Skip to main content

Comment Policy



Please, let’s be civilised and avoid personal attacks or inappropriate personal comments. Contributions can be robust and challenging but should be informative and constructive. Whatever our faith position many contributors at least consider themselves “Christian” and should behave accordingly. Remember, “Do as you would be done by.”

That said, strong views are held and sometimes in robust discussion offence is taken when none is offered. Let’s be grown up about this and not hide behind feigned expressions of hurt. George Orwell wrote, “Liberty is the right to tell others what they don’t want to hear.” There is no such thing as the right to not be offended.

Please try to stick to the subject under discussion in any given post. By all means introduce what might be appropriate and helpful related issues but keep these relevant. If you must follow a tangent somewhere not germane to the post why not suggest it as a separate discussion?

In discussion quotes are appropriate within reason but we don’t tolerate wholesale cut-and-paste jobs. It is just lazy to expect others to do your thinking for you. We solicit your views, not the views of your leaders, or those whose books/sermons/blogs/web sites you admire. Links to outside sites will be allowed though carefully monitored and short messages like, “nice blog”, accompanied by links designed to do no more than advertise another blog/website will not be posted. (Comments with Chinese characters NEVER get through)

We prefer contributors not remain anonymous, although we understand why some would prefer that and will not have a hard and fast rule about this. We like to know who we are talking to however and this doesn't seem unreasonable since anyone can know who we are and, anyway, what have you got to hide? This doesn't mean your comments will not be posted but they will be considered carefully.

Finally, if you’re a Mormon, Jehovah’s Witness, etc. in whatever language you couch it, you believe our Christian Church to be apostate since the earliest days, and mainstream Christians (Christendom) hopelessly corrupt and blind. To you this is fair comment and we accept your right to express your faith in those terms so relax and say what’s on your mind.


By the same token, we and other Christians regard Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, etc. to be counterfeits of the true Christian faith, a dangerous deception, cults and that too is fair comment since these terms accurately describe our honestly held view. After all, as apologists for our faith, what else are we to do but “contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the Saints”? (Jude 3) So, let’s get over ourselves and actually talk about issues. Who knows, maybe we will all learn something along the journey.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mormon Christians? Whats in a Name?

The Mormon Church, disturbed by the continuing identifying of polygamus sects in the news with the name Mormon, recently issued a press statement aimed at "clarifying" issues. It is interesting to note that if you substitute the name "Christian" where they use the name "Mormon" it makes a very good argument for us against the claims of the Mormon Church. The full press release is reproduced below in italics with each paragraph rewritten in ordinary text to present it from a Christian perspective. SALT LAKE CITY 10 July 2008 On 26 June, Newsroom published a package of information featuring profiles of ordinary Latter-day Saints in Texas. With no other intention but to define themselves, these members provided a tangible depiction of what their faith is all about. They serve as the best distinction between the lifestyles and values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Texas-based polygamous group that has recently attracted media attent...

Cheers!

  In their latest update #4, the Jehovah’s Witnesses' Governing Body has announced that toasting and ‘ clinking glasses’  is now allowed at the individual Jehovah’s Witness’s ‘ bible trained conscience’ .  This, Governing Body member Stephen Lett tells us, is due to ‘ prayerful consideration’  by the Governing Body.  This doesn’t sound unreasonable; who could possibly object to toasting, it’s such an innocuous custom?  The answer to that is the Governing Body itself, until now. Ever since 1952, and possibly earlier, the Watchtower has roundly condemned this practice due to its ‘ pagan roots’  in ‘ false religion’ .  The 15 May 1952 Watchtower (page 319), has this to say on the matter Jehovah God and Christ Jesus are not honored by having pagan customs of toasting switched to them, or to human s In 1968, in an answer to  Questions from Readers,  the 1 Jan Watchtower states If a Christian is going to make a request f...

Is atheism an intolerant belief?

The Big Questions , Sunday 2 August 2009, third question. A growing number of Britons say they are certain there is no God - but how do they know? Professor John Adams of the North Yorkshire Humanist Association begins by asking theists what evidence they have for their beliefs. Paul Woolley of Theos continues by pointing out Richard Dawkins description of faith as a 'virus', and the appalling track record of atheism in the 20th Century, as spearheaded by Pol Pot and Stalin. Chloe Clifford-Frith of the Humanist and Secular Students Society contends that Stalin did not do the things he did because he was an atheist, but because he was evil. Paul Woolley rejoins that atheists are trying to have it both ways when they claim that religion is the cause of evil, but refuse to acknowledge the ideological impetus of atheism when it comes to many evil acts. Mao and Stalin both replaced God with the State - a 'religious' manoeuvre. Rev Alistair Rycroft of St Michael Le Belfrey Ch...