Yes, Michael, as you ask, that is my perception of what you are doing and there is plenty of evidence for that opinion. If you want to leave or stay is always up to you. If you feel that you cannot adopt a Christian style of posting and follow the forum rules that you agreed to when you joined this site it is your choice.
Michael said, "A debating style is not 'unChristian'. That is only your opinion. Just say you personally don't prefer the style and leave it at that."
Christ never used insults, belittling, sarcasm.
Christ never spoke according to His own prejudices and always spoke with love.
Christ's greatest concern was to claim the sinner from his false position, Christ never exalted self above all else.
Christ cared what impact His words had and even in His rebukes He drew people to Him not alienating them.
Christ taught that the greatest accomplishment for the striving Christian was to overcome self.
Christ debased Himself so that others may not be lost.
To correctly portray the image of Christ we will not belittle, scorn, insult, abuse, bully, exalt self, display pride in our own acheivements. We will not assume the worst of everyone else, but we will walk and talk humbly, boasting only in Jesus Christ and what He has done in our lives. Our discourse will be tinged with love, charity and concern for the erring. We will be lovers more of righteousness than the things of this world.
Your style appears to consist so much of the former things that I can find no evidence of the latter. Therefore I am able to conclude just by reading the style of your posts that you consistently reflect worldly styles and values and rarely, if ever, reflect the love of Christ in your discourses. In fact you are provably judgemental, abusive, accusing and frequently exalting self. You show no love, no regard, for those with whom you engage and appear much more concerned with "winning" than with a reasonable exchange of ideas. You are swift to defend self by using the faults of others to justifiy your actions and you pour scorn on those who disagree with you.
Even in this matter your only answer is to point to others as if their failings justify your own. None of this is the way of Christ.
Michael, your posting style does not reflect Christ in any way, shape or form.
You are so right John. We really have no place excusing savage, discourteous, presumptious and inimicable behavior! When Jesus gave rebuke it was to those who not only knew better but were in positions of influence!
I was thinking, today is the Sabbath. It was designed to be a day of rest..... rest from our works, a day of fellowship with the Father and with each another. It is clearly evident that not all find rest..........
What is also evident Michael is that you are consistent about misrepresenting the facts!.
Michael, it is the fact that you seek to hide behind the misdeeds of others that just compounds the errors.
You waited less than 30 minutes, on the Sabbath day, before you accused all and sundry of not rebuking Stephen. Personally, I was at church during that time.
Those who Margaret blamed for her departure were firmly rebuked at the time. One of them then left the board because he was told in no uncertain terms that his refusal to abide by the rules was not acceptable. The other person appears not to be posting here anymore. Why didn't you mention that? What are you expecting, that we drag out their dead bodies and ritually burn them? Why have you decided not to mention the "conservatives" who have left the forum because, like you, they insisted that they should be able to break the site rules? It seems that you are very partial in what you mention.
You also seem to conveniently forget that when Stephen made an unwarranted personal attack on you I was the first to rebuke him, but I am not at all surprised about that.
It's all rather pointless anyway, as you consistently try and hide behind the mistakes of others as your excuse for your behaviour. Your sensitivity in this issue is quite remarkable considering how little care you have for the effects of your words on others.
Your sarcastic, beliitling response to my previous post questioned whether there was a Christian style of posting. As I showed you, there is. As I also showed you, your style is exactly the opposite. You can throw as many darts at me as you want but it will never alter the facts.
Btw: I have never spoken to you about my posts, so the "tripe" appears to be, once again, all in your imagination.
Michael, thanks for your post, particularly the part I am about to misquote,
"If you want to ruin a good forum, have too many theological 'watchdogs' who fancy themselves watchmen on the walls and gaurdians of... ...Adventism waiting in the wings to pounce and denounce all who disagree."
I absolutely agree with this. The pouncing is maybe not so bad... but the denouncing... no. (That's one of the reasons for the Site Rules.)
Which should bring us neatly back to the topic of this thread... we cannot make hard and fast rules which just say "no trousers on women" as it may be that in their locality for a woman not to wear trousers would be immodest.
In all things it is the principle that should reign supreme in harmony with other Christian principles, e.g. dress and modesty. Then we won't need to talk specifics. When we mix the overarching principle of love then we won't rebuke or "tut-tut" that visitor with her skirt barely more than a belt and we will spend more time witnessing the love of Christ as we talk with her. (Yes, I know, I took the easy way out and used a female as an example...)
Anyway, what I'm saying is that we create a problem when we isolate "Christian dress" from other principles. With a more holistic outlook there may be a more fluid approach rather than unnecessarily rigid rules.
Aren't we the answer to your problems? lololol There must be a reason God decided it was not good for man to be alone. lololol She really is a wonderful compliment to his masculinity, if he can only see that her gifts do enhance rather than overshadow.
But back to the clothing issue. Stephen I believe you do have some strident views about this. lol One being that you think a woman always knows what the effect of her appearance will be. I would have to disagree.
Don't we all come to this through the filter of our own personalities and experience. I don't know what anyone else is thinking until they venture to share. I might be able to surmise based on their gestures, body language, etc but still that would have to be confirmed. You suggest intentionality and knowledge that may be there for some but certainly not for all.
JohnB has been very open with his disapproval of all rule breakers in the past. MOST of them have been very conservative. So to say he is "completely ignor(ing)" them because of his ideological slant is completely false.
As far as the Adventist spectrum goes, I am more aligned with you than most of the conservatives here. But on this issue of your behavior on the site, I agree with JohnB 100%. Please brother, show Christ's love to all those that disagree with you. It's not showing now. We MUST represent Him in all of our interactions with others. Others should see Him plainly.