The powers that be clearly want to clamp down much harder on social media interaction, judging by the GA Agenda item we just received. On first reading, it appears to give far greater subjective judgment to what would constitute irresponsible use of social media, by including quite subjectively defined concepts such as being “harsh” to its list of forbidden things on social media. No doubt the many CoG snowflakes amongst us will be the first to cry “harsh” and to accuse tellers of uncomfortable truths of being unloving.
They don’t want what comes with social media.So, sadly, they won’t reach the people that interact on social media.COG always 50 years behind________________
Would you mind posting the info for those of us not in the loop________________“Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.”
mcusercontent.com/98e1da87c6ba38bba6f45c48b/files/e523b2b2-8d2f-bab4-0795-9310431a7c1d/GA24_Agenda_rdx.pdfThe portion regarding Social Media use can be found on page B-59, or you can search for “Social Media” and find it within the PDF. The primarily troubling portion is the use of the terms, “harsh” and “demeaning” which are defined as “personal attacks,” by this motion. So, anyone whose comments might be considered “harsh” or “demeaning” could be accused and perhaps even subjected to ecclesiastical discipline, censure, or even trial based on such subjectively defined terms.
I don’t think it stands a chance. It sounds too much like censorship, and is too vague in its wording. As it is written, anyone could feel offended, deem posts a violation, and press charges against a minister.
Re: Censorship
I did not find “menclature” or any word similar on that page
Re: I did not find “menclature” or any word similar on that page
Thank you________________“Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.”
Once again, it would seem the CoG wants to go backwards instead of forwards. Heavy-handed, overreaching, strong arm attempts to “control” people never works. Furthermore, the entire proposed resolution could be summed up in “love your neighbor as yourself”________________“Hell will be filled with people that didn’t cuss, didn’t drink, and may even have been baptized. Why? Because none of those things makes someone a Christian.”
Sorry. that’s it. What does it mean? From Oxford:the devising or choosing of names for things, especially in a science or other discipline.the Linnean system of zoological nomenclaturethe body or system of names in a particular field.plural noun: nomenclaturesthe nomenclature of chemical compoundsFORMALthe term or terms applied to someone or something.
Sorry. that’s it. What does it mean? From Oxford:the devising or choosing of names for things, especially in a science or other discipline.the Linnean system of zoological nomenclaturethe body or system of names in a particular field.plural noun: nomenclaturesthe nomenclature of chemical compoundsFORMALthe term or terms applied to someone or something.“customers” was preferred to the original nomenclature “passengers.”
I hope you are right. It is very concerning that the EC felt this motion should be on the agenda.
Thank you! So was it harsh to rip the whole Exec Committee for very poor management of finances when they let an employee take a minimum of 1,000,000 in tithe dollars right from under their nose?Would I get brought up on charges for pointing that out today?We already know you get charges for posting someone’s picture approving of gay affirming communion. COG should just close down now if this happens. You can never say the Emperor has no clothes with that kind of rule.Find us an infallible Pope to run things.________________
Hereafter known as the TJ motion… ________________More of Him…less of me.twitter.com/camiracle77www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=691241499&ref=name
I hope you are right. It is very concerning that the EC felt this motion should be on the agenda. I feel like it is a reaction to a few people stirring things concerning Lee University and the charges that were filed against TJ on a couple of FB sites.
Agreed________________
I hope you are right. It is very concerning that the EC felt this motion should be on the agenda. On the COG FB site, Tom Sterbens revealed two VERY concerning things. Bishop Hill confirmed these facts, with his own post as well.1. The Executive Committee determined that conversation on the Excellent Ministry FB page needed to be reigned in.2. It was suggested that someone from headquarters MONITOR that site. It concerns me greatly, that conversations on a Facebook site would cause that much of a stir in Cleveland________________