From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.religion.biblestudy moderated
Date: 8 Jan 93 20:46:01 GMT
Organization: SPSS Inc.

chrisf@brtph316.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Chris Fulmer) writes:

>In article <79365@hydra.gatech.EDU>, gs26@prism.gatech.EDU (Glenn R. Stone) writes:
>> 
>> The mod isn't going to allow questioning of some of the more basic,
>> and yet more complex, problems concerning this collection of works,
>> and he presumes there will be any real discussion?  Sounds like a
>> waste of bandwidth to me...  not that I'll have anything to do with
>> anything remotely related to the group anyway, but I'll vote against
>> it just on the principle that if you're not allowed to question 
>> *everything*, your search for truth is meaningless.  Censorship at
>> its very worst.
>
>Yow.  Well, there are plenty of non-newsgroup bible studies that go
>on, with a good deal of discussion.  So, I'd expect some real discussion.
>
>As for the question of whether you should question everything, I'd say
>that you should.  However, I'd also say that there are some forums where
>it may not be appropriate to do so.  In any discussion, including a Bible
>study, it is necessary to set some common ground on which to build.  The
>less common ground you have, the less in-depth the discussion can go.

A big problem here, though.  Even 'Christians' can differ drastically on
the Bible.  The opinions of a member of a liberal Protestant denomination
and a member of a conservative fundamentalist denomination may be like
night and day.  Even their views of Jesus Christ will differ.  I find
oftentimes that *my* reading of Scripture conforms more to what my good
Orthodox Jewish friends believe than to most other Christians.  Where would
that leave me?

In addition, you will find believing Christians who dispute inerrancy, who
support the P/E/D/J distinctions in Genesis, who have different canons
(which canon will be used) and different views on the applicability of
non-canonical sources.  All from believing Christians.

>Looking at it from a mathematical perspective, it'd be like having a
>newsgroup dedicated to a discussion of Euclidian Geometry, when some of
>the participants believe that parallel lines do cross. 

There is a big difference here, though.  Mathmatics is a science, with a
defined set of parameters that are accepted by mathematicians as a basis
for their discussions.  In general, there is no deviation on basic
princples.  Christians can't even agree on the basic theology.

>There have been arguments made along the lines of "What about people 
>who believe such-n-such?," where "such-n-such" conflicts with the
>basic premises of the newsgroup.  Those people would naturally not
>be able to contribute, unless they would be able to make arguments
>based on the premises of the newsgroup.  (Of course, there's the
>question of whether they'd want to participate, anyway....)
Sure they would.  There are numerous possible readings of certain texts in
the Bible, depending on how one views the application.  For example,
married ministers and/or women ministers.  Etc.

>As for the question of censorship, I fail to see how creating a
>NEW newsgroup, even if it does have some restrictions on it, can
>be a form of censorship.

I don't see it as censorship per say, but if I want to disagree with
something that is said, and I happen to be outside of the mainstream on a
particular reading, will my comments be accepted?

I propose making the group generic, moderated and with a charter that
allows anyone interested in the Bible to contribute, no matter what their
views.  The moderator should allow a wide disparity of views.

As I've said, I'm willing to moderate, if I can set aside the time to do it
properly.

 -Steve
--
  The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                         -------------------
   adams@spss.com                                  Phone: (312) 329-3522
   Steve Adams        "Space-age cybernomad"       Fax:   (312) 329-3558
Newsgroups: news.groups