A plea to return to scripture.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
OMC said:
I hear your concerns.
If anything in my tone made it sound like I was claiming authority, or expecting people to treat my words as the standard, then that tone was wrong — and I accept that.”

“The letter wasn’t written to elevate me.
It was written to call out attitudes that damage how Scripture is handled — including attitudes I’m not immune to myself.”

“You’re right — this is a forum, not a classroom.
People here are diverse, blunt, emotional, inconsistent, and sometimes unkind.
I don’t expect anyone to treat me as a teacher, and I’m not asking anyone to submit to my words.”

“If my style ever felt evasive, too polished, or too confident, that’s something I need to correct.
I’m not above the same failures I warn others about.”

“My aim is not to be taken seriously — my aim is to keep the conversation anchored in Scripture.
If my tone ever obscured that, then the tone needs adjusting, not the people.”
Click to expand...

Then don't ID as a teacher. Share your insight, knowledge and if you have wisdom, that too. I guess it's too late for that though. :unsure:

A teacher, if called by God, has authority. A gift even. The attitudes are real enough but just think (I sometimes reflect on this) that the same people writing here that make people raise their eyebrows, may sit beside you in church and their little heads are just filled with all manner of the same things they write here. Although I see u don't go to church.

Well, carry on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Churchgoer
CS1 said:
no nobody does however why did you provide them? Please correct me if I am wrong but your post would have had the same effect without you giving them would it not? Or was it given as a mean to show all you have authority and learned or was it used to intimidate? Or validate your post. If you were not seeking to be elevated, why did you? Could not responsibility been addressed without your Credentials?
Click to expand...
the credentials weren’t there to elevate me.
They were there to identify me.”
“A corrective letter should never be anonymous.
If I’m going to speak strongly,
I should also be accountable for the words.”

“The letter would have had the same message without the credentials — yes.
But without a signature, it could look like another faceless rebuke.
I wasn’t trying to intimidate or validate myself.
I was simply owning the correction.”

“Responsibility doesn’t require credentials — but accountability does require a name.
That’s all it was.”
 
OMC said:
From AI, to a bot, back to AI, now a devil. sigh
Click to expand...

O, if your going to spend alot of time here, you need to get familiar with the ignore option. It takes alot to give up on other called out one, but you'll sense there are some that might be here to just muddy Gods word.

I have a handful on ignore, we can't do much with someone who desires to be willingly ignorant.
 
OMC said:
the credentials weren’t there to elevate me.
They were there to identify me.”
“A corrective letter should never be anonymous.
If I’m going to speak strongly,
I should also be accountable for the words.”

“The letter would have had the same message without the credentials — yes.
But without a signature, it could look like another faceless rebuke.
I wasn’t trying to intimidate or validate myself.
I was simply owning the correction.”

“Responsibility doesn’t require credentials — but accountability does require a name.
That’s all it was.”
Click to expand...
I agree with that point however, your name cannot be verified. So to render honor where honor is due. Your credentialing is univariable. as far aa a faceless rebuke you have User Chat name as we all do. And the thread originator is fully identified. You could have added to your personal account that all can click on and see your marital status, age and past post. But you gave your name and your doctorate credentialing. I checked and it was no existent. That raised more questions for me.

“Responsibility doesn’t require credentials — but accountability does require a name.
That’s all it was.”

OMC would have been more than enough in this setting.
 
Watchman22 said:
O, if your going to spend alot of time here, you need to get familiar with the ignore option. It takes alot to give up on other called out one, but you'll sense there are some that might be here to just muddy Gods word.

I have a handful on ignore, we can't do much with someone who desires to be willingly ignorant.
Click to expand...
I won’t ignore anyone. As long as today can still be called today, I’ll keep trying.
 
CS1 said:
I agree with that point however, your name cannot be verified. So to render honor where honor is due. Your credentialing is univariable. as far aa a faceless rebuke you have User Chat name as we all do. And the thread originator is fully identified. You could have added to your personal account that all can click on and see your marital status, age and past post. But you gave your name and your doctorate credentialing. I checked and it was no existent. That raised more questions for me.

“Responsibility doesn’t require credentials — but accountability does require a name.
That’s all it was.”

OMC would have been more than enough in this setting.
Click to expand...
“I’m here to share Scripture. If my signature distracted from that, then it shouldn’t have been there. God’s Word matters — I don’t.”
 
OMC said:
“I’m here to share Scripture. If my signature distracted from that, then it shouldn’t have been there. God’s Word matters — I don’t.”
Click to expand...
well i have a question for you sir, with such a strong rebuke from the word of God and the truth you did provide your credentials. Do you think it is wrong that they can't be verified. Or would say to all I would prefer to keep my name private and personal information.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Churchgoer and pinebeach
OMC said:
I won’t ignore anyone. As long as today can still be called today, I’ll keep trying.
Click to expand...

Example: when I first came in here, i was not only eager to know Jesus better, I was eager to share what I've learned from my g ofted teacher.

Whenever i would mention his name 3 or 4 members would relentlessly drag him through the mud. They didn't know a thing about him or his teachings, but just went crazy when I mentioned him, disrupting my threads over and over.

You met my teacher in person, I think you'd would agree he had different teaching methods, but did deserve that kind of treatment.

They didn't stop doing it when I put them on ignore, but I didn't have to look at it anymore.
 
CS1 said:
well i have a question for you sir, with such a strong rebuke from the word of God and the truth you did provide your credentials. Do you think it is wrong that they can't be verified. Or would say to all I would prefer to keep my name private and personal information.
Click to expand...
“This is a public forum, and under both the First and Fourth Amendments I’m under no obligation to provide personal information.
Scripture also instructs me to act with prudence (Prov 22:3) and to guard what is entrusted to me (Prov 4:23).
So I decline to share personal details — not out of secrecy, but out of wisdom.”
If people disagree with what I post, that’s just how it is. They have a block option, or so I’m told—feel free to use it. I’ll keep sharing non-threatening, constitutionally protected material in this public forum. Listen if you want, block me if you don’t.
I bid you good day sir.
 
OMC said:
“This is a public forum, and under both the First and Fourth Amendments I’m under no obligation to provide personal information.
Scripture also instructs me to act with prudence (Prov 22:3) and to guard what is entrusted to me (Prov 4:23).
So I decline to share personal details — not out of secrecy, but out of wisdom.”
If people disagree with what I post, that’s just how it is. They have a block option, or so I’m told—feel free to use it. I’ll keep sharing non-threatening, constitutionally protected material in this public forum. Listen if you want, block me if you don’t.
I bid you good day sir.
Click to expand...
In many threads I appreciate omc s good manner.

If you can just write ✍ by yourself, without AI edit, involved, it will be better for me personally.

But maybe others and you like the AI part, then to each its own. I respect everyone s different preference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Delvianna
Churchgoer said:
In many threads I appreciate omc s good manner.

If you can just write ✍ by yourself, without AI edit, involved, it will be better for me personally.

But maybe others and you like the AI part, then to each its own. I respect everyone s different preference.
Click to expand...
I can’t communicate without assistance, and I can’t be the only person in the world dealing with this kind of issue.
 
Churchgoer said:
In many threads I appreciate omc s good manner.

If you can just write ✍ by yo
Click to expand...

Churchgoer said:
urself, without AI edit, involved, it will be better for me personally.

But maybe others and you like the AI part, then to each its own. I respect everyone s different preference.
Click to expand...

Im going to say this for you to see omc.

I asked you that same question, because it was hard for me to see how someone could answer so intelligently so fast, without copy and pasting from AI.

You kind of blew it off, and said you have never heard of AI before. Which that answer in this day and age didn't help your case.

So maybe you can clear that up?
 
Watchman22 said:
Im going to say this for you to see omc.

I asked you that same question, because it was hard for me to see how someone could answer so intelligently so fast, without copy and pasting from AI.

You kind of blew it off, and said you have never heard of AI before. Which that answer in this day and age didn't help your case.

So maybe you can clear that up?
Click to expand...
Which thread i said I have never heard of AI?
 
OMC said:
“This is a public forum, and under both the First and Fourth Amendments I’m under no obligation to provide personal information.
Scripture also instructs me to act with prudence (Prov 22:3) and to guard what is entrusted to me (Prov 4:23).
So I decline to share personal details — not out of secrecy, but out of wisdom.”
If people disagree with what I post, that’s just how it is. They have a block option, or so I’m told—feel free to use it. I’ll keep sharing non-threatening, constitutionally protected material in this public forum. Listen if you want, block me if you don’t.
I bid you good day sir.
Click to expand...
that is right. I am not saying you have to do it, I was asking you why you did. The First and Fourth Amendments also have what is called freedom the press which allows one to verify one claims for the purpose of truth. Yet you shared personal details willing did so, and now do not want validate your claim. That's to bad. Thanks . Doctor No,
 
  • Like
Reactions: Caan
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back