quote:
My point was only that there are many Christians who post on here that would not let a comment like that go unchallenged.
Some, for sure. I wouldn't say many. Read the old threads. There are often many Christians posting all around NA's comments. Condemnations for them are pretty few and far between. Generally craigernaught and Silent are the only ones I can think of who would actually challenge him on the way he treated people.
quote:
Well, the topic was, "what does Paul teach" There's plenty of room for disagreement on what Paul teaches on any given subject. If you want to discuss what he meant by a particular passage, or how a different passage provides context that changes the meaning of another, that would be great and on topic. Telling us why you disagree is off topic and derails the thread.
Again, I guess we disagree on what's relevant. I'm not sure why we're allowed to talk about what he said, but not why we disagree with what he said. I'll remember that next time there's a thread about Dawkins I guess. "Nope - no disagreements. Just talk about what he said." Again I don't see any way this isn't just asking for an echo chamber.
quote:
No. It derailed the thread. Again, the topic was, "What does Paul teach."
Same as above. If you want to confine everything to such a narrow scope you're going to get some pretty short, boring threads.
quote:
Of course it is. Start a new topic if you want to discuss it. You can even roll it all together by starting a topic like, "Paul has no credibility on any subject due to his views on slavery." I think that's fine.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I'll just defer to my answers above. At any rate, even if we define this as a "derail," I still don't see how this is in any way worth the whining we see in the OP and throughout this thread.
quote:
And, If that thread had veered off course to start discussing how you should be treated then, by all means, chime in. It was derailed right from the start. That's really my only issue with it.
Sigh. Again, I disagree with your premise that this was a derail. You want to see a derail, look up literally any thread Top Hat ever posted on. We could all be sitting around talking about our favorite cereal, and he'd swoop in and talk about how Trix are a tool of the leftist liberal agenda sent by the devil to turn children into gay rabbit-worshiping heathens. THAT's a derail. Asking related questions, providing context, and rebutting sources isn't a derail.
And how many posts are we allowed before the subject of the discussion has changed enough that we can talk about other things? Does a Christian have to open that door? If a Christian moves it toward how you should treat gay people, then I'm allowed to speak? Basically, if a Christian derails first, I can finally join in? Until then I have to just keep my mouth shut?
You seem like a fairly reasonable guy. You should understand how this sounds.