Would you like to be a TWeb moderator?

[dizzle]

Okay if you are thinking that perhaps you would like to assist the site in that way we have a few requirements.

First, you need to agree with the Statement of Faith located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/faq.php?faq=important_notices#faq_mission_statement).

Also you need to have been around a bit and posted and gotten a feel for the site and its philosopy to be sure you can support this mission.

We have needs in the following forums which ideally do require some speciality or at least ambition to make it a specialty....

Islam
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society
Judaism
Latter Day Saints

In those areas we need someone who would be dedicated to the development of those new forums......

The other area we have need is the Library and specifically the Book of the Month club. This would require leading monthly discussion on books of various interests, fiction and nonfiction, but carefully remembering the Christian outlook and worldview of the forum and its leadership.

All interested persons should write ddw@theologyweb.com.

Please know that any acceptance is not based upon anything person but to have the right fit for the job. It is a hard thing to advertise for positions because we do not want any feeling to ever be hurt if the timing or the fit at this time is just not right. Thank you for your interest!

[Rusty T]

Just a quick question:

Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, & Oriental Orthodox are precluded from being moderators? Seems strange that TWEB has eliminated potentially over 1 billion 300 million believers in Jesus Christ as moderators.

[dizzle]

What do you mean? Our SoF does not say that Scripture is the sole source of authority, but the final source. We would not eliminate someone who held tradition as authorative as long as they held Scripture to be supreme over all. We even as protestants hold creeds to be authoratative.

[Rusty T]

Then you answered my question. Thank you.

[NSMinistries]

The other area we have need is the Library and specifically the Book of the Month club. This would require leading monthly discussion on books of various interests, fiction and nonfiction, but carefully remembering the Christian outlook and worldview of the forum and its leadership.


I can help as have been by locating books and Bibles. Just let me know if you guy's need research in that area...

[dizzle]

Thank you NSM! If we have not thanked you lately for your assistance to this site, let me please do that again now.

[NSMinistries]

I don't know how you guy's do it. This place just keeps getting better and beter... Thank you.

[spl_cadet]

What do you mean? Our SoF does not say that Scripture is the sole source of authority, but the final source. We would not eliminate someone who held tradition as authorative as long as they held Scripture to be supreme over all. We even as protestants hold creeds to be authoratative.

That excludes Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy though, as we hold Tradition to be equal to Scripture.

[dizzle]

Well anyone who did, that would exclude such. That is our convictions for moderators. Of course that does not exclude participation, but that is our moderator requirements. I would ask that if further discussion or dispute on that point is desired that maybe the Locker Room is appropriate. We have a need for some moderators, and this would not be a debate thread. I do appreciate your clarification though Cadet. You know we have not been a Catholic bashing site. I really thought don't want to get into a debate over our SoF and overshadow our need right now.

[Bob Jenkins]

Well anyone who did, that would exclude such. That is our convictions for moderators. Of course that does not exclude participation, but that is our moderator requirements. I would ask that if further discussion or dispute on that point is desired that maybe the Locker Room is appropriate. We have a need for some moderators, and this would not be a debate thread. I do appreciate your clarification though Cadet. You know we have not been a Catholic bashing site. I really thought don't want to get into a debate over our SoF and overshadow our need right now.
Have you got something less than moderator where the affirmation is not needed but a desire is assist TWeb is present?

[dizzle]

Yes Bob we do. I appreciate that you can respect our requirements for moderators, but let us get with you on some other stuff. Or if you have any ideas get with us, we would really appreciate it.

[Bob Jenkins]

Yes Bob we do. I appreciate that you can respect our requirements for moderators, but let us get with you on some other stuff. Or if you have any ideas get with us, we would really appreciate it.
Great!!

[dizzle]

Please don't let me forget Bob. I get so crazy sometimes. We are working on site development ideas that we could really use some help in as well as some advertising ventures.

[Bob Jenkins]

Please don't let me forget Bob. I get so crazy sometimes. We are working on site development ideas that we could really use some help in as well as some advertising ventures.
It's been on my mind for two-three months now - I'm hardly likely to forget.

One idea I had was a less intensive section for kids which I am hardly able to form or assist. Perhaps it could be more of an off-shoot rather than at a forum level. High schoolers seem to be right at home in the forum sections but I thought this would extend the age lower. I think it would be a sizeable effort but it might fit in the back of your mind.

[dizzle]

Always, anyone, please give us any ideas you have. And sometimes things take a while, for instance, this selectable skin thing was somethiong brought up soon after we started the site, as well as having something pink and purdy for the ladies.

[$cirisme]

I want to be a TWeb moderator! :idea:

Oh wait :shifty: :metro:

[yxboom]

DDW forgot to say, place your suggestions in the Front Desk (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=21)

[dizzle]

I have gotten some really good feedback and reactions!!! Everyone who wrote, I will get back to you in some form soon.

While I am at it, I might as well throw open the door.... if you enjoy science (eek!) we also have a need in that area.

[Gilgaron]

I have gotten some really good feedback and reactions!!! Everyone who wrote, I will get back to you in some form soon.

While I am at it, I might as well throw open the door.... if you enjoy science (eek!) we also have a need in that area.
What do you need in science? It's usually the section I read the most :teeth: I can lend a hand if it is something I don't need to accept your SoF for. Around midterms my time gets rather short, of course, but it's nothing terribly prohibitive. Not yet at least... :read:

[NoeticPenguin]

I would love to help lead the "book of the month" project. (I've even got a couple of books that I think would be great!)

If I can be of help please let me know.

I do need to say however, that I give authority to Tradition as well as Scripture. I find that Tradition and scripture rarely if ever contradict each other.

-Pkj.

[dizzle]

Hey everyone - thank you so much for the interest. We will be making some new moderator announcements soon. We have filled the position for the Book of the Month thingy yesterday as well as finding someone for the LDS forum (yes names will be forthcoming!). I believe we may have found someone in the JW section as well. Those areas do require persons with some specialized knowedge. Even though we have persons for those two areas we would be interested in other applicants who have the knowledge and interest in devoting to the area.

We still need moderators for Islam and I did not mention before the Judaism forum, and of course in the science forums.

Gilgaron, thank you so much for your interest, but committement to our SoF is a requriement. There has been some controversy on this in the past, but we make no secret that our ultimate mission is ultimately a spiritual one, and specifically a Christian one. I do though so appreciate your post.

[Jaltus]

Gilgaron,

Just because you do not fit our mod requirements does not mean you cannot do special things there. Feel free to post ideas for science in the Front Desk or else PM DDW, GrayPilgrim, or myself (we try not to bother Boom or WUC since they are busy programming, or sleeping, they never tell us which). Any ideas are welcome. Often times some of the special things posters want to do can be done without being a mod.

- Jaltus

[Gilgaron]

If I come up with any interesting ideas I'll be sure to let you know.

[themuzicman]

Okay if you are thinking that perhaps you would like to assist the site in that way we have a few requirements.

First, you need to agree with the Statement of Faith located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/faq.php?faq=important_notices#faq_mission_statement).

Also you need to have been around a bit and posted and gotten a feel for the site and its philosopy to be sure you can support this mission.

We have needs in the following forums which ideally do require some speciality or at least ambition to make it a specialty....

Islam
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society
Judaism
Latter Day Saints

In those areas we need someone who would be dedicated to the development of those new forums......

The other area we have need is the Library and specifically the Book of the Month club. This would require leading monthly discussion on books of various interests, fiction and nonfiction, but carefully remembering the Christian outlook and worldview of the forum and its leadership.

All interested persons should write ddw@theologyweb.com.

Please know that any acceptance is not based upon anything person but to have the right fit for the job. It is a hard thing to advertise for positions because we do not want any feeling to ever be hurt if the timing or the fit at this time is just not right. Thank you for your interest!


What? No imminence required? :wink:

Michael

[dizzle]

Only in eschatology

[elysian]

I am not Roman Catholic (ex-Catholic, long story) but perhaps we should have a forum specifically for the RC's and Orthodox, moderated by RC's and Orthodox. We have some strong RC and Orthodox apologists here (Cadet, George Blaisdell come to mind) and they understand what is fact and what is fiction about those sects better than most Protestants (even the ex-Catholics like me) do. Because so many Catholic and Orthodox traditions and beliefs are very foreign and bizarre sounding to people raised exclusively in Protestant traditions, this could be a beneficial learning experience for all of us. We might not agree but at least 1. we might better understand why we disagree, and 2. we will be compelled to understand and to learn what we believe and why.

Just a thought. :pray:

[Origen]

Hey DD -

I am a bit of a specialist in the Watchtower department. Let me know if I can help moderate...I would be happy to assist in any way I can.

- Origen

[johnnybanano]

I'd love to help out, but, of the forums listed I certainly don't condsider myself to have extensive knowledge. I've learned a lot since I've been here at TWeb and it's only the beginning. I'd be more than happy to help out in the lighter forums such as the Dorm or the Chapel or something like that. . .perhaps there's someone in those who has more extensive knowledge of these other topics. Other than that, there's not much I can do. But you guys have been a great help to me so I'd like to return the favor if I am able..

[Origen]

I second Elysian.

There are several issues in Catholicism/Orthodoxy I would be interested in discussing, and someone like SPL would be great to moderate.

- Origen

[dizzle]

Thank you everyone for your interest!!!

I have been in contact with the applicants for the specific forums to discuss.

At this time we are happy to announce that Amazing Rando has been promoted to co-moderate the Library and also to assist in the Amphitheater.

Troutk13 has been promoted to oversee the LDS section.

We are still in need of an Islam and Watchtower moderator.
We have had some interest in which we have asked that a bit more time be spent posting so that we can get to know each other better..... to those please do get in touch with me again.

If anyone else is interested in those areas let me know, as well again as anyone interested in science.

Bob had come up with a way to assist us in spreading the word through flyers and for that we are very grateful.

[Xmansmommy]

We need another mod for ITT. :frown:

[Xavier]

We need another mod for ITT. :frown:
:teeth:

[Rubia Warren]

I wish so badly that I could be a moderator. :frown:

[Socrates]

That What do you mean? Our SoF does not say that Scripture is the sole source of authority, but the final source. We would not eliminate someone who held tradition as authorative as long as they held Scripture to be supreme over all. We even as protestants hold creeds to be authoratative.
That excludes Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy though, as we hold Tradition to be equal to Scripture.
Apparently not, because Jezz is an AA and Eastern Orthodox, and believes that the Church had the authority to reinterpret the 4th Commandment.

TWeb mission statement
Scriptures
All of the Scriptures (the Bible consisting of Old and New Testaments) to be the final authoritative source for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness.

As SPL said, this does seem to rule out RCs and EOs -- not as Christians but as mods.

[dizzle]

We have discussed this thoroughly with Jezz and amongst ourselves and it was never our intent, nor does that guideline, rule our RCC or Eastern Orthodox as moderators. If as a matter of conscience a RCC feels that it does, we are notone to argue with their conscience, but as an orthodox person, Jezz is comfortable with our intent and agrees with our assessment.

Boom and I when writing this statement had explicit conversations with each other that well-grounded RCC would not be excluded on that fact though they as a matter of conscience may think so, it is not inevitable.

We are very pleased to have Jezz as an Orthodox representative on our leadership team.

[Socrates]

That's strange. "The church had the authority to change the 2nd and 4th commandments" does not seem compatible with "The Scriptures [are] the final authoritative source for ... instruction in righteousness." Another point is that RCC and EO have books they call Scripture which would not have been in view in TWeb's mission statement. After all, most evangelicals use the word "Scripture" to refer to 66 books only.

[Da Lone-Warrior]

Commandments differ from edicts by virtue of the fact that they leave room for interpretation of the exact meaning.

I.e., the commandment thou shall not kill did not mean that the Hebrew people were not able to defend themselves or claim the land of Canaan for themselves.

We can say it was thou shall not murder, but the Bible doesn't specify in exhaustive detail what is murder and what may be a justified killing that is the lesser of two evils in the world we live in.

ie., willy-nilly churches make determinations as to the right application of the ten-commandments.

dlw

[Socrates]

I.e., the commandment thou shall not kill did not mean that the Hebrew people were not able to defend themselves or claim the land of Canaan for themselves.

We can say it was thou shall not murder,
Yes we can because that is what ratsach means. It's hardly our fault that the King Jimmy mistranslated it to "kill".

... but the Bible doesn't specify in exhaustive detail what is murder and what may be a justified killing that is the lesser of two evils in the world we live in.
It does so.

ie., willy-nilly churches make determinations as to the right application of the ten-commandments.
Different from the explicit claim that they had the authority over Scripture in changing the commandment. That's one of the favorite ways they bash Protestants, although they haven't a clue of the real reason many protestants go to church on Sundays.

[dizzle]

This is not the place for that, have some common sense folks.

[Socrates]

Let's put it on record -- I greatly appreciate the vast majority of Jezz's posts for their incisive apologetics.

[Amazing Rando]

Me like Jezz. Jezz smart! :duh:

[dizzle]

Jezz as the Orthodox representative on our leadership team has discussed this very thoroughly with us, and I will leave it to him as someone holding that paradigm to be a better judge than I as to the compability. He heard our heart and agreed.

[Jaltus]

Don't become a mod, once you are in you can never leave!

Oh no, DDW's bully-boys are after me.....RUN FOR IT MARTY!

[flipper]

I read the mission statement. I'm interested to know what the given reason is why an atheist, pagan, or agnostic couldn't be a moderator. Would it be seen as rewarding godlessness in some way?

I don't have any complaints about how moderating is done, nor do I have any interest in becoming one (no really, i'm not just pulling a Hilary). I'm just interested in the whys, and whether there is any merit in the idea of a community being led by cross-representation of its membership?

[dizzle]

Hey Flipper, we have addressed this a bunch of times, and IIRC, though I know it is hard to remember every post, once with you back when the board was first started. Boom made an analogy at that time about how anyone can be a citizen of the United States but only a native-born could be President and that satisfied you at that time. Forgive me if I am wrong. This forum is a Christian ministry at its core and we as leadership see it as a spiritual undertaking, and thus with that in mind, I think it becomes apparent why. The forum was always intended to allow a wide range of views to be discussed but we have never hidden whatsover that our personal goal of leadership is the promotion of Christianity - thus this is an evangelistic endeavor - that is a core command of the Christian life. All of our featured articles, ads, ministries, affiliations, are all done with this in mind. In so doing we reach out to those who are not of the same faith, and interact with them as valued persons (and you know personally Flipper the tremendous amount of friendship affection I have for you), but the leadership is a bond of spirit and faith - they are my brothers and sisters in the Lord and that is simply how this thing "works."

I hope you do not mind Flipper if I ask that any further questions about this be taken up with us in PM. This has been the cause for the stirring of great dissension on the forum before, and I do not wish for that situation again - it resulted in the moderation of a member who just could not accept our decision. We are more than happy to discuss our reasons, but great debate over it is not productive for this is a non-negotiable. I hope that we as leadership have been responsive to suggestions on things that we are amenable to modify and change.

[Jezz]

Let's put it on record -- I greatly appreciate the vast majority of Jezz's posts for their incisive apologetics.
And let me put it on the record, that I greatly appreciate the vast majority of Socrates' posts for the same reason. Even some of the ones that are aggressive. I further wish to reemphasise a fact that seems to have gotten lost somewhere - I have never been completely against the use of aggression. If anyone claims anything else, let them be anathema... :wink:

That's strange. "The church had the authority to change the 2nd and 4th commandments" does not seem compatible with "The Scriptures [are] the final authoritative source for ... instruction in righteousness."
I would appreciate it if you did not misrepresent me.

I did not say that the Church had the authority to change commandments. I said that they had authority to reinterpret commandments. And in point of fact, that is not strictly correct either - what I should have said is that they have the authority to interpret (not reinterpret) the commandments. My apologies for not making this clear the first time - I'm still fairly new to this Orthodox stuff. :smile:

As to the actual question of authority of Scripture vs Tradition: as Dee Dee already pointed out, when I first started coming around to Orthodoxy, it was mentioned that the SoF may be a barrier for some Catholics. Therefore at this time, I checked it out with upper leadership to see whether or not it would be appropriate for me to continue as moderator, or if I should step down. After some discussion to clarify the intent behind the wording, we came to a mutual understanding that we were all happy with. As Dee Dee et al were the authors behind the SoF, I see no reason to doubt their judgment in this area.

For those who are interested, the resolution to the apparent contradiction between the SoF and the RCC/EO doctrine on Scripture vs Tradition is something like this: What the SoF really means is not "Scripture is the final authority", but rather "the authority of Scripture is final". In other words, no doctrine or tradition of the Church should contradict Scripture (correctly interpreted).

It is in this sense that it was intended that the authority of Scripture was to be considered "final" - ie, that if a doctrine disagrees with Scripture, then it is to be discarded. And an RC/EO Christian should have no problem agreeing to this statement, if they have properly understood the role of Scripture within their respective Churches. And this is entirely consistent with the intended meaning of the SoF, as explained by Dee Dee.

The confusion here, I think, is that the SoF as it is written seems to imply that the Scripture is the sole authority, and this is not the case. One must recognise other authorities. In the case of EO/RCC, they recognise the authority of their respective Churches to interpret the Scripture - in the case of a Protestant such as Soc, they must recognise the authority of whatever interpretative context they use (eg, the grammatical-historical method) to interpret the Bible, and decide the canon, etc.

There is also the complicating factor that the authority of the Church temporally precedes the authority of Scripture (because the Church and its tradition existed before the NT, and it was the Church and its tradition that gave the NT its authoritative status). So on the temporal scale of authority, the authority of the Church is more important than the authority of Scripture - but in the doctrinal sense, the authority of Scripture is higher than that of the Church hierarchy.

Another point is that RCC and EO have books they call Scripture which would not have been in view in TWeb's mission statement. After all, most evangelicals use the word "Scripture" to refer to 66 books only.
In light of the above, this doesn't really matter. All three of the RCC, EO and Protestant consider those 66 books to be authoritative. So again, the question is only relevant if the SoF implies that only these books are the "final authority" - which, as I explained above, is not the intended meaning. An RCC or EO should certainly be able to agree with the idea that no doctrine of the Church should contradict anything in one of the 66 books of the Protestant canon.

In summary, the SoF (properly understood) does not conflict with EO or RC teaching on the role of Tradition and Scripture (properly understood).

[flipper]

#45
Hey Flipper, we have addressed this a bunch of times, and IIRC, though I know it is hard to remember every post, once with you back when the board was first started. Boom made an analogy at that time about how anyone can be a citizen of the United States but only a native-born could be President and that satisfied you at that time. Forgive me if I am wrong. This forum is a Christian ministry at its core and we as leadership see it as a spiritual undertaking, and thus with that in mind, I think it becomes apparent why. The forum was always intended to allow a wide range of views to be discussed but we have never hidden whatsover that our personal goal of leadership is the promotion of Christianity - thus this is an evangelistic endeavor - that is a core command of the Christian life. All of our featured articles, ads, ministries, affiliations, are all done with this in mind. In so doing we reach out to those who are not of the same faith, and interact with them as valued persons (and you know personally Flipper the tremendous amount of friendship affection I have for you), but the leadership is a bond of spirit and faith - they are my brothers and sisters in the Lord and that is simply how this thing "works."

I hope you do not mind Flipper if I ask that any further questions about this be taken up with us in PM. This has been the cause for the stirring of great dissension on the forum before, and I do not wish for that situation again - it resulted in the moderation of a member who just could not accept our decision. We are more than happy to discuss our reasons, but great debate over it is not productive for this is a non-negotiable. I hope that we as leadership have been responsive to suggestions on things that we are amenable to modify and change.


No, I remember asking a year or so ago. I will admit to entertaining a vague hope that this might one day change which is why I brought it back up as the forum has grown and matured (in the best sense of the word).

However, I understand the reasoning and your explanation was a fair one. Also, I was unaware of previous controversy in this area or I wouldn't have raised it. So anyway, it's answered to my satisfaction.

[dizzle]

Hey thanks Flip! Aren't you flattered that I remember your posts so well :teeth:

[Kenny]

I wish so badly that I could be a moderator. :frown:

I wish you could be too. You seem like such a cool person. I wish you believed in historic orthodox Christianity and affirmed the Trinity. As it stands, though, I am glad that belief in the Trinity is a requirement. I consider the Trinity to be one of the most important doctrines of our faith.

God Bless,
Kenny

[Amazing Rando]

I wish you could be too. You seem like such a cool person. I wish you believed in historic orthodox Christianity and affirmed the Trinity. As it stands, though, I am glad that belief in the Trinity is a requirement. I consider the Trinity to be one of the most important doctrines of our faith.

God Bless,
Kenny

:shocked: Umm... Kenny? Can you support that? Can you show somewhere where Rubia says she doesn't believe in the Trinity?

[Jaltus]

AR,

She says it all over the place.

[Amazing Rando]

Oh... well, that's news to me. Guess I don't hang out in the spam places enough.

[Christianotaku]

if you still need moderators :wink:

[Queen]

if you still need moderators :wink:

:ai:

[kafka]

well whaddya know, i agree with your statement of faith.

:shifty:

[robert65]

I thinks a tad more expeience and seasoning are required then some have. :brood:

[kafka]

:lol: Your absolutely right. To misquote Groucho Marx, "I'd be a part of no group that would have me as a moderator..."

[Christianotaku]

Ive been moderator in forums and chat rooms before I take my duties very seriously

[$cirisme]

if you still need moderators :wink:
Okay if you are thinking that perhaps you would like to assist the site in that way we have a few requirements.

First, you need to agree with the Statement of Faith located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/faq.php?faq=important_notices#faq_mission_statement).

Also you need to have been around a bit and posted and gotten a feel for the site and its philosopy to be sure you can support this mission.

We have needs in the following forums which ideally do require some speciality or at least ambition to make it a specialty....

Islam
Watchtower Bible and Tract Society
Judaism
Latter Day Saints

In those areas we need someone who would be dedicated to the development of those new forums......

The other area we have need is the Library and specifically the Book of the Month club. This would require leading monthly discussion on books of various interests, fiction and nonfiction, but carefully remembering the Christian outlook and worldview of the forum and its leadership.

All interested persons should write ddw@theologyweb.com.

Please know that any acceptance is not based upon anything person but to have the right fit for the job. It is a hard thing to advertise for positions because we do not want any feeling to ever be hurt if the timing or the fit at this time is just not right. Thank you for your interest!

Emphasis mine.

[Rubia Warren]

Oh... well, that's news to me. Guess I don't hang out in the spam places enough.
I usually don't talk about it in the spam areas.... but nope I'm not a trinitarian. :blush:

Kenny- thanks, that was nice. :rubia: