Why Ask?? Why have this forum??

Welcome to EvC.The owner of this board has a set of rules he wishes members to abide by.
Rule #2 is "Please stay on topic for a thread. Open a new thread for new topics."Admin can explain why he wants that rule.

quote:

---

Look I have stated I am new here, I have only posted one reply to a post in a thread I was interested in and when I made a point that either the member didn't have an answer to or could not refute a suggestion was made to close the thread on the basis that it was now "off topic". An Admin jumped in and closed it down. I read through the posts and though it wandered a bit here and there but I believe for the most part it was very much on topic.

---

The closing had nothing to do with you personally or Christian vs Non-Christian. I don't play favorites. I had posted several warnings in that thread concerning the topic. The opening post is always the guideline. Trust me, no one likes having their thread redirected by participants. The thread, Define literal vs non-literal., was about methods of interpretation, not about whether Jesus was real or not. That's more of an accuracy and inerrancy issue. Whether he was written as a literal person or not, was a stretch but if tied in with interpretation rules; it might have flown. I tried but they wouldn't go for it. The rule is, if you don't want to stay on topic, start a new thread. If someone wants to discuss an issue bad enough, they will start a new thread.Were you interested in the post because of the opening post or because of the discussion around Paul's writings and whether Jesus was a real person or not?
Theodoric had already been warned that his line of discussion was off topic, so he would not have responded to your post.The discussion around Paul had nothing to do with the topic and I couldn't get participants to tie it back to the topic. The originator's request to close the thread confirmed that that line of discussion was off topic. Since earlier warnings and nudges hadn't worked, I felt closure was necessary to get everyone's attention.My Admin message gave people the opportunity to make a request to reopen the thread, but it still had to be on topic with the opening post. The discussion of Jesus wasn't.If you want to start a new topic about whether the Gospels or Paul portray Jesus as a literal person, then go for it. There's nothing stopping you. I'm sure Theodoric will jump right in. Make your proposal in the Proposed New Topics thread. I have no problem promoting such a topic if the OP is written well. Your OP is what helps Admins determine when someone is off topic.If your topic is whether the Gospels or Paul portrayed Jesus as a literal person, then discussion of whether Jesus existed in real life is off topic because you specified how he was portrayed in the Gospels or Paul. This would be more of a Bible Study forum topic.If your topic is whether Jesus existed in real life, then how he was portrayed in the Gospels and Paul is not necessarily off topic; but probably not concrete evidence. This would be an accuracy and inerrancy forum topic if you want evidence from outside the Bible, as well as Biblical evidence. It is a science forum so evidence outside the Bible is necessary. If you're not particular about the evidence, then the Bible Study forum is a good choice.So the option is yours. Make a new thread if you wish to discuss the reality of Jesus (or how he was written) or ask for the old thread to be reopened if you wish to stay on topic with the opening post.

Rule #1: Follow all moderator requests.Read the opening post of the thread.The originator was speaking of methods in determining what is to be taken or read literally and what isn't. He clarified his point just before I closed the thread.No it wasn't confined to Genesis and that wasn't the issue with the Jesus discussion.

quote:

---

So why should I have to start another thread based on the literal or non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings when that is what this thread was about.

---

Then make a case for reopening the thread. The choice is yours, but what you were presenting did not really deal with literal or non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings. If you feel it did then make your case. In your Message 257 you stated: Theodoric made it very clear he wanted to discuss a mythical Jesus. Now read the originators comments in Message 264. It is about rules of interpretation. Just as he asked in the OP. The discussion concerning Jesus wasn't dealing with interpretation issues. It was dealing more with belief, outside info, etc.

quote:

---

My point exactly! This was a discussion of how we were to interpret Paul's writings and if he portrayed Jesus in a literal or non-literal context, so it is "on topic" for the thread and "on topic" for the forum. The discussion was not if he existed in real life, you are just merging the two. I could do that with the Genesis account or miracles as well on the basis of whether or not the events ever took place. What is the difference between debating Paul's writings as literal or non-literal vs miracle accounts or the creation account. Its all a debate over the topic just citing different examples. So why should I have to start another thread based on the literal or non-literal interpretation of Paul's writings when that is what this thread was about.

---

"Portraying Jesus in a literal or non-literal context" equates to existence in real life. That has nothing to do with how Paul wrote or the topic.So make your case right now. Me and you only. What verses were being misunderstood and what method of interpretation should be used to understand Paul's writings. What are the rules? Is there really an issue when reading Paul's letters that Jesus wasn't understood to be a man by Paul's audience? Forget Theodoric. Show me the interpretation conflicts.

quote:

---

This brings me back to my original question which is Why Ask? and Why have the forum? If you are going to only allow the first example cited to rule the thread and not allow the discussion to evolve and use other examples to make a point, why even have the discussion? Isn't that the whole theme of a forum, to have other people bring in their take on any one topic and debate it?

---

One's take on the topic has to fall within the parameters of the argument presented in the opening post. This one dealt with methods, not a specific example. The way Jesus was being discussed did not fit the topic. Just because you use the word literal doesn't mean it's on topic.

Understood.

quote:

---

In only the Social and Religious Issues forums are you as administrators asking me and others to separate our belief and faith, that the Bible is the living word of God, from the topic when interacting in the debate?

---

As members, we are guests on this board and as guests we are asked to put forth our best behavior. All members are asked to follow the forum guidelines. The moderators are concerned with behavior (not belief) and enforce those guidelines. I suggest you read the guidelines and decide whether you can abide by the rules of the board. What you do with your belief and faith is up to you.