The winds of change

This blog has for as long as we can remember engendered a range of often heated discussion, which have many times turned quite vitriolic.  This has been occurring far too often of late and has resulted in long standing bloggers leaving our little gathering.  I have repeatedly asked people to restrain themselves and keep it nice (don’t worry, I do see the irony coming from me) to no avail.

With Steve and Q both leaving I have decided to take the reigns of this blog completely and have revoked all publishing rights other than my own. If this upsets  you to the point you too will leave, so be it – hopefully a new gathering will develop over time that is respectful and desires to understand opposing views rather than belittle and offend.

This is a theological blog not a comparative religion or political blog and so the posts will reflect that direction.

I’m disappointed that certain people were unable to contain themselves and we have seen the disintegration of our fellowship as a result.

I am sad.

We move on from here.

35 thoughts on “The winds of change

  1. Thats weird, because I never found that you were averse to belittling and offending when it took your fancy. Your comment on my post “Calvin and American Exceptionalism” was

    Too long, too boring and too little formatting! Summarise, format and…actually it’s irredeemable tripe…delete and be done with it!

    I’m going to go ahead and guess that you’re not going to delete this horrendous piece of rubbish?

    Then you went on to throw a fit about Political posts.

    After that you made two posts exclusively about Politics, no discernable theological content at all – Hugh MacKay on stopping the boats, and the Liberals proposed legislation on non-profits. You filed both of these under “Theology”

    You censored the artists images in the last thread for “un-necessary offensiveness”, but didnt censor the really objectionable things she said, or that Steve said. In a thread about free-speech.

    I was really surprised that you threatened to ban Bones, when the most offensive stuff was coming from the other side.

    Good luck for your new venture.

  2. irony is when you say something opposite to the truth, in order to highlight the truth.

    When you do something opposite to what you say, its called hypocrisy.

  3. In any case your definition of irony is limited and falls short of the additional meanings:

    3: a) : incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result; an event or result marked by such incongruity
    b) incongruity between a situation developed in a drama and the accompanying words or actions that is understood by the audience but not by the characters in the play —called also dramatic irony, tragic irony

    A simple way of putting it is that irony usually signals a difference between the appearance of things and reality. For instance, here is how Wikipedia defines it: “Ironic statements (verbal irony) often convey a meaning exactly opposite from their literal meaning. In ironic situations (situational irony), actions often have an effect exactly opposite from what is intended.”

    Therefore it is ironic, not hypocritical as I recognise it and don’t deny it!

  4. I can understand why you are sad Greg.
    And the comments on this page are a perfect example.

    You tried to start again, and even then, someone calls another a jerk after they’ve left.

    And even though you clearly said “I see the irony” Wazza couldn’t leave that alone, and started quoting old stuff.
    Then when you went further , he just came back and called you a hypocrite.

    Your answer was sensible to me.

    The thing I like about you is that while you get agro and come out with stuff you’re quick to admit it and leave things behind.

    I didn’t really read the super offensive thing that was said back there, but all I can say is that Steve took a lot for a long time before he got to that stage.

    Feel free to delete this comment anytime you like. I’ve always said that I have no problem with moderation and could care less if every post of mine was deleted.

    Not sure what wazza’s post about you moving over to singposts is about.

    Does that mean that this blog is finished and being restarted at singposts or is that a blog Wazza is starting by himself?

    In case you’re looking for an interesting article it was big news recently that Ulf Ekman who founded a charismatic mega church in Sweden and was internationally famous in those circles, announced to his old congregation that he and his wife would be becoming Roman Catholics. This is after 30 years of pastoring that famous charismatic church and after several years of “study, prayer and reflection”

    It’s certainly not something that happens very often and obviously perplexing for those who left Catholicism for charismatic churches.

    But given that he was a long standing respected bible teacher who preached in charismatic churches over the world for decades it will probably make people think.

    Probably should have put this in “About” but just wanted to say go for it and I think you did a good job of a ridiculously difficult task.

    Another interesting thing I read today is that North Korean Christians are praying that their leader (dictator) becomes a Christian. Amazing, because I would have been thinking more along the lines of coup or outside invasion. Given that Christians are being killed and abused it’s an amazing prayer.
    Shows how good Christians can become in the face of real persecution.

    Hope you had a good day.

  5. So do I get this right?
    Out of signposts people has come c3churchwatch, c3churchwatchwatch, c3churchwatchwatchwatch, and now singposts? Oh and group sects too,
    With the same people involved?

    The real question then is “are Christians and ex-Christians” just simply crazy?

  6. Said like an apologist for the Roman Catholic Church

    So really they’re just schismatics!

    Don’t worry. They’ll come back into the fold sooner or later.

  7. Well there are good Popes and bad Popes.
    Not sure about your spelling there, but maybe there will be a singposts demagogue called Pope Wazza soon…?

  8. For even more interesting news – esp for those of you who like Pope Francis but despise Kenneth Copeland….. on youtube you can check out a video message from the Pope to a Kenneth Copeland gathering and a reply back.

    So the Pope and Copeland can get on better than a lot of other folks. Interesting!

  9. lol
    Not sure where you’re heading with that Wazza, but I guess having one person here having authoring rights doesn’t really bother me, no.

    i guess i see running signposts as not hat serious as being the dictator of a country. In the end it’s a pretty big internet. And most websites have some kind of control.

    People take things and themselves too seriously.

  10. And you’ve given up even the pretence of trying to ensure eveyone is happy with any changes.

  11. The way this has all ended.

    It’s been interesting seeing the responses of people.

    I could elaborate, but it’s probably self evident.

  12. no – little boy, I took control of the blog and will not tolerate any abusive comments from here on in – so we never have another Steve and Bones shit fight on this blog. You just don;t happen to like it, that’s understandable, however the deal is done. Time to move on from this subject.

Comments are closed.