How we treat people

[Reformed]

I read a news story recently about Internet message boards. Because of the depersonalized nature of message boards (you do not actually see the person you are interacting with), and because of the relative anonymity (you do not actually know the person you are interacting with), it is easier to treat people in a way that people will seldom do in person. That report got me thinking about how we treat each other when debating on the BB, and how that would translate into an actual face-to-face relationship in the local church. Would we be as caustic with a brother in Christ in-person as some of us are on the BB? I have met in-person some brothers in Christ that I first met on the Internet. Those meetings have gone well, although a casual meeting is different than attending the same church together.

I have a good friend who did not get along with someone on an Internet message board. That friend is a dormant member of the BB. One Sunday his Internet adversary showed up at his church announced. He was in town on a business trip. The "adversary" did not know what my friend looked like, so he asked to be introduced to him. The two shook hands and engaged in a short discussion which my friend later described as "cordial, but not friendly". My friend told me (paraphrased), "I could not get out of my head the nasty things this person said about me. He is not someone I would willingly meet. I think it was morbid curiosity that brought him to my church while he was in town on business." Indeed, less than a week later they were back at it again on a message board. That is when my friend decided to stop posting on message boards. He explained that he was harboring bad feelings towards too many people and it was not glorifying to the Lord.

I am not sure what type of conclusion any of us should draw from my friend's anecdotal story, but the news story I read and my friend's experience are worth considering.

 

[MennoSota]

Perhaps it might be best to consider the Federalist papers and the sharp disagreement otherwise civil people have had in writing.
Throughout the history of the church the disagreements have been heated. Jabs made at a person's views. This is human beings believing what they think is correct and standing firm. I don't take it personally. For example, I would still have a cup of coffee with TC, even though I wouldn't care for him carrying a gun with him. [emoji41] [emoji379] [emoji780]

 

[Reformed]

Perhaps it might be best to consider the Federalist papers and the sharp disagreement otherwise civil people have had in writing.
Throughout the history of the church the disagreements have been heated. Jabs made at a person's views. This is human beings believing what they think is correct and standing firm. I don't take it personally. For example, I would still have a cup of coffee with TC, even though I wouldn't care for him carrying a gun with him. [emoji41] [emoji379] [emoji780]

A vigorous debate that is focused on the topic is one thing. It is not for the faint-hearted or easily offended. However, when it morphs into personal insults (which often happens on most message boards) does that not cross a line? How are God's people supposed to handle such personal interaction?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

At the time of the English Reformation, there was a sort of literary duel between William Tyndale and Sir Thomas More.
More described Tyndale as "a hell-hound in the kennel of the devil," "a new Judas," "worse than Sodom and Gomorrah," "an idolator and devil-worshipper" and "a beast out of whose brutish, beastly mouth cometh a filthy foam." Some things never change.

Ironically, both men died for their faith within a year of each other, and at the hands of the same monarch.

Having said that, we should all try to play the ball and not the man.

 

[MennoSota]

A vigorous debate that is focused on the topic is one thing. It is not for the faint-hearted or easily offended. However, when it morphs into personal insults (which often happens on most message boards) does that not cross a line? How are God's people supposed to handle such personal interaction?

Accepting that we are sinners who passionately have an opinion. We see this interaction with Paul and Barnabas regarding John Mark. Notice that Paul and Barnabas must have come through the fight okay because Paul mentions John Mark in his writing.

 

[Reynolds]

I am milder in written form than in person.

 

[Rob_BW]

Having said that, we should all try to play the ball and not the man.

Sage advice. I try, and certainly fail at times, to do just that. As Reformed's tale shows us, it's easy to allow the relative anonymity of the internet to affect our...communications.

 

[Iconoclast]

On Sermon Audio David Silversides has done a couple of messages on social networking that speak to this issue in part.

 

[HankD]

I read a news story recently about Internet message boards. Because of the depersonalized nature of message boards (you do not actually see the person you are interacting with), and because of the relative anonymity (you do not actually know the person you are interacting with), it is easier to treat people in a way that people will seldom do in person. That report got me thinking about how we treat each other when debating on the BB, and how that would translate into an actual face-to-face relationship in the local church. Would we be as caustic with a brother in Christ in-person as some of us are on the BB? I have met in-person some brothers in Christ that I first met on the Internet. Those meetings have gone well, although a casual meeting is different than attending the same church together.

I have a good friend who did not get along with someone on an Internet message board. That friend is a dormant member of the BB. One Sunday his Internet adversary showed up at his church announced. He was in town on a business trip. The "adversary" did not know what my friend looked like, so he asked to be introduced to him. The two shook hands and engaged in a short discussion which my friend later described as "cordial, but not friendly". My friend told me (paraphrased), "I could not get out of my head the nasty things this person said about me. He is not someone I would willingly meet. I think it was morbid curiosity that brought him to my church while he was in town on business." Indeed, less than a week later they were back at it again on a message board. That is when my friend decided to stop posting on message boards. He explained that he was harboring bad feelings towards too many people and it was not glorifying to the Lord.

I am not sure what type of conclusion any of us should draw from my friend's anecdotal story, but the news story I read and my friend's experience are worth considering.

Well just a reminder that early on in our history some of these verbal duels turned into duels of real bullets.

These posting boards are opportunistic for us.
One can show the Holy Spirit in their heart even in a lively debate (assuming an attempt is made).

HankD

 

[Reformed]

Well just a reminder that early on in our history some of these verbal duels turned into duels of real bullets.

These posting boards are opportunistic for us.
One can show the Holy Spirit in their heart even in a lively debate (assuming an attempt is made).

HankD

I agree. I have been guilty of poor form in my debating. I now labor hard not to be personally offensive. If some is offended at my words, I rather it be the topic and not me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[evangelist6589]

On Sermon Audio David Silversides has done a couple of messages on social networking that speak to this issue in part.

Like you are the best example of being nice to people here!

 

[evangelist6589]

I read a news story recently about Internet message boards. Because of the depersonalized nature of message boards (you do not actually see the person you are interacting with), and because of the relative anonymity (you do not actually know the person you are interacting with), it is easier to treat people in a way that people will seldom do in person. That report got me thinking about how we treat each other when debating on the BB, and how that would translate into an actual face-to-face relationship in the local church. Would we be as caustic with a brother in Christ in-person as some of us are on the BB? I have met in-person some brothers in Christ that I first met on the Internet. Those meetings have gone well, although a casual meeting is different than attending the same church together.

I have a good friend who did not get along with someone on an Internet message board. That friend is a dormant member of the BB. One Sunday his Internet adversary showed up at his church announced. He was in town on a business trip. The "adversary" did not know what my friend looked like, so he asked to be introduced to him. The two shook hands and engaged in a short discussion which my friend later described as "cordial, but not friendly". My friend told me (paraphrased), "I could not get out of my head the nasty things this person said about me. He is not someone I would willingly meet. I think it was morbid curiosity that brought him to my church while he was in town on business." Indeed, less than a week later they were back at it again on a message board. That is when my friend decided to stop posting on message boards. He explained that he was harboring bad feelings towards too many people and it was not glorifying to the Lord.

I am not sure what type of conclusion any of us should draw from my friend's anecdotal story, but the news story I read and my friend's experience are worth considering.

I am a punching bag for many around here. Recently watched the Phantom Menace again and there is a scene where Sobobo kicks Jar Jar Brinks to the ground and grabs his neck ready to punch him. This reminded me of this board. Lots of sobobo's here and I am like Jar Jar Brinks!

 

[Iconoclast]

Like you are the best example of being nice to people here!

I am nice to people who do not divorce their wives and then plan on becoming adulterers, then turn around a start threads on the 10 commandments,w.o.t.m.
.You will search in vain for reformed persons who will give a wink and a nod to such behavior. You would be under church discipline until you repented.

 

[Reynolds]

I am a punching bag for many around here. Recently watched the Phantom Menace again and there is a scene where Sobobo kicks Jar Jar Brinks to the ground and grabs his neck ready to punch him. This reminded me of this board. Lots of sobobo's here and I am like Jar Jar Brinks!

No, you ask for it and seem to enjoy it.

 

[evangelist6589]

I am nice to people who do not divorce their wives and then plan on becoming adulterers, then turn around a start threads on the 10 commandments,w.o.t.m.
.You will search in vain for reformed persons who will give a wink and a nod to such behavior. You would be under church discipline until you repented.

John 8:7
When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”

Are you without sin Icon? You sure act like it on this board. The Bible commands us to love all people and be nice to all people (1 John 3:16). Second it is your opinion that I divorced for a bad reason. Abuse can be a reason for divorce as it was in my case. It is your opinion that I am in the wrong, when it is in fact you that it is in the wrong.

 

[TCassidy]

Are you without sin Icon?

I certainly am not. But I did not divorce my wife with no biblical reason.

I did not abandon my wife when she was ill with cancer.

I did not violate my wedding vows to love, honor, and cherish her until death parted us.

I did not troll the internet to find another victim of my unbridled lust.

I have not bragged of being an "evangelist" who has never won or discipled a single convert.

I have not repeatedly displayed my self-centeredness by attacking every person who has tried to help you.

I don't think you are presently qualified to question the sins of others.

Matthew 7:3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but don’t consider the beam that is in your own eye?