Conference yukon::christian_v7

This note string was moved from chit-chat, becaues I felt it concerns an 
important facet of our fellowhsip here.  I know people have felt 
uncomfortable enough to leave, and I am sad about that - not least, 
because these are people with whom I appreciate sharing fellowship, and 
wish to enjoy mutual encouragement.  Losing them makes this place less 
likely to be the place we both/all want it to be.  However, that does not 
make it right to offend other people into leaving.

I would be glad of feedback here, on what people see as the right conference 
balance, and how they would like to see it achieved.

Jill, perhaps you could invite input from whoever told you they were 
leaving?

btw ... Do you pray regularly for the conference, to be a place where the 
LORD is manifest to us all and through us all?

					God bless
							Andrew

    
    Those who feel they can't fellowship here because of a few antagonistic
    noters are very disheartening to the state of Christianity today.  Do we
    wish to become a cult outside of society, where our influence is most
    needed?
    
    By no means should we be comparing ourselves to CP or any other conference
    for that matter.  We stand for the Word of God in its entirety as being
    inerrant, period.
    
    We believe in the blood of Christ and we stand by that belief.  Just
    because our belief is challenged shouldn't make a difference.  Those
    who wish to fellowship should go right ahead in those topics that are
    not controversial.  That's what Chit-Chat is all out.
    
    IRC is "instant gratification" but by no means does it replace this
    forum, where our words are written and kept for anyone to see even
    months, years later.
    
    I pray that Christians are stronger than needing instant gratification
    and can stand in the face opposition.  Paul said all those who live
    godly WILL suffer persecution.
    
    Praise God for the antagonists, that means we're doing something right!
    
    Amen?  AMEN!
    

    Nancy,

    I must admit (even though it's Jill's note as the base-note here) that
    it was my reply several earlier that kicked this whole rat-hole along.
    Sorry :(

    I was in a nostalgic mood, I admit that. I was (probably) wrong. I was
    expressing some frustration that I (and it appears I'm not the only
    one) have felt since re-joining the conference.

>    noters are very disheartening to the state of Christianity today.  Do

    no, not 'disheartening to', but rather 'disheartened at'. Nancy, you
    _know_ I speak with Michelle Burt, you know too that I speak (via) irc
    with Jill, and some others.

>    IRC is "instant gratification" but by no means does it replace this
...
>    I pray that Christians are stronger than needing instant gratification

    well, I dunno about that as a 'criticism'. I have received (and given)
    some very Godly Councel via that medium. Indeed, you have been that
    #channel (so to speak ;') on more than one occassion.

    Yes. The face of ::CHRISTIAN is changing. I made a comment that I
    thought/felt that it wasn't for the better.

    I've been asked 'why don't _you_ do something then?' I *have*. And I
    was effectively ignored. Well, one person responded (thanks Fris').

    As to the question of 'have I prayed for the conference?' Yes, but
    nowhere near enough. I am guilty of that, and convicted, too.

    I *LOVE* this place, I really do.

    Well Harry,
    
    My note wasn't direct *at* you, but I can understand how you or anyone
    might take it that way.  
    
    I'm sorry I don't recall Michelle Burt.  Also, remember this conference
    is only as good as it participants.  We the members of the moderator
    staff can only do so much.
    
    So tell me would you rather we become members only and restrict the
    conference so that no-one antagonistic would have ready access?
    I certainly don't want this.  I feel as though inspite of our
    weaknesses we still provide a forum that stands for the *right* things.
    :-)
    
    I love this place too... glad we agree.
    
    Nancy

    Nancy,

    "Michele Burt" == "'Chele"  (sorry, 'Chele - I mispelled the first time)

    You know, another of us loud Aussie's :') She departed here several
    weeks back.

    Harry

    I remember Chele!  :-) Oops sorry Michelle!  I never saw her as
    Michelle before.
    
    Nancy

| <<< Note 751.3 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>



| Praise God for the antagonists, that means we're doing something right!

	Wow.... talk about putting yourself above the clouds there Nancy. ANY
person, regardless of whether they are what you consider a Christian or not,
can be used by God to give you insight. To write what you did above just helps
illistrate how some close off themselves to the rest of God's world. Remember,
this is His world, we're just living here. Anyone who you view as an antagonist
is one in your eyes, but it does not mean that because one is present, that you
are doing the right thing. 


Glen

  Antagonism:  Opposition, hostility

  Antagonize:  To incur the hostility of, from the greek word meaning to
               struggle against.




  
 One who does not hold the premise of a particular conference, and continues
 to push against or speak in opposition to that premise, can, based on the
 above, be considered antagonistic.  

 
 Jim

    Glen,
    
    This conference has been the subject of attack in other conferences so
    often that its very rewarding.  That means the participants of this
    conference have been influential.  Now whether it was something
    perceived as influential for good or not is up to the individual who
    reads here.
    
    It is no secret that you devalue, criticize and demean this conference
    and its participants quite often.  But inspite of that, we do try to
    turn the other cheek.
    
    I said this 3 years ago, when I logged for the first time in this
    conference and you were having a go at the members then, you and
    Yukon::CHRISTIAN will *never* come to terms with each other as long as
    you continue to hold the premise of this conference as incorrect.
    
    You don't belong in here.  I don't understand why you continue to come
    in here.. well yes I do..to continue to antagonize the participants of
    this conference.
    
    Personally, I don't know how you keep up with all the conferences that
    I see you in... why you should even care about an extremely small forum
    of believers that aren't even allowed to discuss your favorite subject
    is beyond me.
    
    I wish you'd get the clue that noter after noter after after noter has
    given you here.  We know you don't agree with us, we know you don't
    value us [thats apparent by the criticisms in other conferences], so
    why don't you just put all your energy into those other conferences
    where there is less conflict?
    
    Digital Equipment Corporation didn't allow us this forum to spend it
    bickering with you.
    
    Nancy

| <<< Note 751.9 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Learning to lean" >>>

| Antagonism:  Opposition, hostility

| Antagonize:  To incur the hostility of, from the greek word meaning to
| struggle against.

	What does the Bible call the above? Where is it listed? According to
your own beliefs, that can be the ONLY accurate place for the answer.



Glen

      And he arose, and rebuked the wind, and said unto the sea, Peace,
      be still.  And the wind ceased and there was a great calm.
    
    
      I believe this applies to the mind (primarily).
    
      I would like to believe that if 'worldlings' frequent this conference,
      we can enjoy the peace that Mark 4:39 promises in spite of their
      strife.  We can also enjoy promises that we can have the perfect
      words for them.
    
      I figure, welcome them all.  Enjoy the peace Christ promises in
      spite of any friction.  Enjoy the oppurtunity to be a light.
    
      In this world, it is better to shine the light in darkness rather
      than only in light.
    
      Welcome the sometime occurances of darkness!
    
    						Tony
                                             

>	What does the Bible call the above? Where is it listed? According to
>your own beliefs, that can be the ONLY accurate place for the answer.



 So, those who take the Bible to be true are to toss out their dictionaries?

| <<< Note 751.10 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>


| This conference has been the subject of attack in other conferences so often 
| that its very rewarding.  

	When people talk about this conference, they are referring to some of
the individuals who note here, not the conference. To call it rewarding might be
something you believe is true, but does God? Oh, and before you answer, not
you, me, or anyone can REALLY know the answer.

| That means the participants of this conference have been influential.  

	To some it has helped, to others it has driven them away. 

| It is no secret that you devalue, criticize and demean this conference and its
| participants quite often.  

	I state my beliefs, as you do yours. The only thing is I state my
beliefs elsewhere because they are allowed there.

| But inspite of that, we do try to turn the other cheek.

	Which is why many end up saying that many in here react before the
think. That most of what is said towards me never should be said. If that is
turning the other cheek..... you might want to recheck what it means.

| You don't belong in here.  

	Wow..... I don't belong in here. How nice. I guess if it were a members
only type of conference, you could have it that way. As I have said in the
past, I do learn things in here. A lot of what I learn is based on things like
what you wrote above, others are how others have grown to become closer to Him,
while still other things on people and their personal struggles they have being
a Christian, the different ways people show their love for others, how God uses
some in here throughout the day, things like that. But I don't have to agree on 
every little thing someone says (abortion is a good example of this). And as 
long as I do not go against the premise, I can state my differences. 

| I don't understand why you continue to come in here.. 

	Reread the above. 

| well yes I do..to continue to antagonize the participants of this conference.

	Again, why ask a question that you are going to answer yourself? You
believe you have the "right" answer for the question you asked ME. But you are
once again wrong, Nancy.

| Personally, I don't know how you keep up with all the conferences that I see 
| you in... 

	Very easy Nancy. The programs I write take a while to run. While they
are running, I hop into notes. 

| why you should even care about an extremely small forum of believers that 
| aren't even allowed to discuss your favorite subject is beyond me.

	Are you asking or telling me?

| we know you don't value us [thats apparent by the criticisms in other 
| conferences], 

	I really wish you would read what is written in those other
conferences. Maybe you would get it right.

| Digital Equipment Corporation didn't allow us this forum to spend it bickering
| with you.

	Then don't.


Glen

| <<< Note 751.13 by CSLALL::HENDERSON "Learning to lean" >>>


| >	What does the Bible call the above? Where is it listed? According to
| >your own beliefs, that can be the ONLY accurate place for the answer.

| So, those who take the Bible to be true are to toss out their dictionaries?

	Are dictionarys inerrant Jim? If not, how can you trust it?

I will not take this bait....

I will not take this bait......

I will not take this bait........

I will not take this bait..........

[Repeat 10,000+ times]

>	Are dictionarys inerrant Jim? If not, how can you trust it?
    
    Huh ????
    

 I'm kinda scratching my head over that one too.

	It's easy.... your belief says the Bible is inerrant. trust in the
Bible. A dictionary does not fall into this catagory, which means you can't be
sure that anything in there is correct. 

>	It's easy.... your belief says the Bible is inerrant. trust in the
> Bible. A dictionary does not fall into this catagory, which means you can't be
> sure that anything in there is correct. 

Glen,
I still don't understand.  What does the dictionary have to do
with things ?  Are you trying to tell me that the dictionary is
incorrect and that I can never understand what anyone says because
nothing in there is correct ?  Or is only some of it correct and
if so then what should I believe is correct in the dictionary ?

    

Dictionaries and Bibles aside, I think that in a heated exchange everyone
should write their note offline, store it away, and re-read it several 
hours later or the next day while asking themselves these questions:

   1) is this a personal attack or slander on anyone?
   2) does this further explain or defend my viewpoint in a helpful way?
   3) have I already said the same thing xxx times already?
   3) what was my objective when I wrote this note?  Was my objective one
         God would approve of?
   4) would I be hurt if this note were written to me?
   5) does this note contain flamatory, belittling, sarcastic, angry, or
         mean statements or rhetoric?  If so, can I say what I need to say 
         differently?

Then decide if you really want to put it in as is, edit it, or just delete it
and move on.

Leslie

    Leslie,
    
    I agree in principle with what you have written, but it does not
    necessarily apply every time in practice.
    
    I'm voicing my frustration loud and clear that Glen Silva should move
    on... for 3 years I've been in this conference and in 3 years, if he's
    learned anything, he's kept that to himself, he's continued to voice
    his objection the conference and slander it when he feels its
    appropriate in other conferences, he continues to note in a forum in
    which we all know he doesn't agree with its premise.
    
    He should move on and stop wasting company time.
    
    Nancy

    Glen,
    
    1.  Yes I believe you don't belong in here... you antagonize, criticize
    and hurt the members of this conference with your verbal assaults about
    this conference [conference = participants] continually.
    
    2.  Now what I believe can't stop you from noting here.
    
    3.  But as long as you continue your antagonistic journey in this
    conference, I will point it out and ask you each time to leave
    politely.
    
    4.  You must run a lot of batch jobs, cause your noting in at least 3
    conferences that I know of is very extensive.
    
    Nancy

    It's not easy standing up for the truth in today's world.  However,
    Christ warned us to beware when all men speak well of you.  
    
    For those that are offended or fearful of having their faith tested by
    antagonists, I'd suggest that you'd get use to it.  This world isn't
    going to improve before our Lord's return.  You should also look to
    this as a sign that you need to more deeply study God's Word so that 
    you can properly defend your faith.  1 Peter 3:15 commands you to do so.
    
    Mike

| <<< Note 751.20 by YUKON::GLENN >>>


| I still don't understand.  What does the dictionary have to do with things?  

	Jim was using it. I asked why when the Bible is the only method one can
get information which is 100% true according to his beliefs.

| Are you trying to tell me that the dictionary is incorrect and that I can 
| never understand what anyone says because nothing in there is correct?  

	No, I am not saying that. I am saying a dictionary is not inerrant,
which means the word could be right, or could be wrong.


Glen

| <<< Note 751.22 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>



| I'm voicing my frustration loud and clear that Glen Silva should move on... 
| for 3 years I've been in this conference and in 3 years, if he's learned 
| anything, he's kept that to himself, 

	This is false. I voice what I have learned evertime you question me on
why I am in here. I am sorry if you didn't read the notes I wrote.

| he's continued to voice his objection the conference 

	And this is bad? Nancy, are you the pot, or the kettle? Unless you have
never voiced your objections about another conference, then you can not really
seriously say what you did above. Or is it a pick and choose thing?

| and slander it when he feels its appropriate in other conferences, 

	Same as above. I do voice what I see is wrong with this conference in
others. I am not allowed to do that here, so I can't. You set the stage for
that. (you being the body of people that make up this conference)

| he continues to note in a forum in which we all know he doesn't agree with 
| its premise.

	Nancy, one does not have to agree with something to hold a
conversation. As long as I am not breaking any of your rules, where
is the problem?

| He should move on and stop wasting company time.

	What does company time have to do with it Nancy? Are you saying only
those who agree with the premise aren't wasting company time?



Glen

 I'll not waste everybody's time by continuing the dictionary debate with
 Mr. Silva.



 Jim

| <<< Note 751.23 by JULIET::MORALES_NA "Sweet Spirit's Gentle Breeze" >>>


| 1.  Yes I believe you don't belong in here... you antagonize, criticize and 
| hurt the members of this conference with your verbal assaults about this 
| conference [conference = participants] continually.

	Nice to know that you believe this to be true. Maybe you should ask and
not tell me what I am doing.

| 4.  You must run a lot of batch jobs, cause your noting in at least 3
| conferences that I know of is very extensive.

	Batch jobs? Oh.... the programing I do is with a non-dec optics
machine. With doing probecards and such (500+ probes), it takes a long time for
the machine to focus in on every single probe tip, find the size, etc. And then
there is the 2nd run that's out where the probe meets the epoxy. So while it
takes up to 2 hours to run it (after I program it), I have time.


Glen

    
    
| Are you trying to tell me that the dictionary is incorrect and that I can 
| never understand what anyone says because nothing in there is correct?  

|>	No, I am not saying that. I am saying a dictionary is not inerrant,
|> which means the word could be right, or could be wrong.

Glen,
    But, if what your saying is that the words in the dictionary could
    be right or could be wrong, then what your writing could be right
    or could be wrong.  On that premise there is no way for understanding
    what you are writing because it could be right or wrong.
    
| I still don't understand.  What does the dictionary have to do with things?  

|>	Jim was using it. I asked why when the Bible is the only method one can
|>get information which is 100% true according to his beliefs.

    So there is no further point in discussing the definition or
this topic because the only logical conclusion is there will be
no understanding because any definition could be right or could
be wrong and there is no understanding.
    
 Where there is no understanding there is no communication and
    therefore silence.
    
    

	Ya think?

    *** Action: Harry {sighs} as he shakes his head sadly

I'm extremely sorry to see the line that this note has taken.  It was 
started as an attempt to see a positive way forward; to see what people 
*do* want, and to see how best to approach it.  Not as a place for 
bickering or accusations.  As it is, I can understand why anyone who felt 
uncomfortable at such things as are displayed here, doesn't feel able to 
use this note to communicate!

Please mail me if you want to make positive input concerning attitudes or
subject matter, or any area where we can improve the level of fellowship
here.  I will keep any mail confidential, though I may address the points
raised as replies here if relevant. 

I feel I should address one suggestion which has been mentioned from time 
to time; that of making 'CHRISTIAN' a members-only conference.
To do so would not radically change the content of the discussions.  Digital
policy is that we are permitted employee-interest members-only conferences,
only if they are open to all who ask for membership.  We are not permitted 
to refuse anyone, without clear recognisable grounds which personnel can 
accept.  It is likely that even then, a ban would be only of limited
duration.  The only people this *would* lock out are the read-onlies.  And
most people (I imagine), start off that way, to find out if this is a place
they even want to be known to look at! 

I believe and hope that _everyone_ belongs in here.  Sadly, this has to be
narrowed down some, to those who are employed by digital.  Then again, it
gets narrowed down even more, to those who have the noting bug.  And even
of those, only where there is some interest in eternal things! 

The Bible is a most wonderful book, full of God's wisdom and revelation. We
should be sharing it together, and able to represent how we understand it
to those who wish to participate without personally holding to the
conference guidelines.  

I didn't mean to get personal (!), but Glen has wrestled with this position
for a good number of years.  By 'wrestle', I don't mean so much 'trying to
undermine the position of inspiration of the Bible', as 'trying to
understand the reason, motivation, and any possible justification of the
position of inspiration of the Bible'.  I applaud that, even if it does
come over very differently to us sometimes!  Sure, sometimes we seem to end
up at loggerheads, but Glen, for one, doesn't give up ;-) .  Glen, have I 
read you right there?

Sometimes discussions (not specially with Glen!) get heated, or long drawn 
out.  We need to know when a dead horse is being flogged, and quit.  Not 
necessarily waiting until we're 'ahead'.  That doesn't prove spirituality,  
nor even a doctrinal point...

Folks, unity in Christ is the biggest thing in creation!  Bigger, even, 
then sliced bread!  I'm not about to argue how thickly it gets sliced.

Meanwhile, yes, it *is* essential to maintain a clear view of the 
essentials of the faith, that we be a channel of the Holy Spirit, who 
convicts the world of sin, that many may be saved from the wrath to come.

					in Jesus' love
							Andrew

    Oh Andrew,

    _bigger_ than sliced bread? Surely you jest? ("no I don't. and don't
    call me shirley." ;') Sliced bread is a pretty big thing y'know... :')

    Again (as usual) you talk a lot of sense. No, making ::CHRISTIAN a
    'members only' conference would be counter-productive.

    re: the other stuff (especially the dead-horse flooging), I have been
    guilty of that :( mea culpa.

    Father God, thank you for this forum.

>    Again (as usual) you talk a lot of sense. No, making ::CHRISTIAN a
>    'members only' conference would be counter-productive.

      Well, I am certainly numero uno when it comes to beating a
      dead horse until it is a couple of miles under!
    
      I have explained the reason for my need to persist with some
      doctrines.  Basically, if I believe a certain thing that shows
      God's loving character in clearer lines than a contrasting 
      view...to that degree I feel a need to participate.  And, of
      course the topic in 94/737 is by far the most dramatic example
      of this (to me).  (Please, I'm just explaining myself, I don't
      want to talk about this here.)
    
      For example, you don't see me going crazy over the 7th day 1st
      day issue.  I believe in the 7th day as an enduring commandment,
      but I don't feel the need I feel with this other topic.
    
      I always try to be loving in my replies and sometimes I fall 
      short.  I always try not to describe anyone's heart, but rather
      to dwell objectively only on the merits of someone's position.
      I think thats a good approach to take.
    
      Outside of certain doctrinal debates, my input in here is pretty
      much exclusively devoted to encouraging someone by saying thanks
      or amen to an especially spiritual reply someone might have written.
      (Kent Cason's story of the Indian who became converted is a notable
      example.  Is Kent around by the way?)
    
      I reread the beginnings of this string and I believe .8 was an
      unfortunate entry (sorry Glen).  It just wasn't necessary.  I don't
      know if it was valid or not, but the spirit of the topic was one
      of trying to build up and unify and so forth.  Sometimes pointing
      out what one considers a wrong simply is not worth the strife it
      can cause.  I think .8 did this.  Even if correct, it nullified
      the oppurtunity for a good deal of unity and healing.
    
      I think I have received as much personal criticism as about anyone
      in here.  Recent notes would attest to that.  I try real hard
      not to dish out personal criticism and I disagree with it. 
    
      I think most of the dissensions I have caused have been doctrinal.
    
      As for the personal ones that occur, I think they are especially
      unfortunate.
    
      Maybe for personal ones, we could appeal (though not insist) that
      they be taken offline?
    
    						God Bless,
    
    	    					Tony

    
    
    Colossians 3:13-17  Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if
    any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also
    do ye.
    
    And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of 
    perfectness.
    
    And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye 
    are called in one body; and be ye thankful.
    
    Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching 
    and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, 
    singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.
    
    And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the 
    Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.
    
    +++++++++++++++++++
    
    Ephesians 5:18-21
    -----------------
    And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be
    filled with the Spirit;
    
    Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, 
    singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;
    
    Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the 
    name of our Lord Jesus Christ;
    
    Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.
    
    

    Hi,

    scary how far this thing can go.

    I was thinking, and praying, about this over the weekend. I hit the
    mods with something over 400 lines of pontification. But when it all
    boils down to it, I, Harold Vaughan Woodward-Clarke, and you <insert
    name here>, am responcible for the conduct in this conference.

    If I tolerate topics diverging from the conference guidelines, then I am
    by my inaction, condoning that.

    I closed my letter to the mods with the following. It is the 'ideal'. I
    haven't even begun to get close to it. But at least it's here, where I
    can refer to it on a regular basis.

>            What can I do?
>    
>            To the best of my ability I commit myself to:
>    
>            - pray regularly for all the conference participants
>            - pray regularly for the conference Moderators in their duties
>            - participate in a positive manner in the conference
>            - participate in a way that is Glorifying to God
>            - participate in a regular manner
>            - be willing to enter into the controversies in a Loving manner
>            - be sure to promote peace and shed light, rather than obfuscate
>            - [deleted]
>

    I have, as I said, a long way to go. But this is my charter. I could add
    that I hold firmly to the conference guidelines and the statement of
    faith in 2.0 and 2.1.

    I urge you *all* to review those two documents yourself.

    In Him who is our Light,

			    Harry

    Good note Harry!  If we all could do what you've written, this
    conference would be full of the Spirit! :-)

    Worth repeating:
    
    >            What can I do?
    >    
    >            To the best of my ability I commit myself to:
    >    
    >            - pray regularly for all the conference participants
    >            - pray regularly for the conference Moderators in their
    		   duties
    >            - participate in a positive manner in the conference
    >            - participate in a way that is Glorifying to God
    >            - participate in a regular manner
    >            - be willing to enter into the controversies in a Loving
                   manner
    >            - be sure to promote peace and shed light, rather than
                   obfuscate
    
    

    	What does the tenor of this topic say about this conference's
    	fellowship?

    Not sure your point, Joe.  I think it shows people who are willing to
    risk something for what they believe.  Whether be on the side of the
    premise of this conference or against it.
    
    It shows that no matter what side of the premise you are on, you are
    human, you have failures and you have victories.  It shows that many of
    us learn from our mistakes, while others continue to blunder through. 
    Is eithe good or bad?  No... one can be frustrating to the other, but
    God didn't create us all in one mould, so surely we can just continue
    to let him be God. :-) :-)
    
    Love ya,
    Nancy

    	I don't know what my point was either.  I was just commenting
    	out loud because I was feeling rather uncomfortable about it.