I have no problem accepting warnings, just not from people on the internet when I don't have a clue who they are or what their motives are. In my opinion an internet forum isn't a place for such things. To me it reeks of someone only out to impress.
Well - we have to use discernment. I am only saying that we should guard against making "automatic judgments" about people when we do not yet know enough about them.
Why be so quick to do damage to a relationship between you and them if it would actually turn out to be a good thing...?
There are many people on here I do not know well enough yet - but, I am not going to "start out" making assumption-based "automatic judgments" about them - if/when they prove to have made a serious departure from those things I know to be right-proper-and-correct - then, by virtue of that discernment - I will modify my assessment of them in an appropriate way. But, I see no reason to make enemies "at the get go" for no reason.
The key thing here is discernment.
In general, I trust my 'discernment' ability (not that I cannot ever be fooled).
I try to befriend folks unless-and-until they give me a good reason to do differently.
When it comes to 'warnings' - do the same exact thing that you would when it comes to anything else - be like the Berean - verify what is being said. And, the point here is - let it be about what is posted more than the person who posted it. In other words, take it for what it is worth - "eat the meat and spit out the bones" - however you wish to think about it - it all comes back to discernment.
That is - 'discernment' coupled with:
Romans 12:
18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
If you give people a bit of leeway, they will show you who and what they are soon enough. However, if you make unfounded assumptions about them - then act on those assumptions - you are likely to cause very unnecessary animosity, conflict, strife, etc.
People need to have people in their own geographical location who know one another and who can support one another; that's why the Lord instituted the local church. The internet is no substitute for the local church regardless of how much some people would like it to be.
I totally agree.
Nonetheless - we do in fact have "unavoidable" communication - on the phone - on the internet - etc. - with people we do not know. Why would we conduct ourselves - and use discernment - any different for any of the avenues that we use to communicate with others?
We know for a fact that we do not know enough about most people we meet face to face. But, do you ever just walk up to someone and strike them hard based on an assumption about them? Or, do you treat them 'decently' (as a 'default') unless-and-until they give you a reason to do otherwise?
What I am trying to say is - in an environment like this - don't look for the worst in people as the default
modus operandi. Instead, allow yourself the general belief that most of them are okay folks.
Should you use care and discernment? Absolutely!
However, if your relationship with someone is destined to come to naught -
let them destroy it - don't do so yourself before it has a chance to become something worthwhile.
There are two kinds of 'mistrust' related to this issue:
1) The kind where you act in a friendly way towards them but want to be sure you know them well enough before you decide that you trust them.
2) The kind where you have insistent suspicion by habit and demand that they prove they are not pure evil before you have anything to do with them.
My suggestion - do #1 as much as possible and avoid #2.
Again - the [general] answer is simple - "let it be what it is" and use 'discernment' - determine-as-you-go.
Good general rule - do not unnecessarily aggravate any situation without due cause or good reason.
