|
Post by sharon on Jul 1, 2009 15:57:47 GMT -5
I thought they were considered the "heathens"!
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on Jul 1, 2009 16:46:38 GMT -5
Ronhall, I believe you might mean that the muslims claim lineage from Ishmael, the first born by Hagar of Abraham? Esau's decendants as I understand it, became Edom who sort of disappeared. I'm not quarreling with your point, Ronhall, perhaps just reading your postings to literally. But as Muslims, per se, they were not in existance in biblical times and the religion of Mohammaden was never addressed in the bible. Perhaps it doesn't change the meaning of your post, but it could be confusing.
regards.
|
|
npdw
Junior Member
Posts: 50
|
Post by npdw on Jul 1, 2009 20:08:33 GMT -5
To respond to Backinblack. You missed the bus on this one. If people have such despicable qualities, why on earth would you have a problem if the lines of communication are broken? Especially if you were responsible for the breaking? Isn't that what you wanted??
Furthurmore, you describe a people as judgemental and gossipy, are those the qualities of people you regard as friends? Come on, you cannot have it both ways. If you want to maintain a friendship , particularly if you're the one causing the rift in the first place, get off your high horse and approach rather than sit and moan about who didn't come to you. Generally speaking of course. Maggsmagpie spoke about being cut off, which is so highly ridiculous because he/she's the one who left. That's a conscious choice he/she made. It's like walking out of a marriage then complaining that your ex and your in-laws no longer contact you. What do you expect? Who cut who off?
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Jul 2, 2009 7:28:49 GMT -5
Many people often stay within the confines of a particular group of people just because of the loyalty they feel for those within that group. However, if there is personal dissatisfaction, the relationship often becomes eroded as well. Then a final exit leaves both sides feeling very bereft because of the negative feelings invoked perhaps even before the final exit happens. Nevertheless, some people have a strong sense of loyalty to those they've claimed as friends and desire beyond anything that's happened to retain some of that friendship. There is no way to really make this happen when negative feelings have crept in and perhaps mostly unawares to both sides of the equation. At the best, both sides have to grow in their own direction and sometimes when that growth is there, then they can retain the friendship in a different way, a different fellowship if you will. And I'm not saying the fellowship has anything to do with spirituality at all!
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Jul 2, 2009 16:11:40 GMT -5
You don't get into heaven based on what group you belonged to, it's an individual matter, so to leave because you don't believe a group is the only right group is dumb. Likewise, staying in a group because you believe it is the only right group is dumb.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Jul 12, 2009 12:25:46 GMT -5
Since Christmas trees were mentioned... My dad used to tell me that we couldn't have a tree because Pagans used to have trees and they hung ornaments of people in effigy on those trees. I'd really like to read references to that. The funny thing to me was that we got tons of gifts for Christmas. So I guess the message was that gift giving and Santa Claus (some of the gifts were signed "from Santa") was okay, just not the tree. Oh... and Christmas lights were a no-no also, as God made the stars in the sky and what could compare? I wonder why that never applied to lamps and ceiling lights?
|
|
gells
Senior Member
Posts: 744
|
Post by gells on Oct 5, 2009 13:36:57 GMT -5
I've read through many different threads, and I just wanted to comment on some peoples different ideas. Reading about television, and women wearing jeans, and Christmas trees, I have had my own experiences. I currently am going to meetings, and I plan on raising my children in this way. I believe that it is my own service to God that matters in the long run. It is not my right to judge others that do not follow as I do. The only one that can judge is God. I truly believe that. I did not grow up with a television in my home, as according to my parents it was letting ungodly things into the home. We did, however, have a computer with the internet. My parents still monitored what we could and could not do on the computer. I do think that it is a good idea to monitor what is influencing us in our own homes. As a child I always wore skirts, but as a teenager, I wore pants, and I still do. I actually wear them in front of the workers and it has never been mentioned that I should not. My parents may mention it however, but I was still allowed to be baptized, and I take part in meeting, and even partake in the emblems. This is just some of my own experiences for those out there that are very judgmental towards the group that I worship with. I cannot say that it is the only "right" way to follow God, but I do believe that it is right, but as I said before, it is not be to judge other groups or people and the way they follow God. Service to God is individual, and we stand before God alone, no matter who we associate with.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Oct 17, 2009 17:13:35 GMT -5
What exactly makes it right, gells?
|
|
gells
Senior Member
Posts: 744
|
Post by gells on Oct 17, 2009 22:37:35 GMT -5
What exactly makes it right, gells? I didn't say that it was "right", I was saying that its not as every assumes that it is.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Oct 17, 2009 22:39:56 GMT -5
I cannot say that it is the only "right" way to follow God, but I do believe that it is right I didn't say that it was "right"
|
|
gells
Senior Member
Posts: 744
|
Post by gells on Oct 17, 2009 22:58:03 GMT -5
I cannot say that it is the only "right" way to follow God, but I do believe that it is right I didn't say that it was "right" Oh, sorry, I was thinking you were referring to a different part of my argument.. Why do I believe that my fellowship is right? Because I believe that it is right to follow Jesus teachings.
|
|
gells
Senior Member
Posts: 744
|
Post by gells on Oct 17, 2009 22:59:10 GMT -5
you need to clarify dear.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Oct 18, 2009 0:12:39 GMT -5
Yes, you do need to clarify. You're arguing with yourself.
|
|
|
Post by GodIsLove on Oct 18, 2009 14:49:13 GMT -5
What is said when a lady talk to another about having to wear a dress is this. The other lady(worker) says I just feel like the spirit moves me to wear dresses. And really what that implys is that the spirit is not moving me. It's very subtle and happens alot where people defend their actions because they say they feel that they are moved to do things that way. I'm not saying they are or not but it leaves the other person feeling like they are somehow not only wrong, but don't have the right spirit. This is a hard topic because it gets into blasphemy too... comments? I came into believing that wearing pants was not acceptable myself, even after my Mom allowed me to wear pants. I honestly think it comes from conforming to the group. I don't mean conforming to Christ (b/c God doesn't judge by external appearance- but of course we must be modest for others) but conforming to how others look. Honestly, the style of wearing buns and long dresses goes back to a 100 years ago when everything first started with this fellowship. Those traditions somehow got mixed in with God's truth and somehow people came to believe that outwardly they had to conform to these rules. But God wants to set us free. I feel I did that more to peer pressure and trying to be more righteous..but we know we cannot please God by how we look! Ridiculous to think so. I also don't believe it's wrong to cut women's hair. I cut my hair and I absolutely feel no different before God. Anyways, I think it all goes back to conforming to the group as to please others and 'fit in'... even if it's not necessary, because we want to be accepted in this exclusive way.
|
|
moline
Junior Member
Posts: 132
|
Post by moline on Jan 29, 2010 19:57:18 GMT -5
I find it interesting that americans do not celebrate xmas I was an elder with a church in my home and we always had a xmas tree in the meeting room. many workers passed thru and nothing ever said to me
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jan 29, 2010 20:22:46 GMT -5
I find it interesting that americans do not celebrate xmas. I was an elder with a church in my home and we always had a xmas tree in the meeting room. many workers passed thru and nothing ever said to me I wonder if xmas is not celebrated both in Western a Eastern America/Canada. Gifts were given in Southern USA, Texas and California when I grew up. No xmas trees tho...just seasonal read/green decorations (holly, snowmen, wreaths, decorated Xmas cookies, etc.) When we moved to Oklahoma in 1988, there was NOTHING in professing homes that was Xmas holidayish. And no gifts were exchanged either. I wrote this in my story about that OK custom:
In the very first Sunday meeting we attended [after moving to Oklahoma], a man said in his testimony that while we weren't subject to terrible persecution like they had in Bible days, still persecution did occur in the lives of God's people at times. For instance, it was hard on the children at Christmas time when everyone else was celebrating and receiving presents, but they didn't, etc. Immediately, I was assaulted by a child on either side elbowing me sharply in the ribs, and whispering in alarm and distress, "Does this mean we can't have CHRISTMAS any more? "
|
|
|
Post by IllinoisGal on Feb 1, 2010 7:12:20 GMT -5
But shouldn't the real respect be to God? Otherwise its being done to be seen of men, wether they be workers or anyone else. I believe the bottom line is the ladies that lead a double standard have never been convicted by God and believe that its is wrong to wear those items. If you truly have a conviction from God you do it even when no one else an see you. It shouldnt be for someone to see but rather God leading your conscience.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Feb 1, 2010 13:21:12 GMT -5
I am sorry, Ronhall as regards your post #34 on this thread. The bible does not explain anything about the Muslims. The muslims came to be as a result of Mohammed. b 570 ad. Perhaps that has been pointed out, I didn't look back through all the posts. Technically you are right -- the Bible doesn't mention Mohammed or the Muslims, however they are very quick to mention that they come from Esau the firstborn. This event is given in Genesis chapter 25. Yes and if you talk to any one who is Muslim they will be the first to tell you that Adam Abraham, Jesus, right through to Mohammed are all Muslim. When asked how that could be since Islam didn't exist until 570 something AD they say because they all worshiped Allah, the only true god. It's convoluted thinking, but hey that's religion imo. We get to make it whatever we believe it to be.
|
|
|
Post by ronhall on Feb 2, 2010 16:11:07 GMT -5
But shouldn't the real respect be to God? Otherwise its being done to be seen of men, wether they be workers or anyone else. I believe the bottom line is the ladies that lead a double standard have never been convicted by God and believe that its is wrong to wear those items. If you truly have a conviction from God you do it even when no one else an see you. It shouldnt be for someone to see but rather God leading your conscience. Really now -- isn't the double standard actually the discrepancies between the social standards and unwritten rules of friends & workers fellowship vs the actual standards of Christ in the Bible? If the answer to that question is yes -- then buns for women, neck ties for men, etc. need to be clearly identified as being recommended for fitting into the social fabric of the group rather than being a doctrinal requirement for professing. If the answer is no -- then I've got it all wrong and hope I haven't muddied the waters too much.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Feb 2, 2010 17:18:13 GMT -5
I believe the bottom line is the ladies that lead a double standard have never been convicted by God and believe that its is wrong to wear those items. If you truly have a conviction from God you do it even when no one else an see you. It shouldnt be for someone to see but rather God leading your conscience. Really now -- isn't the double standard actually the discrepancies between the social standards and unwritten rules of friends & workers fellowship vs the actual standards of Christ in the Bible? If the answer to that question is yes -- then buns for women, neck ties for men, etc. need to be clearly identified as being recommended for fitting into the social fabric of the group rather than being a doctrinal requirement for professing. If the answer is no -- then I've got it all wrong and hope I haven't muddied the waters too much. Just to shed a little light on this post: Illinois Gal is not part of the friends & workers fellowship and has never been. (Not commenting on your observation at all, ronhall)
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Feb 6, 2010 12:22:09 GMT -5
Ronhall, I believe you might mean that the muslims claim lineage from Ishmael, the first born by Hagar of Abraham? Esau's decendants as I understand it, became Edom who sort of disappeared. I'm not quarreling with your point, Ronhall, perhaps just reading your postings to literally. But as Muslims, per se, they were not in existance in biblical times and the religion of Mohammaden was never addressed in the bible. Perhaps it doesn't change the meaning of your post, but it could be confusing. regards. Edom did "sort of disappear" In 126 BC the Judeans (Jews) fought the Edomites (who were Esau and also called Idumeans), as reported by both Josephus AND the Jewish Encyclopedia. The Edomites lost that war, and were forced by the Judeans to either leave the land entirely or embrace Judaism. They were incorporated into Jewry "and have remained Jews to this day." The Jews since that time inherited all the promises and curses God made to Esau/Edom. King Herod of Jesus day was half Judean and half Idumean/Edomite. Today the Jews in the state of Israel are fulfilling the promises and curses God/Jesus made to Esau/Edom. Best regards, Edy
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Feb 6, 2010 12:32:02 GMT -5
Buzzy, I think you (and many others) have allowed other's beliefs to become your own. Obviously, you seem to think that women in pants and celebrating Christmas is ok. If that is the case, follow your heart. DON'T try to live up to the expectations of everyone around you. I'm an innie and most of my female friends wear pants and I don't know of any friends in my area that don't celebrate Christmas. Workers have never threatened us about any of this. There has been the occasional sly remark about some of our practices, but generally, we are well accepted. I think the problem that a lot of us has is the fact that we were told growing up that you can't do this or that. In truth, that was a rule our parents was enforcing on us. It was THEIR rule. Once we are of age, we really don't need to make our beds, put away our dirty clothes, and brush before bed time. Of course, there may be consequences to our actions, but we are not violating a RULE. Our parents, or landlord is not gonna barge into our room or apartment and take away our car keys and and cell phone and tell us that we are grounded until we get this mess straightened out. Likewise if you wear *shudder* pants and you are a woman. You may think that people are looking at you funny because of it, but really, does it matter? What you and many others are doing is allowing your chosen society to dictate your life. If you are a Christian, I think the general idea is that God should dictate your life. Isn't that the idea? So if you are acting in a way that fits with the belief system of others, but contrary to your own, in truth, you are worshiping them instead of God. I think that really pisses God off. In fact, when he laid down the law to Moses, that was the first thing he told him: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" or something like that. At the very least, it think God has a pretty strong opinion about that, so I'd make it a point stay on top of that one. In conclusion, please make sure that wherever you go, whatever religion, faith, belief that you follow, you are doing it out of a sincere conviction that it is God's will and right, not because you think others believe that way and you just want to fit in. You will find a lot more peace that way. How correct you are, Brick! One time my little grandson (age 7) asked his mother's cousin why she didn't go to meeting. Her response to him was food for thought (though it had to be further explained to him "When you're a grown up you get to decide whether you want to go or not. I decided I don't want to go." Best! Edy
|
|
|
Post by bbrown on Jun 4, 2010 17:25:43 GMT -5
Assume for a moment that legalism causes "outsiders" to look upon "The Truth" as some outlandish cult, whether it be for dress code or other legalistic reasons... 1) How does this aid the Fellowship in it's growth? 2) What are the scriptural implications of turning people away from God who are searching? 3) What is the impact (Generally) on those in "The Truth"? 4) For those that know...Specifically, how would you quantify those within that have left (ex-s) and those who never entered based solely on legalistic requirements?
|
|
|
Post by buzzybee on Jul 9, 2010 3:42:18 GMT -5
Nice questions BBrown. Legalism does infact cause others to look upon the group as "wierd" if not a cult outright. However, the effect to those looking on might be one of "oh, these people are really serious." I do not believe the fellowship is really growing in terms of those coming in from the outside. It mainly grows as people procreate from within. What leagism does serve from within the group is if you will a better than thou type of attitude. A we vs. them type of additude towards the outside world. And as a group it bonds them together tighter, because of all the rules they need support in holding up "together.
I also was burdened when inside of the constant need of getting people to meetings in order to be saved. It was constantly on my mind to be a good example because you never knew when someone would ask a question and you could do the first step 1)invite them to meetings. I don't believe you need to go to meetings in order meet Jesus. I don't believe you need to go to meetings in order to serve God. I believe going to meetings may be desired as a need to fellowship with Gods people. There is way to much emphasis on bringing new comers to the workers so they can be saved. Salvation is a gift from God, no one can give salvation to anyone no not even the workers. I guess now my focus is more on living my live in such a way that my maker may be glorified, and if He will use me then do so, and i don't care if i'm never aware that he has used me. The focus of getting outsiders to come to meetings was SUCH a burden.
|
|
|
Post by ronhall on Jul 9, 2010 7:25:50 GMT -5
Nice questions BBrown. Legalism does infact cause others to look upon the group as "wierd" if not a cult outright. However, the effect to those looking on might be one of "oh, these people are really serious." I do not believe the fellowship is really growing in terms of those coming in from the outside. It mainly grows as people procreate from within. What leagism does serve from within the group is if you will a better than thou type of attitude. A we vs. them type of additude towards the outside world. And as a group it bonds them together tighter, because of all the rules they need support in holding up "together. I also was burdened when inside of the constant need of getting people to meetings in order to be saved. It was constantly on my mind to be a good example because you never knew when someone would ask a question and you could do the first step 1)invite them to meetings. I don't believe you need to go to meetings in order meet Jesus. I don't believe you need to go to meetings in order to serve God. I believe going to meetings may be desired as a need to fellowship with Gods people. There is way to much emphasis on bringing new comers to the workers so they can be saved. Salvation is a gift from God, no one can give salvation to anyone no not even the workers. I guess now my focus is more on living my live in such a way that my maker may be glorified, and if He will use me then do so, and i don't care if i'm never aware that he has used me. The focus of getting outsiders to come to meetings was SUCH a burden.To expand a little -- While it is a burden to focus on getting outsiders to come to meetings -- Finding that others want to come to meetings because of the effect of the joy in doing so as seen in your life is a great burden lifter.
|
|
|
Post by buzzybee on Jul 10, 2010 1:48:39 GMT -5
I guess what i was focusing with on that statement was the belief that newcomers must come to gospels meetings in order to hear the gospel "correctly" from the workers. Thats the main focus....'invite them to meetings'. I feel that Godmay be limited with this belief. God can work his Gospel through anyone, not just the workers. I feel like that is the burden. When we just let go and let God then maybe they will ask about meetings, or if so inclined feel the need...
|
|