KeralaBrethren.net
New User? Register Today!
Registered Users, LOGIN
What we believe (Eng) What we believe (Mal) About Us Contact Us
Forums Home General Forum Youth Forum Sisters Forum Archives (2005-2007) Archives (2001-2004)
Listing of Brides Listing of Grooms
Assemblies in Kerala Evangelists in India Instituitions in India
Christian Albums Christian Songs
Audio Sermons Bible Wallpapers Brethren Links KB History (Eng) KB History (Mal)

K E R A L A  B R E T H R E N
General Forum (2005 - 2007)

Forums Home ::
This Message Forum is to discuss spiritual topics only. Please avoid personal or assembly matters.
Let us use this facility for our spiritual enrichment and for bringing glory to our Lord almighty.
Webmasters reserve the right to delete any topic or posting partly or completely from this forum.
View Topics ::

Go to bottom of the page

# 01332 :  Terms and conditions. For the n-th time.
Terms and conditions: As required by the owners of this forum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I did post my feelings about some among us may be belittling and insulting others because they claim, they have revealed their name in these forums. I have spoken against such behavior in the past and let me just state it again as kindly as I can. This attitude must stop and this repeated call for the same must stop. Contrary to the way these people are alluding to the general participants, REQUESTING TO REVEAL THE NAMES IS THE REAL VIOLATION OF THE TERMS AND CONDITION OF PARTICIPATION IN THIS FORUM.

For the record below are some of the terms and conditions one need to abide by, according to the OWNERS of this forum:
"By participating in the KeralaBrethren.net Discussion Forums, you agree to the following:
· You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading or inaccurate.
· You will not behave in an abusive manner, and will not harass, threaten, or attack other participants, or post material that is offensive, abusive, racist or discriminating.
· You will not use profanity. You will not post language or content that is obscene, sexually oriented, or sexually suggestive. You will not attach links to sites that contain such content.
· You will respect the privacy of others and will not post anyone else's identifying information (including their names, contact information, or any other relevant information).
· … "
There are more in the terms and conditions and no need to repost them here.

Let us hope that such behavior will change and may be even those engaged in such insults and violations IN THE PAST offer proper retribution that will satisfy the mandates for Christian conduct.

AO

Post by : spectator  View Profile    since : 2 Aug 2007


Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 2 Aug 2007 5:45:08 PM Close
Dear Spectator,

I think you have brought your point across in a credible manner. My only question would be to see if the webmasters would like to see any changes from what they have established originally. Sometimes changes are introduced based on the current needs and it needs to be recognized and followed. We need to leave that to the webmasters.

You have made it very clear by quoting the guidelines that the participants have no grounds to press someone for revealing their identity. Also, let me encourage the participants, if at all possible, not to show preferential treatment based on whether they have a common ‘pseudo name’ or uncommon ‘pseudo name’. But I do realize most of these names do reveal some of the personality traits, but not necessarily accurate observations.

I believe this thread was initiated because of what transpired at the other ‘Genealogy of Jesus Christ’ thread. It is true that ‘keralabrethren1’ had come across rather strongly in the initial posting against Dr. Johnson C Philip, but he / she indeed brought much awareness to an issue that we all needed to be mindful about. Those who are able to answer the questions need to do it gracefully and timely.

So, ‘keralabrethren1’ bluntly stated what he / she felt in this regard and just because it lacked the gracious finesse (upon scrutiny or through misunderstanding) must not be a reason for receiving severe criticism either. In fact such openness must be welcomed as long as such dialogue would stay within the realm of healthy interactions.

Regards,

Tom J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 2 Aug 2007 9:26:26 PM Close
Thanks observer for your comments. There is on misunderstanding in it, however:

There is NO prohibition about asking a person's identity. The prohibition is only upon revealing the identity of another person (if he does not want it revealed). The statement is:

<<You will respect the privacy of others and will not post anyone else's identifying information (including their names, contact information, or any other relevant information).
· … ">>

I think even Tom J missed noticing this.

Asking for the ID has been necessary to stop disruptive behavior. Brethren line John Mathew (keralabrethren1) immediately reveal their IDs because they are serious contributors.

On being pressed for ID disruptive people like Megalogos leave because they are indulging in a guerilla fight using multiple identities. Their basic intention is not seeking the truth.

This problem does not exist on Moderated Forum because the IP Logging prevents people from using multiple IDs, even if they use only a pen name.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : spectator   View Profile   Since : 2 Aug 2007 10:53:37 PM Close
drjcp, I think this is the real problem. Interpretation to suit our convenience. The meaning and spirit of the terms is to prohibit the very thing you and few others have been practicing. I do not condone anything Megalogs did and rather I do condemn many of his actions and attitude and of many others who have come and disrupted this forum the way they did. Such are to be taken care of by the owners of this forum, and they have done so after careful watch and at appropriate times. But your insults have been to the general participants of this forum using anonymous sign-on. To which also you have not answered my question ( … have you ever registered using pen-name on this forum?).

Moreover, just as recent as few days ago you directly accused Keralabrethren1 of “hiding behind pen name”. Are you suggesting that he qualified to be in the same level in his dealing as Megalogs? I do not believe you have the right to do either and to these you stand accused.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 3:03:34 AM Close
Dear Spectator

my statements above do not apply to KeralaBrethren1 because he did not try to use a mask. On being questioned he was very transparent, and the problem was solved. Since he and I have no problem now, you need not bring it up.

You wrote: <<I think this is the real problem. Interpretation to suit our convenience.>> So I will allow the passage in question to speak for itself:

<<You will respect the privacy of others and will not post anyone else's identifying information (including their names, contact information, or any other relevant information). >>

Nobody has done this. Nobody has revealed information about others, though many of us do have a lot of information about the identity of people who use only pen names.

You asked

<<To which also you have not answered my question ( … have you ever registered using pen-name on this forum?).>>

I did not see that question anywhere being asked to me.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : johnkurien   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 4:58:40 AM Close
I want to correct JCP on this matter.
Megalogos and Elf_Asura did not leave on their own but because they were BANNED for holding views different from what JCP holds.
It was vindictive action.
Facts are facts.
John Kurien
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : talmid1   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 6:09:15 AM Close
You will respect the privacy of others
AND
will not post anyone else's identifying information (including their names, contact information, or any other relevant information)

Here there are two points.
JCP only talks about the 2nd point, ie not revealing the identity of others.

The first is equally important. So let me put that also down.:-
YOU WILL RESPECT THE PRIVACY OF OTHERS

THOU SHALT RESPECT THE PRIVACY OF OTHERS.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : talmid1   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 6:12:33 AM Close
JCP Says:-
<On being pressed for ID disruptive people like Megalogos leave because they are indulging in a guerilla fight using multiple identities. Their basic intention is not seeking the truth.>

My ID Talmid was also BANNED. So I am using a different identity called Talmid1.

I seek the truth. Whether JCP believes it or not is absolutely UNIMPORTANT.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 8:10:51 AM Close
Thank you brethren for coming back with your desire to pick up a fight. Once again we have a case of probable multiple ids.

Else how does JohnKurian know that Talmid was banned -- assuming he was really banned.

Brethren, you do not seek truth.

1. You wish to fight against Biblical truths.

2. You also wish to fight against people like I who take a stand for conservative faith.

If anyone of you indulge in 1, I will sure put up a fight against you. Just as you love to attack the Bible, I love defending it.

If you indulge in 2, calling me names and this and that, I will not respond. It is your privilege to attack me, and it is my privilege to fight or remain silent. I would prefer to remain silent when you attack me.

Johnson C. Philip

PS: interestingly, nobody indulges in disruptive behavior on the moderated forum because their IPs are known.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 9:38:34 AM Close
I agree with what Dr. JCP was saying in regard to the potential of lashing out against someone while concealing the true identity. But the fact that the webmasters would like to have it that way restricts anyone form complaining against it. I believe we should respect the wisdom of the webmasters and leave this matter to them. I am willing not to make derogatory remarks based on any pseudo name. I have done it in the past and if I have offended someone (you), I sincerely apologize.

The essence of discussion must revolve around the issues raised. Lot of times the title of Shakespeare’s comedy ‘Much ado about nothing’ seems to be the inevitable result of our discussions. Let me write this with much apology to Dr. JCP, since I am about to point out the perception he left with me (and possibly others). Please correct me if I am wrong.

What keralabrethren1 pointed out about the follow up comment in the other thread (Genealogy of Jesus Christ) was bluntly accurate. Those of us who regularly make contributions on this forum must be willing to recognize the flaws in our judgment also. There is not one person here who hasn’t made any mistakes.

Those in leadership make several decisions -secular, family or Assembly related decisions. Many decisions could be good and profitable and some are bound to be wrong. After all we are all humans! When someone points out an error on judgment we need to have the graciousness to admit it and hope that we wouldn’t repeat the same at least for a while. It is indeed a painful reminder that we all make mistakes and indeed a hard pill to swallow.

So in this particular case, no one seems to have unleashed any vicious attack that warranted raising the defensive mechanism and wondered that these things happen because of multiple IDs or pseudo name. It is true that such things happened in the past.

Shakespeare indeed had a great deal of 'wisdom'.

Regards,

Tom J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 10:08:13 AM Close
Dear Johnkurien,

You worte -

“Megalogos and Elf_Asura did not leave on their own but because they were BANNED for holding views different from what JCP holds.
It was vindictive action.
Facts are facts.”

They were NOT banned because they held different views from JCP. Obviously you missed a lot of other things. There are many other reasons and I don't think it is profitable to rehash those here. So, I have no desire to discuss any more in this regard but I thought of bringing it to your attention.

An unrelated issue -

[When the webmasters ban someone, others (readers) can see it by clicking on to their icon above any of their previous postings. It will show a circle with a red line across. So this information is rather public and not a preferential one]

Regards,

Tom J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : spectator   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 10:10:43 AM Close
<<<# 01312 : Genealogy of the Lord Jesus
Reply by : drjcp Since : 1 Aug 2007 8:34:19 AM
1. It does not require greatness of character to attack anyone after hiding behind a pen name.
2. I am sure that if your full name or IP number were known on the forum you would not speak in this manner.
3. The person who asked the question has no problem, so why should you behave as the devil's advocate brother.
First have the guts to use your proper name, identify yourself and then attack. Any coward can call anyone names from behind a mask. What is so great about that. >>>
drjcp,
The above are statements from the thread Genealogy …

Since my comments started there let me just point out few observation on your response from a Christian perspective.

Are you truly exhibiting the nature of Christ, just so because someone new or even innocently pointed out a fact many of us observed? Your response is outright attack mode. Yet you claim others are attacking you? Even if others are attacking you what is the true Christian response?

Look at the manner with which you answered.
“does not require greatness”
“hiding behind”
“having the guts”
“identify yourself”
“what is so great about that”

May be it is time to take the pole out before looking for the speck.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 10:14:20 AM Close
Dear brother Tom J

I appreciate your desire to correct me where I might have made a mistake. You say about it:

<<What keralabrethren1 pointed out about the follow up comment in the other thread (Genealogy of Jesus Christ) was bluntly accurate. Those of us who regularly make contributions on this forum must be willing to recognize the flaws in our judgment also. There is not one person here who hasn’t made any mistakes.>>

I am puzzled about the whole thing. Here is the whole story:

Someone asked a question about Geneology of Christ. Others answered, and I kept watching from time to time. Finally when all of them had said what they wanted to say, I appreciated them for their contributions and added some additional information. There there was a gap of 3 weeks between the first post of the person who asked the question and my post, and I did say so.

For this, Keralabrethren1 said "Shame on that statement of Johnson". (Keralabrethren1 and I have patched up after he accepted that his non fluency of English might have prompted him to attack me).

Now here is my question to you brother Tom J: what was the mistake on my part that you want to point to. I mean

1. Is it essential that everyone on this forum should post every day.

2. Is it essential that there should be no gaps in my posting.

3. Keralabrethren1 pointed out to a gap. That was not the point of contention between him and me. The point of contention was him saying "Shame on that statement". Even that statement he corrected when he said that non fluency of language might have imparted meanings not intended, and the problem was solved.

I am confused about why you brought up that thread where the problem has already been settled with a confession about language by Keralabrthren1, an apology by him, and an apology by me ??

I would love to hear from you -- but do look into that thread once again, do look at the statements in this thread, and then please help me to understand the thrust of your argument.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 10:23:10 AM Close
Dear Spectator

i appreciate your desire to explain things in a more elaborate way.

My statement came in response to a blunt attack which said <<Shame on the statement of Johnson C. Philip>>.

My reply came in response to that. What is more, the brother who made this statement has patched up with me. He has given a full explanation of the reason for the patch up.

So why do you worry about that.

Let me reiterate what I have seen from the time this forum was set up (I am the earliest active participant):

1. Whenever the ID/IP of people is known, such as on the Moderated forum, the tendency to attack is simply gone.

2. In other words, anonymity does contribute to frequent outbursts.

3. When the anonymity is gone, there is always sane and sensible discussion. See that on the Moderated Forum

Thanks spectator. This should be taken as our last exchange on my personal conduct as long as you remain anonymous, because anonymity offers immunity, and that makes people initiate fights.

This does not rule out engagement on issues and topics with you.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : spectator   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 12:53:43 PM Close
Dear drjcp,

I am not initiating 'fights' as you say.

Before you say good-bye to this issue kindly answer my question.

You wrote on 3 Aug 2007 3:03:34 - Quote
"To which also you have not answered my question ( ... have you ever
registered using pen-name on this forum?).>>
I did not see that question anywhere being asked to me."

If you didn't see it, let me quote it from 'Genealogy of the Lord Jesus
Christ' - This is what I mentioned -
I wrote on 1 Aug 2007 11:17:34 - Quote

"Secondly, can you my brother drjcp tell me that you never used 'pen
name' on this very forum?"

Now you saw my question and I quoted it here. It is only fair that you
answer.


Thank you,

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 3 Aug 2007 1:48:44 PM Close
Fair enough spectator !

I always used a login name and my full name, so that my identity was not kept a secret

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : keralabrethren1   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 2:06:32 AM Close
Dear drjcp,

Believe me, this is not for a fight!! Do not think that, I am "attacking" you.

Just to point out a statement made by me has been twisted here:

You said <<My statement came in response to a blunt attack which said <<Shame on the statement of Johnson C. Philip>>.>>

But I wrote <<Shame to hear this comment from Johnson>>

On my first reply to you in the other thread I wrote: <<I did not say "shame on you", but said "Shame to hear this comment from Johnson". To the best of my knowledge, both are different, I am sorry if you took it differently.>>

You wrote: <<Keralabrethren1 pointed out to a gap>> I was not telling of the gap.

It is sad that, you are twisting my statement again.

Thank you Br.Tomj & spectator for understanding the spirit behind my statement, instead of reading between the lines.

Let`s keep this spirit up.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : johnkurien   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 3:14:12 AM Close
JCP will never admit that he is wrong. So let's not bother.
His claims to having superiority over others, as far as I can see from his many posts:
1. I don't have a pen name (that is fine but it is the others' prerogative to use pen names or nicks as they are more widely known).
2. I have been the earliest member of this forum. So what? It doesn't make him any whit greater than the simplest newbie who appears out here.
3. I know it all. (This is of course highly doubtful)
4. I stand for the Bible. (What he means is he stands for his understanding or interpretation of the Bible and any other interpretation is false.)
5. The moderated forum is fantastic. (That again is a self-advertised private view that others need not subscribe to.)
6. I can question and browbeat others, but they cannot do the same to me. (Well, he is able to get those who dissent banned, so I guess he has the upper hand on this.)
7. I am intolerant. (Of course, on this we are all agreed.)
8. I want others to be intolerant like me. (Something he can wish for but will not easily get in life.)
John Kurien
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 3:48:01 AM Close
Dear Johnkurien,

Please refrain from unnecessary personal attack as you have unleashed against JCP. Your previous comments and these stick out like a sore thumb and obvious that you have an axe to grind. Please do not use this thread for that purpose.

Such actions would be the ‘continuum of a conundrum’ as you could have qualified – right? [What I just asked here, I believe Johnkurien would understand, but other readers might not. Please forgive me.]

Tom J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 5:21:43 AM Close
Dear Keralabrethren1

I do accept your latest comment in the spirit you intended. Do not be offended in the non literal quote. I was quoting from memory from another thread.

The basic thrust of my comment here is "Keralabrethren1 and I no longer have a problem with each others. We have decided to work together for the same cause so why should the others raise the issue again"

I hope you will see my posts (and others also) in this light of this summary/explanation about our interaction.

Do you feel I have made myself clear about our interaction ?

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 5:26:30 AM Close
Dear JohnKurian

thanks for the personal attacks !!

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tinka   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 5:28:30 AM Close
“But I say to you that for every idle word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned” (Matt. 12:36-37).

Well dear beleivers,
so much of controversy, the only reason I find is that some of us are not are not following this:
“Let no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth, but what is good for necessary edification, that it may impart grace to the hearers” (Eph. 4:29).

So I beleive that if we have the guts to criticize someone, or commend or condemn someone, we must also be willing to say, who we are.
An anonymouus letter has no worth in legal accusation, I think.

sincerely in Christ,
Tinka

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : keralabrethren1   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 6:03:34 AM Close
Dear Tinka,

You are quoting from Bible.

Do you have any quote for your comment : <<So I beleive that if we have the guts to criticize someone, or commend or condemn someone, we must also be willing to say, who we are.
An anonymouus letter has no worth in legal accusation, I think.>>

Nowadays courts initiate action based on the facts from anonymous letter !

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : keralabrethren1   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 6:13:38 AM Close
Dear drjcp,

Thank you for the explanation. I do not have any problem with you, regarding this issue.

But one doubt is still there, what difference it makes when I use usernames like chacko, thomas, joseph, tinku, mary, johnmathew and the present keralabrethren1 ?

I think what I write matters.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 6:28:34 AM Close
Dear Keralabrethren1

That is exactly what I was trying to say to the others that since you and I have settled our problems, they need not raise the issue again.

Coming to your question, the basic issue is not the "username" but "anonymity". Some people use pen name alone and remain anonymous. While there is nothing wrong with anonymity, many on this forum have used anonymity to attack others with immunity. It is like to "invisible man" in the story who could abuse anyone, but the victims could not even defend themselves because the aggressor was invisible.

In your case you made it clear that you have no problem with making your identity known. That is the case with all those who come to this forum for serious discussion -- they have no problem if others know their identity.

But there are many who come to this forum solely to fight against the Brethren movement, Bible, conservatism, and everything that is related to separatism.

If the identities of such people is known, they would not attempt their guerilla tactics.

This was the actual thrust of my original argument. I am sure I have made myself a bit more clear to you

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : keralabrethren1   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 6:57:47 AM Close
Dear drjcp,

Thank you.

Regarding the 2nd part:

I understand what you are saying, but this does not mean that, I fully agree with you.

I know a lot of people are coming to the forum with the intention as you mentioned. but it would be unjust to say that all people with pen names are with that intention.

I am still of the opinion that, we should judge them with what they are saying and not by their names. That`s what a lot of people suggests here too.

One more thing, there is no need that we should respond to all threads and all responses. You may remember, I wrote about this in a new thread and later I deleted it after two weeks. Even ONE PHRASE/SENTENCE could change the focus of the thread in both directions.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : tomj   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 8:45:45 AM Close
Dear readers,

What keralabrethren1 mentioned makes good sense. He / she wrote – “I am still of the opinion that, we should judge them with what they are saying and not by their names.”

Let me clarify it by showing the common pseudo name ‘johnkurien’. This name is very common to most KB. Johnkrien made two postings in this thread. Both were pointed against JCP. You might have noticed that I responded to both.

[I was severely ridiculed for making some assumptions by one of the previous contributors, who is no longer allowed on this forum under that original name. Some of the readers might remember that. Here let me make another assumption!]

Let me dare say this; the person with the common pseudo name ‘johnkurien’ had contributed on this forum under different ‘uncommon pseudo name’. I am willing to apologize to you johnkurien, publicly and unconditionally on this forum if I made a wrong assumption. I realize it is possible, though I seriously doubt it.

Now back to the original point – as keralbrethren1 suggested, it is not entirely on the name a person assumes, but the person’s contributions are guided by the underlying motives.

Whether the person comes out with ‘johnkurien’ or ‘devasura’ wouldn’t make MUCH difference. More of a ‘devasura’ can pretend to be a ‘johnkurien’; a seemingly tame approach! Hope we realize the irony here.

So, as long as the owners of the KB Net allows anonymity and promotes it, let us move to the next step and start strictly addressing the issues and judge a person by his/ her contributions.

Regards,

Tom J

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 11:32:18 AM Close
Dear Keralabrethren1

I am happy that with each post we are coming closer in our agreement. I think only one more thin is left. You said:

<<it would be unjust to say that all people with pen names>>

This does not apply to me because I said

<<there are many who come to this forum solely to fight>>

kindly notice that I did not say "all". I also did not say "the majority". I only said "many" which is exactly the stand that you have.

With that I believe there no difference of opinion left between us. If there is anything, kindly do mention it and I will be happy to respond.

There is a separate point -- not related to our earlier discussions -- that I will address separately.

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 11:41:01 AM Close
Dear Keralabrethren1

you said

<<there is no need that we should respond to all threads and all responses>>

the problem is that "ideas have consequences". Since this forum is read by a lot of people, false ideas -- if left unrefuted -- can do a lot of damage.

This means that trivial things can be overlooked, but serious attacks against the bible, the Brethren movement, Christian faith, etc. should not be left unrefuted.

God bless you

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : observer   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 11:48:47 AM Close
In my opinion, people insisting and being harsh on the registered users to reveal their name and identity are just silly and don’t make any sense. By revealing the name, unless a person is well known, no one knows what and who they are. I know several Tom, George, Samuel (who are not even believers) etc and how do I know which Tom or Samuel is writing. So in my opinion by putting the real name or using a pen name DO NOT make any sense to me unless I know the person personally. So please stop this attitude and keep bragging about this. Also what if a person comes and attacks someone and put a name like Samuel or Thomas or George or John. Does this give satisfaction to the people those who are insisting to reveal the legally registered name? Give a break!
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : spectator   View Profile   Since : 4 Aug 2007 10:29:47 PM Close
All,

My intentions are not to attack anyone in particular. Rather it was to stand with the ones got attacked unjustly. I have no personal vendetta or agenda towards anyone on this anonymous forum. Therefore be careful how you perceive my writings.

I am very disappointed the way how some responses have come; especially from those whom I think much is given by the Lord, so much more was expected in attitude and conduct.

I am very busy for next few days however, I will try to (DV) categorically address these concerns later.

Cheers,
AO.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : keralabrethren1   View Profile   Since : 5 Aug 2007 1:20:38 AM Close
Dear drjcp,

<<there is no need that we should respond to all threads and all responses>>

Please see, "ALL", It does not imply that we should be silent on trivial things, serious attacks against the bible, the Brethren movement, Christian faith, etc. It should not be left unrefuted.

There is a principle in Management - Management by Necessity. The essence is that, one should involve in matters, only where his involvement is necessarily required. This is good, if we apply it here and in day today life too !!

regards

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : drjcp   View Profile   Since : 5 Aug 2007 2:44:18 AM Close
Dear Keralabrethren1

I fully agree with your statement

<<The essence is that, one should involve in matters, only where his involvement is necessarily required. This is good, if we apply it here and in day today life too !!>>

warm regards

Johnson C. Philip

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : spectator   View Profile   Since : 8 Aug 2007 10:39:21 AM Close
Dear drjcp,

The reason I started this thread was to address the on-going harassment to those who assume an uncommon ID. Many people already pointed out the uselessness because anyone can assume any form of ID. So, may I request that you and others who practice or propagate such notions, please stop attacking people based on their names. If you like to talk legal about it, asking for name is revealing of it. Therefore, it is against the terms and conditions set forth by the owners of this forum, where you are a participant just as anyone else. It is a violation of the policy.

Does an anonymous forum have its' disadvantages?
Will it allow some people to express more freely?
Does an anonymous forum has its' advantages?
What if someone comes and really abuses the participants and the Word of God?

These are all good questions. But remember that is not the issue here.

The real issue is:
Is it, being on this forum with an apparent pseudo name (pen name, uncommon name or whatever you want to call it) inferior, unethical or unchristian?
Does it give any other participant with the so called real name the right to insult others?
Is it within the terms and conditions of participation on this forum and within the spirit of the overall terms and conditions of this forum?

The answers are obvious to the unbiased and clear thinking.

Continued to Part-2

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : spectator   View Profile   Since : 8 Aug 2007 10:39:42 AM Close
Part-2

To the accusation that if a participant is not using their birth certificate name gives them an advantage has also been proved baseless (see examples by Tomj).

However, even if they have an advantage for any reason, it is the participants' privilege and choice to participate here the way it is authorized by the owners. Not the other way around as implicated by some. Anyone who has a disagreement with the set policy can choose not to participate. But throwing insults at each and every respectable brothers and sisters who participate on this forum and to think that it is the right thing to do so because you don't approve of their name is the mindset that needs changing.

Such behavior is against the spirit of acceptable Christian conduct. It is also an encroachment into the freedom allowed on this forum.

There are other deep concerns that are worth looking into in these two threads. Some involve the replies you gave me to my direct questions. I am for now leaving it to you to look into for correction.

Cheers,
AO.

Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : johnkurien   View Profile   Since : 8 Aug 2007 11:12:37 PM Close
I am thankful to God that at last some more people are seeing what really is happening behind the scenes on this forum in terms of it being controlled by the whims and fancies of one or two people who assume superior privileges over all who come here, innocently or not, to be edified.
May God sort this out once and for all.
John Kurien
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : johnkurien1   View Profile   Since : 9 Aug 2007 6:19:08 AM Close
TWO POSTS FOR ALL TO REFLECT UPON
Friends
How long are you going to keep on banning people on this site?
I strongly urge those who use the ban indiscriminately to put it up front on this site as to WHAT EXACTLY MUST BE SAID IN HERE.
Are we supposed to only state that THERE ARE NO TONGUES ANYMORE and ONLY THEN WILL WE BE ENTERTAINED?
How many UNSPOKEN RULES are there on this forum?
Please be explicit.
I hope everybody is watching this cat and mouse game between some who feel they can ban anybody and everybody whenever they want, whether one is civil and courteous or whether one is insulting.
Is this Christian behaviour?
May God have mercy on the ones who banned without reason.
John Kurien
Friends
I also hope somebody is watching keenly so that these posts can be deleted even before others read it, in case they are dangerous posts.
All that was done was to discuss in a civil manner and I think when certain people felt they had lost the upper hand, they decided to ban. In this way they are able to ensure doctrinal conformity. But the truth is believers are free to believe in the doctrines of the churches they come from and not necessarily adhere to the Brethren doctrine or the specific doctrine espoused by three or four people in here.
Otherwise, please put up a big notice board at the entrance saying: Those who do not believe in doctrines 1, 2, 3, 4 etc - PLEASE DO NOT ENTER.
Then peaceful believers and even those who are civil in language will stay out of this place.
I hope people here understand the import of what I am saying in here.
The day will come when even innocent ones will be banned increasingly on this site.
May God have mercy on those with sinful natures who resort to such methods of silencing others who disagree or have a different point of view and have not spoken any evil.
John Kurien
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page

Reply by : johnkurien1   View Profile   Since : 9 Aug 2007 6:29:07 AM Close
What is my sin?
John Kurien
Go to top of the page
Go to bottom of the page



Go to top of the page

All times are GMT -5 Hours
Forums Home ::
© 2018 Sansnet.com



HOME