told I am wrong.

Just saying.

Do I agree with every sermon and every point a preacher made in my church?... No!... Men are fallible, even a preacher... Then we can agree to disagree on here, even with those that are not of our particular church or group... Have you ever apologized on here, for being in error or saying something unkind?... I have... Ever posted something and after thinking about it hours later deleted it, because you posted it on the spur of the moment and let your emotion get away from you... I done that too... I've also stepped away from discussion that got to heated... I don't have to have the last word... I don't have to be in the spotlight... We are suppose to be Christians on here and exemplify who we represent Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!... Do we?... I have been on here a long time and think I know of where I speak and I'm sure brethren that know me will say the same... Just thoughts from a charter member... Brother Glen

 

[canadyjd]

One thing I believe to be important is the ability to accurately repeat the opposing position without any assumption of motives.

It goes a long way toward civil discussion for someone to know their opponent really understands the position they hold, in the spirit it was given, even if they don't agree.

 

[37818]

how do you feel if you explain a posters' error repeatedly and why they are wrong and yet continue to repeat error?

If an opponent persists, at some point, let them have a last word and go on without resolution. Or let them know I am not able to agree. State if need be "can we agree to diagee?"

 

[37818]

Do I agree with every sermon and every point a preacher made in my church?... No!... Men are fallible, even a preacher... Then we can agree to disagree on here, even with those that are not of our particular church or group... Have you ever apologized on here, for being in error or saying something unkind?... I have... Ever posted something and after thinking about it hours later deleted it, because you posted it on the spur of the moment and let your emotion get away from you... I done that too... I've also stepped away from discussion that got to heated... I don't have to have the last word... I don't have to be in the spotlight... We are suppose to be Christians on here and exemplify who we represent Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!... Do we?... I have been on here a long time and think I know of where I speak and I'm sure brethren that know me will say the same... Just thoughts from a charter member... Brother Glen

Thank you. Maybe never to degree you have been abie to, but yes.

 

[JonC]

From my perspective there are a few things, other than ethics, being discussed.

In the types of debates we see it is inevitable that arguments will arise and get out of hand – NOT because they should but because in so doing they demonstrate our imperfection as human beings. Our beliefs are something that we hold dearly, and when confronted with opposing ideas we often become defensive.

Insults are not always unethical, but they are always inappropriate. I have been guilty of this. When things heat up, tempers heat up. For example, if I were to call @tyndale1946 a toad, that may be an insult but it is not necessarily unethical.

Ad hominem is a logical fallacy. This generally occurs when a member can no longer address the topic and seeks to attack the person (e.g., “you are ignoring the plain teaching of Scripture”, or if @tyndale1946 were to call me rather than the post juvenile for calling him a toad.). While a fallacy, I am not sure that this is unethical.

There are boarder line things. Sometimes false accusations are errors, oversights, or misunderstandings. It can be unethical if whatever research is considered reasonable was neglected and could have prevented the false statements.

And then there are blatantly unethical activities like lying, cheating, stealing, and cheering for Alabama. These things typically get people banned. For example, were Froggy to accuse a member who is in good standing but not active here of being kicked off the board for lying, that would be unethical.

Were Kitty to claim that Alabama had a superior football team than Clemson, that could be unethical, depending on the mental clarity of Kitty at the time (Kitty could be delusional).

BUT the more important aspect is holding another to a Christ-like standard. When we do this, ethical issues are covered. We should be discussing things as Christians (for fellowship, edification, to uplift one another, to strengthen one another, etc.). So even if we were to never agree, we could at least come to a better understanding of one another's beliefs.

My solution (the one I've recently adopted) is to step away and prayerfully consider my response before posting. It is not my responsibility to "correct" other people's "errors". All I can do is explain what I believe to those who inquire, and even this is not something I have to do. We need to ask if it will benefit the other person. Is it a discussion Christ would enter into.

 

[Reformed1689]

Insults are not always unethical, but they are always inappropriate.

Lol Devil's Advocate...What about when Christ called the Pharisees a brood of vipers?

 

[JonC]

Lol Devil's Advocate...What about when Christ called the Pharisees a brood of vipers?

Context

Here we are among brothers (or at least have agreed to that assumption).

 

[Reformed1689]

Context

Here we are among brothers (or at least have agreed to that assumption).

Lol you dodged. Was His insult inappropriate? Remember you said they are ALWAYS (strong word) inappropriate lol.

 

[JonC]

Lol you dodged. Was His insult inappropriate? Remember you said they are ALWAYS (strong word) inappropriate lol.

I guess it depends on the context. I didn't mean my assessment be applied to Christ.

I should have specified "here". Insults are never appropriate here, unless it is anti-Alabama and anti-Duke (but that's a given...we are Christian, after all ).