Infinite Blogging

Tales of love, fertility and nourishing food.

The Reason for the Treason. October 24, 2006

Filed under: Uncategorized — Annette @ 5:01 am

It finally makes sense.  Remember the run-in I had with RCG at the beginning of the year?  I really couldn’t figure out why in the world they would be so concerned with what I was writing.  Looks like this is why:  They were doing intelligence-gathering on COG-related blogs so they could quote and criticize them in an article written for RCG youth – written by Kevin Denee.  Kevin and I were good friends and more or less grew up in the church together, and he dated one of my closest friends for years.  It looks like I escaped from being quoted in their article, although several other COG-related bloggers were not quite so fortunate.


12 Responses to “The Reason for the Treason.”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    I don’t know if you track your hits or not but I’ve found what appears to be them, ( how many people in Wadsworth Ohio are running searches on Church of God?) on quite often at times. From what I can tell they are the only group doing that. I’ve had others on once or twice but only when I mentioned something specific. For some reason RCG seems to be quite concerned about what is online. Someone must spend all day surfing the net at work. Where I come from that’s called loafing.

  2. Desiree Says:

    Oh Kevin… how disappointing. He was a good kid.

  3. Banjo Ben Says:

    Unfortunately the entire article is full of assumptions and generalizations that don’t apply in every case. It’s too bad some can’t see through the fallacious arguments (that’s a great word if I do say so myself 🙂 ).

  4. Karl Says:

    It’s doubtful though that on issues such as this one that you’re ever going to find problems that occur in every case. If blogs were all good and everyone had the best intentions, then yeah, no problem. But since you’ll never have things 100% in this world, you can only go the way of generalization to provide instruction (I’m not saying that I agree with the article, mostly because I didn’t read it.)

  5. Banjo Ben Says:

    Of course not, but the conclusion they reach with their argument is that no one in the church should have a blog or a public website of any kind unless it is strictly for professional reasons (perhaps there were a couple other exceptions that I don’t recall at the moment). The problem is that when you make a blanket statement such as this to cover everything, you’re essentially implying that the generalization holds all the time…which is simply not true.

    Basically, you could apply a similar argument to say that one should never drink alcohol. There are many dangers involved, and as ambassadors for Christ we should stay away from anything that could possibly draw us away. However, we know of course that that doesn’t have to be the case. The same is true with blogging.

  6. Charlie Says:

    Can anyone complete the following statement:

    “It’s not the THING that’s the sin…”

  7. Stace Says:

    “…it’s the wrong use of the thing that’s the sin.”

    Not sure if that’s the exact quote, but there’s the meaning. Didn’t HWA say that, or no?

    Anyway, its quite true.

  8. Kerr Says:

    “In the end, blogging for personal expression is a waste of time.”

    “Should teenagers and others in The Restored Church of God express themselves to the world through blogs? Because of the obvious dangers [obviously]; the clear biblical principles that apply [which I must have missed]; the fact that it gives one a voice [which is bad?]; that it is almost always idle words [almost always meaning…?]; that teens often do not THINK before they DO [stupid teens]; that it is acting out of boredom [always out of boredom, or maybe almost always?] and it is filled with appearances of evil [filled, to the brim] —personal blogging should not be done in the Church. It is clear that it is unnecessary [unnecessary for what?] and, in fact, dangerous on many levels.”

    How can you argue with that sound, Biblical instruction?

    And I agree with Ben. Using that type of super-quick over generalizing, you could say a lot of things…

    But I think Charlie pretty much put it to rest.

  9. Kerr Says:

    And I’m a little disappointed that nothing I wrote was quoted in there. C’mon, I had some pretty good stuff.

  10. Jokerr Says:

    I didn’t make it either…

  11. rakkav Says:

    I’ve been wanting to throw my two shekels in for a while. I’m late again (a couple of years late, in fact).

    In the Internet Age, practically anyone can be a publisher that wants to be. That’s a two-edged sword, to be sure, and for Church members and teens especially. But it can be used well, provided that the blogger (or Web site builder) has learned how to be governed both by God directly and by those whom God appoints over him. Having to balance both those demands at once (plus considering the impact on the reader as well) gives the best possible outside prod to the blogger (as to the researcher and writer for “official” publications) to “get it right”. The rest is up to the author.

    It would be hard for an organization that emphasizes human authority at the expense of other parts of God’s government to strike this balance, or to teach others to do so.

    (Hm, I wonder if my personal Web site was ever cited as a negative example by RCG. If memory serves, Dr. Robert Thiel’s was.)

  12. Infinity Says:

    Oh yes, they’ve never been big fans of Dr. Thiel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s