|
Post by What Hat on Sept 25, 2009 10:40:24 GMT -5
The wiki article 'Christian Conventions' has been largely rewritten by a single anonymous writer. The writer thinks he's being impartial but is clearly writing a critique based on mainstream Protestant, possibly Evangelical thinking.
Please have a look at some of the statements I have red-flagged. Do you think they are fully accurate statements? Does the article accurately reflect the teaching or doctrine of the fellowship?
The following is just one problematic section of the entire article.
Some general comments.
(1) The passive phrasing "members are discouraged/ encouraged, and so on" is insiduous. But it's not said who is discouraging or encouraging, leaving the reader to infer some kind of authoritarian scheme. Perhaps the writer means the workers, but they don't, in the present time, engage in the kind of micro-management suggested. (2) Another problem I have with this section is that it describes worker preaching by comparing to the Orthodoxy of mainstream religions. That's very presumptuous. This kind of description would be useful to a Methodist or Presbyterian but not to most of the world's population. It clearly marginalizes the teaching of the group to a neutral observer.
RED = Total crap. BLUE = Half-truth.
Following from wiki:
Doctrines
A catchphrase frequently used to describe the group is: "The church in the home, and the ministry without a home."[74] The movement owns no church buildings: church buildings are seen as inconsistent with biblical Christianity, and were strongly denounced by early workers.[75][76] Its ministers do not own homes or draw a salary. The group has maintained these practices since its inception.[77][78]
All the movement's teachings are expressed orally exclusively: the movement publishes no doctrine or statements of faith.[79][80] Workers hold that all church teachings are based solely on the Bible. The Bible alone is held as insufficient for salvation, except that its words be made "alive" through preaching of its ministers.[81][82][83][84][85][86] The extemporaneous preaching of the ministry is considered to be guided by God,[87] and must be heard directly.[88] Significant weight is given to the thoughts of workers, especially more senior workers.[89] Salvation is achieved through willingness to uphold the group's standards, by faithfully following in "the way," and by personal worthiness.[81][90] Doctrines such as predestination, justification by faith alone, and redemption as the sole basis of salvation are rejected.[91][92][93][94] All other churches, religions and ministries are held to be false.[95][96][13][97][98]
Members are encouraged to attend meetings, and to speak at them.[99] Other standards include modest dress and avoiding activities deemed to be worldly or frivolous[100][101] (such as smoking, competitive sports, motion pictures and theater).[102][81][103][104][72] Standards and practices vary geographically: For example, in some areas fermented wine is used in Sunday meetings, in other areas grape juice is used; in some areas people who have divorced and remarried are not allowed to participate in meetings, in others they may.[105][106][107][103] The use of television and other communication media is discouraged in some areas, based on the stance of the local workers and overseers.[108][104]
Christology
The group has rejected the doctrine of the Trinity since its inception.[109][110][111][112] Though members believe in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, they hold a unitarian view of Christ.[113][2] The Holy Spirit is held as an attitude or force from God. Jesus is God's son, a fully human figure who came to earth to establish a way of ministry and salvation;[114] godlike or "divine," though not God Himself.[115][116]
Baptism
Baptism by one of the group's ministers is considered a necessary step for full participation, including re-baptism of persons baptised by other churches.[2] Candidates approved by the local workers are baptised by immersion.[117]
Church name
The group represents itself as nondenominational[118] and without a name. Though overseers and head workers use registered names when necessary to conduct official business, most members do not associate a formal name with the church.[119] Instead, they refer to the movement as "The Truth" or "The Way."[120] Few members are aware that the group has official names[121] used for church business.[122] Registered names vary from nation to nation. In 1995, controversy arose in Alberta, Canada, when part of the group incorporated as the "Alberta Society of Christian Assemblies". The entity was dissolved in 1996 after its existence became generally known.[20]
Restorationism
Many church members hold to a long-standing view that the church has no earthly founder,[123][124] and that it originated directly with Christ during the first century AD.[125][126][72] However, members have begun to make more frequent statements that hint either at a beginning during the closing years of the nineteenth century[104] or at a notable resurgence around that time.[127]
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 25, 2009 11:46:17 GMT -5
I've given up on the Wiki article. I totally re-wrote it about three years ago - you can see preserved what kind of rubbish I replaced, because I copied it for posterity into the "discussion" tab. No sooner had we the article up to wiki standards - I along with several other folks committed to an impartial presentation minus all the "weazel words" and interpretations - and no sooner had the wiki moderator given it a stamp of approval, a couple of anonymous folks came along to butcher it.
The problem, unfortunately, is what I call the purple circle routine. Those with an axe to grind invariable cite the exes who have an axe to grind, and they in turn cite the citation of their own perspective. It becomes a closed circuit, and intellectually incestuous. And unfortunately, in this process, the vast body of documentation in Workers' notes, professing people's statements, or newspaper interviews with professing people are ignored.
Unfortunately, when you have people not accustomed to academic or scholarly writing, you wind up getting the sorts of hackneyed results I have preserved, some of which are so ridiculous they are comically child-like. It is for this reason my university forbids the use of Wikipedia as an "authority" on anything.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Sept 25, 2009 11:47:42 GMT -5
Wow I read the same thing with different conclusion. Seems you have taken up the BERTFORMAT of response to troublesome points. Taking things out of the context that they were written can also taint a fair conclusion. A favorite way that Nathan and Bert spin the facts. Sometimes there is a grand attempt at obfuscation where the reader can easily lose track of what was the original subject Personally it discourages anyone from making their own conclusions. Again let the reader decide if it agrees with his experience and knowledge or not
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 25, 2009 11:53:31 GMT -5
Wow I read the same thing with different conclusion. Seems you have taken up the BERTFORMAT of response to troublesome points. Taking things out of the context that they were written can also taint a fair conclusion. A favorite way that Nathan and Bert spin the facts. Sometimes there is a grand attempt at obfuscation where the reader can easily lose track of what was the original subject Personally it discourages anyone from making their own conclusions. Again let the reader decide if it agrees with his experience and knowledge or not Ken, you're getting into the realm of criticizing the writers instead of dealing with the facts. I'm not exactly sure what your point of reference is here.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 25, 2009 11:59:21 GMT -5
I've given up on the Wiki article. I totally re-wrote it about three years ago - you can see preserved what kind of rubbish I replaced, because I copied it for posterity into the "discussion" tab. No sooner had we the article up to wiki standards - I along with several other folks committed to an impartial presentation minus all the "weazel words" and interpretations - and no sooner had the wiki moderator given it a stamp of approval, a couple of anonymous folks came along to butcher it. The problem, unfortunately, is what I call the purple circle routine. Those with an axe to grind invariable cite the exes who have an axe to grind, and they in turn cite the citation of their own perspective. It becomes a closed circuit, and intellectually incestuous. And unfortunately, in this process, the vast body of documentation in Workers' notes, professing people's statements, or newspaper interviews with professing people are ignored. Unfortunately, when you have people not accustomed to academic or scholarly writing, you wind up getting the sorts of hackneyed results I have preserved, some of which are so ridiculous they are comically child-like. It is for this reason my university forbids the use of Wikipedia as an "authority" on anything. At some point, the article stabilized where the writing was very poor, but at least the bias wasn't too bad. I would estimate 10-12 writers had a hand in it. Since then, the entire article has been re-written by one writer using a few self-published sources. As you indicate, there is a "purple circle" routine at work, where something licentious appears somewhere and is then re-quoted ad nauseum as if it is true. (This phenomenon is by no means unique to the ex's research industry.)
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Sept 25, 2009 12:30:45 GMT -5
I have extracted your so called crap statements for further discussion The Bible alone is held as insufficient for salvation, except that its words be made "alive" through preaching of its ministers. Salvation only through the workers The extemporaneous preaching of the ministry is considered to be guided by God,[87] and must be heard directly No tape recordingSalvation is achieved through willingness to uphold the group's standards, try shorts or short hair or tv in livingroom by faithfully following in "the way," and by personal worthiness.[81][90] Doctrines such as predestination, justification by faith alone, and redemption as the sole basis of salvation are rejected.[91][92][93][94] Jesus plus lots of other traditions All other churches, religions and ministries are held to be false.[95][96][13][97][98]Anyone who has not heard this was sleeping during meetings Few members are aware that the group has official names[121] used for church business. No name church has a name several matter of fact
|
|
eh?
Senior Member
Posts: 714
|
Post by eh? on Sept 25, 2009 12:42:57 GMT -5
Who can update Wiki? At one point a while ago I had read the 2x2 info and it was ... kind of like some of the info that has been posted here. Things that have been 'heard' being posted as SOP. The one thing I remember from that 'version' was that the workers liked to go to NV brothels. Later I read the info again and that info had been removed and the info in general had changed it's tone.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Sept 25, 2009 13:19:50 GMT -5
anyone.
|
|
eh?
Senior Member
Posts: 714
|
Post by eh? on Sept 25, 2009 13:25:17 GMT -5
That explains it
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Sept 25, 2009 14:41:47 GMT -5
RED = Total crap. BLUE = Half-truth. Following from wiki: Baptism Baptism by one of the group's ministers is considered a necessary step for full participation, including re-baptism of persons baptised by other churches.[2] Candidates approved by the local workers are baptised by immersion.[117] What is off about this one?
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Sept 25, 2009 15:57:44 GMT -5
I never wrote or had anything to do with the article, but it seems spot on to me. Some of the stuff about sport has changed in real life, but guess it wasn't written yesterday and yes there are still a lot of 2x2s who do not agree with sport. The remainder is spot on. The article seems well written in respect to having many references to back up the statements written.
I consider passive phrasing to be very wise in writing this kind of article. It does not mean authoritarian as you suggest, but the opposite.
|
|
otto2
Junior Member
Posts: 59
|
Post by otto2 on Sept 25, 2009 16:01:37 GMT -5
RED = Total crap. BLUE = Half-truth. Following from wiki: Doctrines A catchphrase frequently used to describe the group is: "The church in the home, and the ministry without a home."[74] The movement owns no church buildings: church buildings are seen as inconsistent with biblical Christianity, and were strongly denounced by early workers.[75][76] Its ministers do not own homes or draw a salary. The group has maintained these practices since its inception.[77][78] All the movement's teachings are expressed orally exclusively: the movement publishes no doctrine or statements of faith.[79][80] Workers hold that all church teachings are based solely on the Bible. The Bible alone is held as insufficient for salvation, except that its words be made "alive" through preaching of its ministers.[81][82][83][84][85][86] The extemporaneous preaching of the ministry is considered to be guided by God,[87] and must be heard directly.[88] Significant weight is given to the thoughts of workers, especially more senior workers.[89] Salvation is achieved through willingness to uphold the group's standards, by faithfully following in "the way," and by personal worthiness.[81][90] Doctrines such as predestination, justification by faith alone, and redemption as the sole basis of salvation are rejected.[91][92][93][94] All other churches, religions and ministries are held to be false.[95][96][13][97][98]Members are encouraged to attend meetings, and to speak at them.[99] Other standards include modest dress and avoiding activities deemed to be worldly or frivolous[100][101] (such as smoking, competitive sports, motion pictures and theater).[102][81][103][104][72] Standards and practices vary geographically: For example, in some areas fermented wine is used in Sunday meetings, in other areas grape juice is used; in some areas people who have divorced and remarried are not allowed to participate in meetings, in others they may.[105][106][107][103] The use of television and other communication media is discouraged in some areas, based on the stance of the local workers and overseers.[108][104] .[127] I'm sorry what but the texts highlighted in red which you describe as 'total crap' were without doubt the position my parents taught me as a teenager growing up in the seventies, and I'm pretty sure my mother would subscribe to them even today. My brother (a worker) would probably just remain silent! It may not be the general position today but it was certainly my experience of the position then. The other headings; Christology, baptism etc were not on my radar at that time.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Sept 25, 2009 16:30:19 GMT -5
What Not your experience-thats ok. Mainline 2x2s who have tried to follow the unwritten doctrine and workers wishes find most of what you call into question true and their experience and some are not exes. Perhaps you have had a sheltered existence in the 2x2 fellowship -or- just not want to admit what is true as being true. Ken
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Sept 25, 2009 16:31:11 GMT -5
I never wrote or had anything to do with the article, but it seems spot on to me. Some of the stuff about sport has changed in real life, but guess it wasn't written yesterday and yes there are still a lot of 2x2s who do not agree with sport. The remainder is spot on. The article seems well written in respect to having many references to back up the statements written. I consider passive phrasing to be very wise in writing this kind of article. It does not mean authoritarian as you suggest, but the opposite. RED = Total crap. BLUE = Half-truth. Following from wiki: Doctrines A catchphrase frequently used to describe the group is: "The church in the home, and the ministry without a home."[74] The movement owns no church buildings: church buildings are seen as inconsistent with biblical Christianity, and were strongly denounced by early workers.[75][76] Its ministers do not own homes or draw a salary. The group has maintained these practices since its inception.[77][78] All the movement's teachings are expressed orally exclusively: the movement publishes no doctrine or statements of faith.[79][80] Workers hold that all church teachings are based solely on the Bible. The Bible alone is held as insufficient for salvation, except that its words be made "alive" through preaching of its ministers.[81][82][83][84][85][86] The extemporaneous preaching of the ministry is considered to be guided by God,[87] and must be heard directly.[88] Significant weight is given to the thoughts of workers, especially more senior workers.[89] Salvation is achieved through willingness to uphold the group's standards, by faithfully following in "the way," and by personal worthiness.[81][90] Doctrines such as predestination, justification by faith alone, and redemption as the sole basis of salvation are rejected.[91][92][93][94] All other churches, religions and ministries are held to be false.[95][96][13][97][98]Members are encouraged to attend meetings, and to speak at them.[99] Other standards include modest dress and avoiding activities deemed to be worldly or frivolous[100][101] (such as smoking, competitive sports, motion pictures and theater).[102][81][103][104][72] Standards and practices vary geographically: For example, in some areas fermented wine is used in Sunday meetings, in other areas grape juice is used; in some areas people who have divorced and remarried are not allowed to participate in meetings, in others they may.[105][106][107][103] The use of television and other communication media is discouraged in some areas, based on the stance of the local workers and overseers.[108][104] .[127] I'm sorry what but the texts highlighted in red which you describe as 'total crap' were without doubt the position my parents taught me as a teenager growing up in the seventies, and I'm pretty sure my mother would subscribe to them even today. My brother (a worker) would probably just remain silent! It may not be the general position today but it was certainly my experience of the position then. I agree. Much of it is as I remember it--no sports, no movie theaters, all other religions are false, etc., Parts of it are new to me, as we read about now--i.e. has to come from the workers (I never knew that as a youth--my profession was at convention so I neither had nor knew to claim a specific worker for my profession).
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Sept 25, 2009 16:37:14 GMT -5
Just a rough estimate, but sports and theater have been acceptable for at least 20 years. Motion pictures have become increasingly common entertainment choices over the past 10 years.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Sept 25, 2009 16:45:08 GMT -5
Just a rough estimate, but sports and theater have been acceptable for at least 20 years. Motion pictures have become increasingly common entertainment choices over the past 10 years. Well...for those of us who would have lost out for such, and as youth who were not allowed to participate in those activities, it was very real. No band for instance because of those band pants...and how wrong it would be for girls to wear pants. We well remember the stigma and the unnecessary denial.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Sept 25, 2009 16:58:59 GMT -5
As I sit here and read all this difference of opinion about this one article... all I can think is none of this would be taking place if the 2x2s had a written doctrine and they followed it. We might be talking about how we disagree with it but that is true of every faith... there will always be someone to disagree... this is why we have so many.
If you want to improve the 2x2s this would be the first thing to do... agree on a doctrine.. and publish it... follow it.... but if you never do that people will always be making one up for you and it will be based on their own perspective... and that perspective may not be 100% truth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2009 17:03:33 GMT -5
What Not your experience-thats ok. Mainline 2x2s who have tried to follow the unwritten doctrine and workers wishes find most of what you call into question true and their experience and some are not exes. Perhaps you have had a sheltered existence in the 2x2 fellowship -or- just not want to admit what is true as being true. Ken Ken, I'm sure you need no introduction to the fact there is a "spell" that many people fall under within this sect. I know it only too well. We are oblivious to the obvious and deny the directions of common sense, logic, sound reasoning and understanding, which are exorcised by the spell we come under. It can take many severe experiences to break this spell and cause the scales to fall from our eyes. Those who deny those things that we now see so clearly, by and large genuinely believe their position to be true. Once the scales fall away, they will then clearly see what they cannot yet see and will wonder how they did not see. It's all about convoluting facts, circumstances and indoctrinations to fit in with a current state of mind. How do I know this? I was top of the class at one time ! How do I know others are likewise afflicted? Because they have identical positions to that which I once had ! We really cannot argue with them. In my insufficient attempts to understand my former self, I do find that I can understand why they are the way they are, for that which I was and that which they are now, are like two peas in a pod. Lord I pray for a less confrontational heart and one that can extend love and understanding to those who have not yet crossed the Rubicon on their Damascan journey.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Sept 25, 2009 17:34:30 GMT -5
"It may not be the general position today but it was certainly my experience of the position then." That's the trouble otto, the "reliable" sources quoted are in essence personal opinions and interpretations of non and former members portrayed as universal timeless truths. According to wiki it doesn't matter if a statement is true as long as there is a cross reference with which to "verify" the statement. The problem with that is many of the reliable sources have been cross referenced to each other, often back to the exact same Impartial Reporter articles and letters to the editor, and works like the Cooneyites section of Heresies Exposed. Repeated cross referencing does not make what's cross referenced true. For example, the -->> 2x2 article in "The Plain Truth" magazine << references The Church Without a Name which would make it "verifiable" per wiki and acceptable as a source for a wiki article even if statements in the article and/or book are not true.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Sept 25, 2009 17:38:52 GMT -5
What Not your experience-thats ok. Mainline 2x2s who have tried to follow the unwritten doctrine and workers wishes find most of what you call into question true and their experience and some are not exes. Perhaps you have had a sheltered existence in the 2x2 fellowship -or- just not want to admit what is true as being true. Ken Ken, I'm sure you need no introduction to the fact there is a "spell" that many people fall under within this sect. I know it only too well. We are oblivious to the obvious and deny the directions of common sense, logic, sound reasoning and understanding, which are exorcised by the spell we come under. It can take many severe experiences to break this spell and cause the scales to fall from our eyes. Those who deny those things that we now see so clearly, by and large genuinely believe their position to be true. Once the scales fall away, they will then clearly see what they cannot yet see and will wonder how they did not see. It's all about convoluting facts, circumstances and indoctrinations to fit in with a current state of mind. How do I know this? I was top of the class at one time ! How do I know others are likewise afflicted? Because they have identical positions to that which I once had ! We really cannot argue with them. In my insufficient attempts to understand my former self, I do find that I can understand why they are the way they are, for that which I was and that which they are now, are like two peas in a pod. Lord I pray for a less confrontational heart and one that can extend love and understanding to those who have not yet crossed the Rubicon on their Damascan journey. Thanks Ram I was in the same school for a long time. Your prayer is one I need also. How soon we forget our own experience defending the indefensible Love conquers all and I needed the reminder. Thanks brother ken
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on Sept 25, 2009 17:41:11 GMT -5
As I sit here and read all this difference of opinion about this one artical... all I can think is none of this would be taking place if the 2x2s had a written doctrine and they followed it. We might be talking about how we disagree with it but that is true of every faith... there will always be someone to disagree... this is why we have so many. If you want to improve the 2x2s this would be the first thing to do... agree on a doctrine.. and publish it... follow it.... but if you never do that people will always be making one up for you and it will be based on their own perspective... and that perspective may not be 100% truth. We *do* agree on a doctrine: Our doctrine is to not have a doctrine that we agree on. ;D fs
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Sept 25, 2009 17:44:42 GMT -5
"It may not be the general position today but it was certainly my experience of the position then." That's the trouble otto, the "reliable" sources quoted are in essence personal opinions and interpretations of non and former members portrayed as universal timeless truths. I understand that the one about sports and movies has now been relaxed.
Instead of telling us our perception or understanding isn't correct, I'm hoping someone will take them point at a time and give us clarity.
For instance...it is no longer believed that the 'truth' can only come by way of the worker?
I would really like to know what is in error about the baptism statement.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Sept 25, 2009 17:49:36 GMT -5
Had a chuckle over this... yep that pretty much sums it up... and here lies the problem.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 25, 2009 18:24:07 GMT -5
As I sit here and read all this difference of opinion about this one article... all I can think is none of this would be taking place if the 2x2s had a written doctrine and they followed it. We might be talking about how we disagree with it but that is true of every faith... there will always be someone to disagree... this is why we have so many. If you want to improve the 2x2s this would be the first thing to do... agree on a doctrine.. and publish it... follow it.... but if you never do that people will always be making one up for you and it will be based on their own perspective... and that perspective may not be 100% truth. That's the point. An encyclopedia article should not make up things. We don't have a published doctrine because we are led by the Holy Spirit. The perspective offered in the article is entirely that of an ex-member. Most members recoil at the manner in which the article is written. No doubt I have led a "sheltered" existence, but so have most of those in the fellowship. The other factor is that many denominations were much more conservative and legalistic 30 or 40 years ago. Generally, a conservative religious movement will be slow adopters of new things: movies, novels, etc. Apparently, workers were reluctant to use microphones and computers when these first appeared on the scene.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 25, 2009 18:25:12 GMT -5
Just a rough estimate, but sports and theater have been acceptable for at least 20 years. Motion pictures have become increasingly common entertainment choices over the past 10 years. Well...for those of us who would have lost out for such, and as youth who were not allowed to participate in those activities, it was very real. No band for instance because of those band pants...and how wrong it would be for girls to wear pants. We well remember the stigma and the unnecessary denial.Gone with the dodo bird.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 25, 2009 18:27:07 GMT -5
What Not your experience-thats ok. Mainline 2x2s who have tried to follow the unwritten doctrine and workers wishes find most of what you call into question true and their experience and some are not exes. Perhaps you have had a sheltered existence in the 2x2 fellowship -or- just not want to admit what is true as being true. Ken Ken, I'm sure you need no introduction to the fact there is a "spell" that many people fall under within this sect. I know it only too well. We are oblivious to the obvious and deny the directions of common sense, logic, sound reasoning and understanding, which are exorcised by the spell we come under. It can take many severe experiences to break this spell and cause the scales to fall from our eyes. Those who deny those things that we now see so clearly, by and large genuinely believe their position to be true. Once the scales fall away, they will then clearly see what they cannot yet see and will wonder how they did not see. It's all about convoluting facts, circumstances and indoctrinations to fit in with a current state of mind. How do I know this? I was top of the class at one time ! How do I know others are likewise afflicted? Because they have identical positions to that which I once had ! We really cannot argue with them. In my insufficient attempts to understand my former self, I do find that I can understand why they are the way they are, for that which I was and that which they are now, are like two peas in a pod. Lord I pray for a less confrontational heart and one that can extend love and understanding to those who have not yet crossed the Rubicon on their Damascan journey. It doesn't matter whether it's an employer, a religion, or a restaurant chain. When we're positive minded we see positive things, and negative minded we see negative minded. All of a sudden the half-full glass is half-empty. I challenge you to provide me one example of being under a spell.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Sept 25, 2009 18:37:55 GMT -5
I have extracted your so called crap statements for further discussion The Bible alone is held as insufficient for salvation, except that its words be made "alive" through preaching of its ministers. Salvation only through the workersResponse: I found salvation before I came to a meeting. Also, there have been people who remember their parents praying for someone like the workers to come and it did not happen in their lifetime. Would they not be saved? The sentence as written implies the workers add to the Bible which they do not. The idea is very badly expressed. In addition how much heterodoxy is permitted on this particular point? Response: Many have been led to the Gospel through the witness of non-workers, even by ex's. Also "is considered" -> considered by who? Go ahead try them. We meet with people every Sunday who have TV in their living room, as their spouses do not profess. Aren't these things a social standard, "just how we do things"? I've never heard the idea expressed that they were a pre-requisite to salvation. A woman had a TV for 5 years after she professed. Are you saying if she had died, she would not have been saved?
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Sept 25, 2009 18:39:53 GMT -5
Well...for those of us who would have lost out for such, and as youth who were not allowed to participate in those activities, it was very real. No band for instance because of those band pants...and how wrong it would be for girls to wear pants. We well remember the stigma and the unnecessary denial. Gone with the dodo bird. Unless this is flying over my head, you're saying it never existed? Or just that it never existed for you?
|
|