|
Post by Geoff on Sept 15, 2009 14:30:23 GMT -5
"It is blatant deception and downright dishonesty to imply that "strangers" are welcome in Sunday a.m., p.m. or Wed. p.m. meetings (nb. not missions)."
Have to disagree. I've been in many meetings (not a majority percentage, perhaps as low as 5%, but still many), in several countries including where I now live, where "non-professing " people attended sunday morning meeting. And some where they spoke in similar manner to the others attending. Twice this year that I particularly remember.
I'm not saying this is a normal event, but in each case those people were made very welcome. To say that in those cases I refer to, the visitors were not welcome is not right.
It may be that in some cases, some people were unwelcome. I was not there.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2009 17:00:25 GMT -5
Okay Geoff, what was the connection /relationship between these "strangers" with other persons in the meetings ?
You will undoubtedly agree that it is against the culture of the organisation to permit complete strangers i.e. those with no connections in the meeting, to attend a Sunday AM meeting. This is particularly true in the homeland of the meetings.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Sept 15, 2009 17:35:24 GMT -5
Okay Geoff, what was the connection /relationship between these "strangers" with other persons in the meetings ? You will undoubtedly agree that it is against the culture of the organisation to permit complete strangers i.e. those with no connections in the meeting, to attend a Sunday AM meeting. This is particularly true in the homeland of the meetings. The reason is quite simple - workers feel its important to control Sunday AM meeting attendance. If strangers tried to join the fellowship by Sunday AM meeting attendance without coming through "the door" of gospel meetings I think most workers would insist they attend a series of gospel meetings and "profess" in a gospel meeting. Every organization has rules, and in our church the workers are the folks in charge.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Sept 15, 2009 18:22:16 GMT -5
We have meeting in our home,and anyone is welcome to come.We aren't in the rural or poor section of town either. Jesus's disciples came to him one time and told him of a man casting out devils in his name. What did he say,go tell him to stop it? No he said if he is for us he is not against us. Sometimes when we refer to the word "outsiders", we aren't the outsiders.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Sept 15, 2009 18:28:58 GMT -5
The Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 believed this without meeting a worker and was baptized the same day he heard it.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Sept 15, 2009 18:38:44 GMT -5
There has been some non-2x2s came to some Sunday morning, take parts and wanted be one of us without ever attend the meetings. The workers couldn't tell them NO! God works in mysterious ways.... so the workers just encourage them to attend the gospel meetings and when the opportunity is given to test the meetings they can declare, and confess they want belong to Christ. [/color][/quote] Someone could come to a Sunday AM meeting and confess they belong to Christ. I agree with Lin, the Ethiopian was baptized by a deacon and didn't have to sit through a series of 2x2 meetings.
|
|
|
Post by sharon on Sept 15, 2009 18:49:43 GMT -5
There has been some non-2x2s came to some Sunday morning, take parts and wanted be one of us without ever attend the meetings. The workers couldn't tell them NO! God works in mysterious ways.... so the workers just encourage them to attend the gospel meetings and when the opportunity is given to test the meetings they can declare, and confess they want belong to Christ. [/color][/quote] Someone could come to a Sunday AM meeting and confess they belong to Christ. I agree with Lin, the Ethiopian was baptized by a deacon and didn't have to sit through a series of 2x2 meetings.[/quote] This is what I thought Phillip and Stephen and 5 other men were supposed to do and that was to lighten the burden of the Apostles....so that should include helping someone when there was no Apostle or worker around, should it be? Why do the workers not allow the elders more ability to work with people like this, why must it be the workers who usher people in? Isn't that limiting the Holy Spirit? Phillip sure didn't tell that Ethiopian Eunuch now come back next week so the Apostles can be here and tell you how to go about this faith business.
|
|
harpic
Junior Member
Posts: 56
|
Post by harpic on Sept 15, 2009 19:35:18 GMT -5
Just for the record, in Ireland there are Sunday evening bible studies, which are only not held if there is a local mission(gospel meeting) on Sunday evenings.
And my grandparents were matchmade by the workers. They married the same day they met. But then, matchmaking was a common thing in Ireland at the time, apart from the workers.
|
|
|
Post by bryanfromak on Sept 16, 2009 13:14:08 GMT -5
Do you want all history books banned because they no longer apply? Of course not Of course not I don't believe there should be a limit Of course not No, that is not what I'm saying.
|
|
peas
New Member
Posts: 24
|
Post by peas on Sept 16, 2009 22:01:39 GMT -5
I know the workers sent my grandpa to marry my grandma when her first husband died, leaving her with 4 young kids... only thing was my grandpa was mean and probably schizophrenic. Those were the early days....
However, 9 years ago before my brother got married, workers that knew him and workers that knew her discussed the engagement, and approved it. I've known situations where they disapproved of a marriage union as well. It is not exactly "arranged" marriages, but influenced by the workers.
|
|
|
Post by Geoff on Sept 18, 2009 8:05:08 GMT -5
Okay Geoff, what was the connection /relationship between these "strangers" with other persons in the meetings ? You will undoubtedly agree that it is against the culture of the organisation to permit complete strangers i.e. those with no connections in the meeting, to attend a Sunday AM meeting. This is particularly true in the homeland of the meetings. R, wasn't ignoring you, but don't visit here often... 1. One was daughter, other (quite seperate event, place) was a work colleague with no connections. 2. Against the culture? No I'd not say that, and unsure culture the right word. Against the "norm", yes of course, its relatively rare, as I said originally.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2009 8:48:52 GMT -5
Thanks for clarification Geoff. I'm here less and less myself. Anyway, what I meant by "strangers" was in fact, "strangers," not unprofessing friends, relatives or colleagues (i.e. associates) of professing people. Glad you agree that even these connections are rare events. For real "strangers" this gives credence to my "blatant deception" and "downright dishonesty" remarks.
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on Sept 18, 2009 15:09:43 GMT -5
Thanks to Brian for confronting this guy. Also it appears that the article has been removed from VOT with my thanks.
|
|
|
Post by stargazer on Sept 19, 2009 12:15:08 GMT -5
It has been pointed out that the article is still appearing on VOT. Why, if it has been discredited?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2009 17:50:17 GMT -5
It has been pointed out that the article is still appearing on VOT. Why, if it has been discredited? My theory is that the VOT wishes to present material that disparages the F&W fellowship from what appears to be apparent objective sources. It appears credible that way. The problem is, Pastor Ken was the perfect stooge as he is an non-ex, but it is not readily apparent to most VOT readers that he used solely non-objective material for his article.
|
|
|
Post by bryanfromak on Sept 19, 2009 19:17:44 GMT -5
|
|