Re: Rules For Challenge Discussion List
Helen Willis (hhiwater@mail.bright.net)
Sat, 19 Apr 1997 14:18:54 -0700
Helen Willis wrote:
>
> jerry d. mcdonald wrote:
> >
> > I want to invite you to join a new discussion list, Challenge.
> > Challenge is a discussion list wherein subjects related to the
> > inerrancy of the Bible and creation vs. evolution may be discussed.
> > Both sides of each issue are invited here. There are some rules,
> > however, that must be observed. If these rules are not observed the
> > sender will be taken off of the list.
> >
> > 1. Since this is a debate list, Hedges Rules for Controversy will be
> > strictly observed. Following is a summation of those rules.
> >
> > "Rules 1st. The terms in which the question in debate is expressed and the
> > precise point at issue, should be so clearly defined that there can be
> > no misunderstanding respecting them.
> > Rules 2nd. The parties should consider each other as standing on
> > equal footing ofequality in respect to the subject in debate, each
> > should regard the other as possessing equal talents, knowledge and
> > desire for truth,with himself and that it is possible therefore that
> > he may be in the wrong and his adversary in the right.
> > Rules 3rd. All expressions which are unmeaning, or without effect,
> > in regard to the subject in debate, should be strictly avoided. All
> > expressions may be considered as unmeaning which contribute nothing
> > to the proof of the question, such as desultory remarks, and
> > declamatory expressions, alltechnical ambiguities and equivocal
> > expressions.
> > Rules 4th. Personal reflections on an adversary should in no instance
> > be indulged in. Whatever his private character, his follies are not to
> > be named, nor alluded to in controversy. Personal reflections are not
> > only destitute of effect in respect to the question in discussion, but
> > are product of real evil.
> > Rules 5th. No one has the right to accuse his adversary with
> > indirect motives.
> > Rules 6th. The consequences of any doctrine are not to be charged on
> > him who maintains it, unless he expressly avows them.
> > Rules 7th. As truth and not victory is the professed object of
> > controversy, whatever proofs may be on either side should be examined
> > with fairness and candor, and any attempt to ensnare an adversary by
> > arts or sophistry, or to lessen the force of his reasoning by wit,
> > cavilling, or ridicule, is a violation of honorable controversy"
> > (Christian Contend For Thy Cause, p.40).
> >
> > 2. There will be NO cursing, foul or degrading language on the list
> > at any time. If you can't respond to your adversary without using
> > this kind of language then don't respond until you can.
> > 3. Unless it is for emphasis, all capital letters are forbidden as this is equivalent
> > to shouting. If you use all caps for emphasis you must put in
> > parenthesis behind the word (emphasis).
> > 4. No one is to tell his/her opponent when they must answer a post.
> > 5. Please do NOT post attachments to the list. Posts with
> > attachments will not be forwarded to the subscribers on the list.
> > 6. Since I am going to be doing this manually, at first, please give me 24 to
> > 48 hours to post your message. If after that time, your message has
> > not been posted send me a message and I will take care of it. I save
> > all messages, and it could be that I just didn't get it on the list.
> > 7. In order to subscribe to the list send a message to
> > jerry@cwent.com and type the word "subscribe" in the body of the
> > message and type "Challenge" in as the subject. You may unsubscribe
> > at any time simply sending a message with the word "unsubscribe" in
> > the body of the message. You do not need to give a reason, just type
> > the word and you will be taken off of the list.
> > 8. Since there may be atheists on the list, Christians need to
> > remember to treat them with as much regard as we treat each other.
> > Atheists and skeptics also need to treat us with the same type of
> > regard.
> > 9. Since there are other lists, in the brotherhood, which are used to
> > discuss internal issues in the church, the subjects to be discussed
> > on this list need to fall into the realm of Christian Apologetics.
> > Any subject pertaining to the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible,
> > the existence of God, creation vs. evolution, etc., may be discussed.
> > All other posts need to be taken to lists that deal with internal
> > issues in the church.
> > 10. When a post is made by your adversary make sure that you respond
> > to what your adversary has written. Don't dodge the issue, but deal
> > with it or don't respond.
> > It is my hope and prayer that this list will do good for the cause of
> > Christ and bring souls to him. At any rate we need to remember the
> > words of John: "but try the spirits whether they be of God..." (1
> > Jno. 4:1). This is the responsibility of every Christian, let us
> > make sure we carry it out, but also make sure we do it with love:
> > "but speaking the truth in love" (Eph. 4:15).
> > In Christ's Service,
> > Jerry D. McDonald
> > http://www.cwent.com/~jerry/index.html
Helen:
I have no problem with you starting another list, but I don't quite
understand why you are doing this. I believe there is already a list to
discuss evolution/creation and the errancy list for discussing biblical
inerrancy. Now, the errancy list is often overwhelming in the number of
responses and over the year I've been on this list, the fundie christians
tend to avoid facing the problems with the claim for biblical inerrancy
by changing the topic to something else generally eithr some long
unsolved philosophical topic or evolution. So if they go off on a tangent
for very long we ask them to get back on the topic. How do you think an
mixed list will help this problem? You either will get an extremely large
number of response which no-one will be able to handle, that will be all over
the place in terms of topics or no responses.
I, also, don't understand why you feel the need for all these "rules" other
than you are a christian and feel an immense need to tell other people how
and when to do everything short of when and how to breath. Are you claiming
we debate unfairly on this list? Please show where? Are you claiming we don't
answer your questions? Again, pleas show where? Isn't a single rule of try to
stay on topic much fairer and easier to follow? I have, also, seen Till ask
people to try to proofread. And, of course, everyone jumped on the anonymous
poster. I've seen very little profanity. Did you find the discussion of Song
of Solomon bothersome? I asked you to explain the nonsexual meaning of this
book. I would still love to have you explain to me, using verses from the
text, how this book explains the love of God for his church.
Why do you feel a need for this new list with these rules? Who will enforce
these rules? You? Are you trying to tilt the playing field in your favor?
Is it that if you make a silly argument you want us to not to make fun of
you? You would like it if we treated a silly argument with the same respect
we would treat a well thought out argument? I bet you would! I, also, bet you
won't answer any ot this.
Helen Willis
hhiwater@bright.net