This is an UNOFFICIAL link site and message board for english speaking “open” discussions on the New Apostolic Church (NAC). We want this to be a neutral site for all opinions and hope that all participants recognize and respect opposing view points and are above profanity.

Unlike the official site, where everything is in oneness, over here various participants have strong opinions which may not agree with the official NAC party line, be warned. Open discussion means “within the confines of any rules that the Founder and Admins have deemed necessary to promote the stated purpose of this board”.

Thank you

Johann Bischoff

CA Leber releases a Statement Concerning the Message of CA Bischoff (the Botschaft)

DirkNow responds :

"... I have never seen anything like this statement. Endless equivocation. Craven, post-hoc rationalizations. And an undying refusal to call a spade a spade and label the botschaft for what it was: the deluded ravings of a senile megalomaniac.

Note also the way that Leber speaks out of both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, he is sorry for those few sentient beings that resisted the message and suffered as a result. But on the other, he holds out those that accepted the message and made preparations (undoubtedly including the vilification of the infidels) as the faithful souls whose obedience was exemplary. So which group was right, and which group was wrong? You can't have it both ways, unless you are the New Apostolic Church."

~ ~

Online Bible : NKJV Easy Reference : Bible Passage Lookup / Word Search

Find that word! Dictionary / Thesaurus Want to check your spelling? SpellCheck

Interesting Documents : NACBoard@faithweb

kbb's esnips site : NAC Publications, CAC Historical Documents and more

Official Site : NAC USA/Canada/Mexico NAC S Africa : NACCape NACSEA

NAC International : NAK.org NAC UK & Ireland : NACukie.org NAC Australia : newapostolic.org.au

Administrators' e-mail : Ken :kenlitzke@yahoo.com

Brenda : brenda_lk1@yahoo.com Rich : rvahlsing@rstarmail.com

RSS
Email

0 Points

Basic Rules Of Discussion and some Guidelines

Author	Comment
BrendaP	Basic Rules Of Discussion and some Guidelines		Lead	[-]
Posts: 7533 10/07/2006 11:06 Administrator	Tags : None Remove this ad I found a print amongst my papers at home and decided to post it again. Maybe it will refresh that insight into what it takes to have a successful discussion board, especially one where matters of faith are concerned. I urge all to have an open-minded approach when reading the various points and to evaluate whether perhaps we fit into one category or another and then, perhaps, our discussions will be more meaningful and not just a case of attack and defend. Firstly, some guidelines : To clarify the Boards stated purpose, it is NOT solely intended as a place for pro NAC discussions. Anti posts are welcome too. Also, the Boards stated purpose is NOT solely intended as a place for anti NAC discussions either. Pro posts are welcome too. It goes both ways. The Boards stated purpose is to be a neutral site for all opinions and discussions on the NAC. If there is more of one type than another, it is not due to what the administrators allow, but rather to the contributors and what they post. Posting of fraudulent or deceiving information, or gross manipulation of fact : Those who post controversial personal information about others (and using real names), must in very short order provide authenticable substantiation (quote sources, show documentation) or the post will be deleted. Those posting under their own real name will be granted greater flexibility, because they can be personally addressed by whomever they are providing information about. This will limit peoples ability to make unwarranted or unsupported attacks on Ministers for the sole purpose of hurting individuals or reputations. You can still anonymously post information of this type, provided you support it with some kind of credible evidence.
My Recent Posts
BrendaP	Re: Basic Rules Of Discussion	#1		[-]
Posts: 7533 10/07/2006 11:11 Administrator	Beliefs cannot be proven nor verified, which means you cannot invalidate your opponents arguments with regard to his logical denying of your assumptions. manipulatory means of debate. Withdrawing to a faith level once you no longer have any sensible arguments. Once youve withdrawn to a faith level, you can no longer be reached by reasoning arguments or logical conclusions. While you are welcome to argue about the content of what you believe (as long as it can be verified), you should not make an argument of your beliefs, as this comes down to the situation where a child asks for the reason why it has to do this or that and is then given the answer because I said so If someone complains about the harshness of truth being stated, dont forget that participation on the Board is voluntary. Those who feel that their faith might be attacked, dont forget : if it does not or cannot stand the rational thinking / conclusiveness or the intrinsic logic of the argument, then either you allow yourself to be convinced by the better argument, or you stubbornly leave. Opposing views can only be respected if they are or can be verified logically. One can only question ideas or behaviour by verifying their invalidity or illogicality, but NOT by simply disliking them. Please remember that argument, from a discussion point of view, does not necessarily mean a dispute. Synonyms are reasoning, debating, denoting, implication, meaning, proving, sifting Shaquille wrote on this thread : "The Board provides an outlet for views on the church, and is critical in developing the opinion that will influence the church in years to come. Understanding this fact will lead to more productive discussion."
My Recent Posts
BrendaP	Re: Basic Rules Of Discussion	#2		[-]
Posts: 7533 10/07/2006 11:13 Administrator	The Function Of Dialogue is to come to a mutual understanding between two parties. Such understanding cant be achieved unless you get down to a fundamental level. Frequently the discussions are seen to be very superficial usually more of debates than dialogue. They deal with beliefs but rarely get into the METHOD through which those beliefs came about and even rarer what needs those beliefs serve. If true dialogue is the goal then a different approach is necessary. To achieve mutual understanding, you have to understand the why and how of your own beliefs and those of your dialogue partner. This means understanding what belief formation method you and they are using and how your / their beliefs meet your / their needs. If you dont come to this understanding, a lot of discussion will just be wasted breath (or typing in this instance). Since our beliefs rest on these fundamentals, real dialogue is most likely impossible without understanding them. You might have a very different discussion with a person who places his/her trust in authority, compared to one who places his/her trust in their intuitive feelings. Another good place where to start is to question each other, and then to listen to the why and why not. The benefit to be gained depends on each persons attitude and needs. We all have needs and none of us can say we know it all.
My Recent Posts

This is NOT an official New Apostolic Church website! For official news or
information regarding the church, please contact:

**The New Apostolic Church * 1703 Peninsula Dr, Erie, PA 16505-4242 * (814) 833-6063**

e-mail NAC USA : communications@nac-usa.org

e-mail Peter Johanning, Media Secretary of the New Apostolic Church : peter.johanning@nak.org