|
Post by lin on Dec 23, 2008 16:15:22 GMT -5
What is the truth?
|
|
H.A.S.
Senior Member
God loves us all. Yes, even you.
Posts: 705
|
Post by H.A.S. on Dec 23, 2008 16:26:55 GMT -5
If you don't know, then don't worry about it. My post was directed at those who know the history of this church but keep it hidden from others.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Dec 23, 2008 16:42:53 GMT -5
How telling that you must ask.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Dec 23, 2008 17:33:49 GMT -5
When someone is sworn in as a witness in a court of law, the question is always asked, "Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?"
Do the friends and workers really want the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Time will tell.
Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:31-32) This implies that anyone who does not tell the whole truth... or even does not know the whole truth and nothing but the truth is not one of Jesus' disciples.... they must be false.
We must not be satisfied with less than the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Dec 23, 2008 17:41:18 GMT -5
RE: Living Witness Doctrine Lin wrote: I just looked it up on the search and it said The Roman Catholic Church has it, that's why they believe the pope is infallible Try this one: The Living Witness DoctrineIt's where you got the info you posted about below on an earlier thread: Lin wrote:Re: Exclusivity VS. Difference! « Reply #25 on Oct 27, 2008, 5:26pm » I just posted this quote in another posting...but here perhaps would be more appropriate as to the discussion of The Living Witness doctrine and how some want to say that the truth's fellowship is rampant with it. But below is a quote from an overseer and it puts into light a whole new perspective and one I had finally come up with myself during the post-traum I had when I learned the "true history" of the truths' fellowship and that was exactly as is mentioned below and John the Baptist was the one who coined it well..."God is able to raise up children from the stones at our feet.." I am not posting the overseer's name because we might want his opinion on another matter and I want him to feel welcome not attacked for what he, himself, believes and has practiced in his workership for nearly 50 yrs. quote: "With what you mentioned in yours just now, I think I know what is being declared by that doctrine. Kind of interesting what people come up with, they got to give something like that a name. Then refer to it as an absolute regarding what people think or believe. Apparently what is being refered to is that there has to be a succession of "people" in order for the gospel to continue from one generation to another. It would be similar to what the Catholics have of their succession of popes. God has not left a record of geneology of the Kingdom. God is able to give life when and where He wants to. God is not bound to human linage. We have not geneology from Christ to our day. There have been some who have been adament regarding that necessity in spite of the fact that it does not exist. The reason for this reasoning is to try and establish the fact that what we have is God's way as it was established by Jesus. But a geneology does not prove anything. The thing that proves what we have is from Christ is the fruit. And fruit comes as a result of a seed being planted because there is life in the seed, not the sower; that is, the sower is not the means of the life, he only plants that which has life in it. But seed can remain dormant for a long time and then when conditions are right, it will sprout and bring forth life. No sower needed in such a case. Anyone who promotes that a geneology is present or needful only causes questions, does not give answers. Since some have promoted this, then the descenders pick that up for two purposes. One, to demand the linage; two, to discredit those (and all the rest, stating all believe this), saying they are declaring something that doesn't exist, thus they aren't honest. John the Baptist said that God was able of stones to raise up childrent to Abraham, so I guess a human linage isn't needful with God. He can raise up men when and where He desires and when He does, they are going to promote His mind and will. But it isn't that the men God raised up are "starting" anything, they are merely moved by God to do His will." unquote!
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 23, 2008 17:51:03 GMT -5
I agree this is a better thread for this discussion. I posted on the other thread and then deleted my post and placed it here. You might want to delete your other post also on the VOT thread. RE: Living Witness Doctrine Lin wrote: Try this one: The Living Witness DoctrineIt's where you got the info you posted about below on an earlier thread: Lin wrote:Re: Exclusivity VS. Difference! « Reply #25 on Oct 27, 2008, 5:26pm » Sadly, the above is just more of the same ole same ole...the Run-Around." Looks like he just read the history explanation collection on TTT and made a composite of all of them wrapped up into one. This is what we're so sick of hearing...just diversions, red herrings. You can read tons more empty statements like this that were designed to pacify the questioner on TTT at: www.tellingthetruth.info/history_articles/howstart.phpIt makes me furious that there are workers who are still spouting this kind of garbage and and there are people still buying into it apparently. si, did you explain in detail what the LWD really is to him? Because he didn't even address the main points of it. He doesnt even know that the earliest workers used the LWD term and that many workers today recognize it and its meaning. I hope you get back to him with some really GOOD questions that show this kind of response just isn't working these days... and these analogies dont prove a thing--just show his POV.
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Dec 23, 2008 18:11:33 GMT -5
Read my post on the VOT article...doesn't matter any more since no one paid a bit of heed to my plea for some mercy in regards to the beginnings of that post!
Cherie...you read what I said....as to other questions I'll ask him? I generally feel free to speak to the man with whatever I'm into and pretty open language and am responded to generally as frank language also!
|
|
|
Post by lin on Dec 23, 2008 18:28:29 GMT -5
Sadly, the above is just more of the same ole same ole...the Run-Around." Looks like he just read the history explanation collection on TTT and made a composite of all of them wrapped up into one. This is what we're so sick of hearing...just diversions, red herrings. You can read tons more empty statements like this that were designed to pacify the questioner on TTT at:
Cherie It's so apparent that you have the bloated feeling that you know everything. If someone else has anything to say you feel it's because they read TTT. It would be too much for you to take if you really knew how few people have ever read your site.
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on Dec 23, 2008 18:35:04 GMT -5
Sharon, my opinion is that if I enjoy praying and worshiping at the meetings, if I enjoy being with other believers, if I am happy and content and get spiritually fed when we meet together it doesn't make a bleeping bit of difference to me if what we do started last week, last year or a hundred years ago.
I have had impromptu spiritual discussions that were very uplifting to me in a variety of unusual places--from truck stops to nail salons--with absolute strangers. Mostly I'm just interested in God and the bible and the spiritual journey of life.
I don't think the history should be some big secret, but if the workers start preaching William Irving and singing "Tell me the story of Willy" instead of "Tell me the Story of Jesus" then I'll find another group to fellowship with.
peace, freespirit
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Dec 23, 2008 18:35:11 GMT -5
Cherie It's so apparent that you have the bloated feeling that you know everything. If someone else has anything to say you feel it's because they read TTT. It would be too much for you to take if you really knew how few people have ever read your site. Actually, lin, we do know how MANY people are reading it. Nice try.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 23, 2008 19:25:38 GMT -5
No I haven't heard them ALL - occasionally a new spin comes along that I can add to my collection on TTT. But I have been around 20 years hearing this type garbage...if that counts for anything. You see, countless people have told me the workers answers to their questions... Lin, you wrote that there was nothing "startling" on TTT - so you must have read it, huh? Surely you wouldnt just say that--if you hadn't honestly read it, would you? Mr. Lin, Peace and Wisdom--you're falling off the wagon again. Time to revisit your famous resolution...were you sincere when you wrote this? When I first came to TMB, I saw the different discussions and opinions. I also found myself classifying posters. One group was enemies , the other friends. The reason for this was their opinions were not like mine or were like mine. Because of this I acted accordingly and also posted accordingly. Over time though I have developed a different feeling. I have come to see individuals who have been through different experiences than myself. Some have had experiences that have hurt them deeply others have had things they don't understand. Others are content and have an exalted feeling of being the great teacher. There are also those that cause no waves. What all of these observations have taught me is I don't know everything,and would like to post more wisely. I also would like to be a peacemaker.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Dec 23, 2008 19:25:52 GMT -5
Guys, it's starting to get surreal in here. The pink mist is floating. For example: Jesus said, " If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." (John 8:31-32) How interested are you really in the truth? The truth is, it is unlikely that Jesus really spoke this saying.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Dec 23, 2008 20:06:24 GMT -5
How do you know for sure?
I guess it depends on what Bible version you are reading.... but the meaning is the same. I believe Jesus did say it.
Hebrews 11:6 says, He that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder to them that diligently seek him.
believe me...I am interested.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Dec 23, 2008 20:45:32 GMT -5
How do you know for sure? I don't know for sure. That's mostly my point. Believers think they know something. They use words like TRUTH to describe what they believe, while ridiculing what others believe. "Historical Jesus" scholars mostly agree there isn't a single word in the book of John that we can reliably put on the "real" Jesus' lips.
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Dec 23, 2008 21:19:22 GMT -5
Sharon, my opinion is that if I enjoy praying and worshiping at the meetings, if I enjoy being with other believers, if I am happy and content and get spiritually fed when we meet together it doesn't make a bleeping bit of difference to me if what we do started last week, last year or a hundred years ago. I have had impromptu spiritual discussions that were very uplifting to me in a variety of unusual places--from truck stops to nail salons--with absolute strangers. Mostly I'm just interested in God and the bible and the spiritual journey of life. I don't think the history should be some big secret, but if the workers start preaching William Irving and singing "Tell me the story of Willy" instead of "Tell me the Story of Jesus" then I'll find another group to fellowship with. peace, freespirit fs! I heartily agree! And I think this is a valid point....do the Methodist preach Wesley everytime they go to a church mtg.? I don't think so for I've been to a Methodist Church and if I had not run onto a Methodist's historian's book I would NOT have know the beginnings of the Methodist church either. Didn't bother me any way I looked at it. But they sure don't go around discussing their "roots" all the time and that's what it would take if the "truth" was to be made known for any denomination, wouldn't it? Wouldn't leave much time to speak about Jesus, our wonderful Master and Saviour.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Dec 23, 2008 21:26:24 GMT -5
Nobody suggested preaching Irvine. That is a popular red herring on this forum. We are suggesting that the workers should start telling the truth about the origin of their ministry. It would be nice if a church which calls itself the "truth" would actually tell it.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Dec 23, 2008 21:52:14 GMT -5
I am sorry
I am sorry for that too... If I let go of my belief in the Bible I would have nothing. So I guess I will keep it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2008 5:01:03 GMT -5
We have good friends who are part of a Baptist congregation,and they often talk about witnessing to people. I believe anyone that God has given salvation to would surely be a witness. Jesus said "let your light so shine that you can glorify your father in heaven". so I don't see being a witness is a flawed doctrine. Lin Your evasiveness is fast becoming as legendary as Todd's ambiguity. Just to remind you of the questions that I asked: 1. Has the Living Witness Doctrine (as preached by the early workers) proved to be a flawed doctrine. (Remember the LWD provided that one could only be saved by hearing the gospel from a 2x2 worker) 2. Are the non 2x2 clergy no longer bound for hell? (Remember this was a fundamental teaching of the original 2x2 church) Of course I respect your right not to respond, however I trust you will respect the right of those of us on the board to draw our own conclusions from any unwillingness to respond or any attempt to fudge an answer as is now almost customary from the more fanatical 2x2 adherents on the board. Matt10
|
|
|
Post by todd on Dec 24, 2008 9:10:01 GMT -5
I don't think the history should be some big secret, but if the workers start preaching William Irving and singing "Tell me the story of Willy" instead of "Tell me the Story of Jesus" then I'll find another group to fellowship with. peace, freespirit Well said freespirit. The history shouldn't have to be a big secret. But in some cases it is better off that way. I hate to keep repeating my wheat farm analogy because maybe it didn't make very much sense, but hopefully people can see, not only why they didn't bother to keep retelling that part of history, but why in the case that I gave (the new farm hand), that it was actually better that he didn't know. And I know everyone keeps saying, "why hide the truth", but in the case of the new farm hand, even telling him wouldn't have given him the truth because he would have misunderstood it, and therefore still not known the truth. If you aren't able to impart the truth to someone, it is no good telling them, especially when what they then believe is further from the truth. If this new farm hand's original belief is that the method written by Geezas, he has got it right. If though in telling the new farm hand about Billion Furlined bringing the method to them, he thinks that Billion was the founder of the method rather than just made a measly 32.518 metre walk, then this new farm hand has just been turned a long way from the truth. This is why you will hear me say that it is a bigger lie to say that William Irvine was the founder. And if left to most exes, who think that William's name should be put on every door into the place so no-one can come in without seeing it, everyone will definately be thinking that we are just serving man, so therefore the truth is still not known. People like freespirit will very rightly go and find another group to fellowship with. In another attempt to see this concept of not telling the truth, with an example that is more 'real'... A lot of people may have seen it happen where they sit in a classroom learning about something, and someone asks a question, and the lecturer responds with something like... "I am not going to answer that" or "I need you to learn something else before I explain that" or "We will get to that". Now, if you were of the ex-2x2 mindset you would be thinking, "hey, why are you not telling me this stuff... why can't you tell the truth when I ask these questions... why are you skirting around the issue... what is there to hide? The truth is that the lecturer wants you to learn something else first. He wants to teach you the first concept so that you will understand the second concept. And most of the time, once the lesson is over, the person is wondering why they even asked the quesion because it seems so clear. They realise it was a stupid question about something that didn't even matter. So back to the farm, once the new farm hands realised that there is an owner, and they find out the relationship between the owner and Geezas, and after getting to know the owner, they realize that he did have the power to give instruction to Billion, and also sack him when he didn't do what the instruction said, they then have no doubts that the most Billion did in bringing the instructions to them was make a measly 32.518 metre walk, which anybody could have done.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Dec 24, 2008 9:41:38 GMT -5
The history shouldn't have to be a big secret. But in some cases it is better off that way.That was really all I got out of your wheat field post. Basically, you are saying that the history SHOULD be lied about, by a worker/friend/acquaintance/anyoneatall who decides who gets lied to and who gets told the truth. Personally, I don't think that there is any need for a worker (or dude or whatever it is you are calling them today Todd) to get up and preach about the history every time there is a meeting (or gathering, or a flock, or a grouping or whatever you want to call it today Todd) BUT IF A WORKER IS ASKED ABOUT THE HISTORY HE/SHE SHOULD BE HONEST AND GIVE AN HONEST ANSWER!Now you can go off on your little 'English word definition' tangent if you would like, but I think most everyone else will understand the difference between a lie and an honest answer Todd. Your statement above clearly infers that depending on the situation, IT IS OK TO LIE TO SOMEONE ASKING ABOUT THE HISTORY. So, do you feel that you are a more special person than anyone else? Do you feel smarter, or more firmly entrenched in the 'truth' (or 2x2 group, F&W's, the way, bunsandskirtchurch or whatever you wish to call it today) What gives you the right to decide who is told the truth about the history of the church? I have seen this argument from several of the people who are professing (or whatever you wish to refer to them as Todd) The fear is that there are some people who will 'lose out', 'lose their faith', 'lose their salvation' and so on. Did it cause you to lose your faith in God Todd? Has it harmed you in any spiritual way to find out the truth about your church Todd? Why should you decide who knows the truth and who gets lied to? I guess it all boils down to the fact that you are here on the TMB actively promoting that workers and others cover up and/or blatantly lie to members of your church (or whatever you wish it to call it today Todd) Is that how you want your church to be known? Hi there, My name is Todd. I attend a church (or whatever you wish to refer to it today as Todd) that I can't tell you about. You need to come and sit in a gospel meeting (or whatever you wish to refer to it today Todd) and listen to the message of the workers (or whatever you wish to call them today Todd) Please don't ask my any questions about the church as I cannot tell you the truth about it. However, I can tell you a wonderful story about a wheat field that has nothing to do with my church. Yeah.... That oughta bring in some new recruits huh??? We have people here on the TMB who are in their 70's who didn't lose their faith because of hearing the truth about the history. Some of them may have left the meetings, but it didn't hurt their faith in God. I suppose that is the bottom line for some here though. The church is more important than an individual's relationship with Jesus/God. Scott
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2008 9:50:37 GMT -5
from Mat10.
Answer me: why are we "evasive" and "ambiguous" when we answer questions, yet I can compile huge lists of questions not even responded to by exes?
I have never heard of any living witness doctrine. We judge what we believe is right or wrong based upon scripture. Answer me: are all Christian denominations going to heaven?
We don't believe in the doctrines of the churches. That will not change anytime soon. Answer me: do you believe that a modern day Jesus would join the clergy?
Ditto.
Answer me: why do you call yourself Matt10?
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on Dec 24, 2008 9:55:39 GMT -5
How about: meninpinksuitswomeninbunsandskirtschurch. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D fs
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 24, 2008 10:13:58 GMT -5
Hi Bert, Two of those questions seem easy to answer , even though I am not being asked.~~~~ 1.Answer me: are all Christian denominations going to heaven?
NO , not one. No, not one. It is believers from MANY different denominations and NON-denominations and "whosoevers" that Jesus talked about.
2.Answer me: do you believe that a modern day Jesus would join the clergy? He was a part of the clergy when he was here last time, so I am confident he would be the same today.
clergy- the whole body of men set apart by ordination for the service of God in the Christian church
Alvin
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Dec 24, 2008 10:15:08 GMT -5
meninpinksuitswomeninbunsandskirtschurchHey... Wait'll that comes out on one of ilylo's t-shirts!!!! Hee Hee..... Scott
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Dec 24, 2008 10:38:19 GMT -5
Hey there Bert!! . I'll go for a couple of your questions Bert.... Answer me: why are we "evasive" and "ambiguous" when we answer questions, yet I can compile huge lists of questions not even responded to by exes?Well... From my standpoint, whenever you and I have had discussions, (and we've had some pretty good ones in the past haven't we???) I think I have answered any question you sent my way. I don't always respond to generic questions on the board, especially when the one asking the question has already been given the answer before, although obviously at times I do respond.... As far as the 'evasive and ambiguous' answers from 'you guys', I agree that isn't really a true statement. Some of you professing folks don't have a problem giving straight answers to honest questions. I have a lot of respect for those people. Like clearday. He fully acknowledges the issues in your church and discusses solutions to those issues. servewithlove and freespirit are a couple of the women that also will give honest answers as well as many others here. Then you have the 'other dudes and dudettes.... They can't give a straight answer to anything. Take a look at our new guy Todd. BOY HOWDY he cant even agree on the terminology that everyone else uses whether they are professing or not!!! He's pretty funny, but his posts can't even be taken seriously, although he does give some of us good stuff to slam him (and by extension your church) about. He has quickly become a non contributor to serious discussion I think..... I have never heard of any living witness doctrine. We judge what we believe is right or wrong based upon scripture. Answer me: are all Christian denominations going to heaven?I'll take your word for the fact that you have never heard of 'any living witness doctrine' Bert. I know you are fibbing on that statement, because you HAVE heard about it on the board several times. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and figure you mean that you have never heard a worker speak of it. No biggee there.... I do take exception to the 'WE" as far as basing your right or wrong beliefs on scripture. I will accept that 'YOU' do so based on your own personal convictions, but since man makes mistakes, I don't think that an all inclusive 'we' can be used. If so..... You'll have to accept people like diet coke as being a spokesperson for your fellowship since he is still a part of it, but I highly doubt if you agree with his beliefs these days..... As far as: are all Christian denominations going to heaven?That is a big fat no. In fact NONE of them are, including yours. Denominations are not saved. Individuals are, and it doesn't matter which denomination one is a part of, (or isn't a part of) that matters in the slightest. The only way to heaven is through Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour. It is an individual's personal relationship with Jesus that is going to decide whether they are going to heaven, not membership in any denomination or lack of any denomination. We don't believe in the doctrines of the churches. That will not change anytime soon. Answer me: do you believe that a modern day Jesus would join the clergy?Actually, you do have your own church doctrine. It just isn't written down. It determines how your conventions are going to take place and what the purpose of them is, it determines how the workers are going to go about preaching and all that fun stuff. It may not be taught from the bible or written out, but it sure is there. (I'm sure we can get a few other professing folks to back that statement up...) In regard to: do you believe that a modern day Jesus would join the clergy?No I sure don't. I do however feel that all the true Christian churches would join Jesus in his ministry in any way that they could help him. In fact I think that the true Christian churches are currently following that modern day Jesus. He is alive and well among us, and we are carrying out the spreading of his gospel message to all the world in whatever method that we can. Just my answers to some of your questions Bert. Got any more you would like me to answer? Scott
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Dec 24, 2008 10:39:38 GMT -5
meninpinksuitswomeninbunsandskirtschurchHey... Wait'll that comes out on one of ilylo's t-shirts!!!! Hee Hee..... Scott I have a pink onesie for todd. It fits his behavior.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 24, 2008 10:53:57 GMT -5
"All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally, it is accepted as self-evident."
- Schopenhauer
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Dec 24, 2008 10:54:04 GMT -5
B) Alvin: He was a part of the clergy when he was here last time, so I am confident he would be the same today. clergy- the whole body of men set apart by ordination for the service of God in the Christian church.
~~~ Jesus was not part of the Clergy in his days. The clergy in Jesus' day didn't accept him and his apostles... and through out the ages.... and it is still the same today! This is what I have read and witnessed
Hi, Sorry. I think my answer was WRONG, Nathan. It could be argued , He was ordained by God to serve the Christian church, but of course, MUCH MUCH more than that, HE was the Saviour , the MEssiah, Son of God, not a mere clergyman. etc.etc. I doubt HE would "join the clergy" as in becoming a minister in any denominational or non-denominational church. I also doubt He would join any particular political group activist movement etc etc. , or allow Himself to be boxed in to ANY particular set of manmade rules that most of us are or have been a part of at one time. All the best, Alvin
|
|