|
Post by lin on Jan 28, 2010 14:05:44 GMT -5
JO wrote: JO: What are the names of the particular websites that fit your description of being "full of hatred for anything 2x2"? Cherie, I don't want to be drawn into a review of anti2x2 websites. I agree with you that the history of our church needs to be common knowledge so I'm happy that historical documents are assembled on the web. What I'm not happy about is the "get out of that abusive cult" tone that quickly becomes apparent when I go to your website. Here's an example: I click on the "testimonies" tab: www.tellingthetruth.info/testimonies_index/index.phpThen I click "The Process of Role Exit" which takes me to: www.tellingthetruth.info/testimonies_articles/roleexitb.phpThis tells me how to write my life story, and asks if I am interested in having my life story or exit letter published on the Veterans of Truth Website. I click on that link and this is what I see: Are you one of the "Walking Wounded" members of the 2x2 sect who feels sick & tired of what's underneath the polished veneer and deadly cover-ups of the workers & want to bring the "REAL" truth to the table? Jesus said: "I am the way, the Truth, and the life." John 14:6
Do you want to be liberated from man created rules that hold you captive? God's Gift of Grace frees us from bad leaders who are not men of meri t and virtue but men who love preeminence over others. They crush freedom with bondage & suspicion.Can you explain to me why as a member of the fellowship I would ever want to point my fellow church members to such propaganda? Thanks JO. I was going to add some more,but felt maybe I was giving the wrong impression. I am positive the history side of the site is good, but the site is also designed to destroy.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jan 28, 2010 14:22:28 GMT -5
Much of the Irvine history has a carnal focus, that was apparent even when I read the Secret Sect in the early 80s. When you understand God is able to raise up of stones children unto Abram and that we are not to be taken up with endless carnal oenologies, carnal history can be put in it's proper perspective. It's then we can understand the spiritual history of the matter, one which should go back to the shores of Galilee.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jan 28, 2010 15:03:35 GMT -5
It's quite a leap to conclude that the 110 year old physical history of the 2x2 sect qualifies as "endless carnal genealogies."
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jan 28, 2010 16:48:34 GMT -5
Much of the Irvine history has a carnal focus, that was apparent even when I read the Secret Sect in the early 80s. When you understand God is able to raise up of stones children unto Abram and that we are not to be taken up with endless carnal oenologies, carnal history can be put in it's proper perspective. It's then we can understand the spiritual history of the matter, one which should go back to the shores of Galilee. I agree that we need to separate the spiritual and the carnal. This is something F&W continue to struggle with. The Living Witness heresy brought a human dimension to something that is purely spiritual. If we're born of the Spirit, man's involvement is immaterial.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2010 1:54:24 GMT -5
No Roger, in fact, any Drummaster guy can toss his own drums into the sea; dump his pesticides into the nearby creek, crop-dust the nearby town and have mutant animals and kids running around with two heads.
What this guy does has no bearing on his credibility as an environmental manager. Agreed?
Same goes for these archbishops, Popes and televangelists. What they do in their religious lives has no bearing on their message of Christ's humility, homelessness. poverty and rejection of the world.
|
|
|
Post by StAnne on Jan 29, 2010 13:34:13 GMT -5
Same goes for these archbishops, Popes and televangelists. What they do in their religious lives has no bearing on their message of Christ's humility, homelessness. poverty and rejection of the world. Boy! It's tough on you to respond on the basis of the 2x2 and keep to that, without throwing in a little Catholic bashing, isn't it.
I'm not certain the Holy Father owns a home. Are you?
I know he sold his quite old, small, Ford-make car after becoming pope.
I don't know if other bishops/archbishops own homes either. Do you know?
Since you're comparing...before we further bash the Catholic Church for lack of charity and charitable donations, maybe we should take a closer look at those of the 2x2 church as an organization. How much did it donate to poverty last year?
How much money is spent running the Vatican and supporting the Pope ? 2 weeks ago Best Answer - Chosen by Asker Mainly the question is, the Vatican has so many treasures it has collected throughout the years. With all these treasures it has, why not sell them and help the poor ten times over, instead of hording them? Answer: The Holy See annually runs a deficit in its operations (including its charitable works), for which it must depend on contributions (most of which now come from American bishops and their people). "Vatican riches" are a myth. I presume the treasures Mitchel wants the Vatican to sell are the widely acclaimed art treasures. Now suppose we sell them. Could they bring in 30 billion dollars? Well, suppose they did bring in so much. There are now close to 5 billion people in the world, and I guess 3billion of these are rated really poor. So the Vatican is able to give each of these ten dollars apiece. Now you can bet that all this money will find its way from the hands of the poor to the pockets of the rich in less than a year. So how are we ahead? Every church has administration costs, and these treasures bring in much need tourist dollars, much of which also goes to the poor. This past year the Vatican has run a 3 million dollar deficit, and has been publicly documented. Now back to the art treasures. They have been sold--to whom? To private collectors and to museums. The world will never see nor derive any benefit from the treasures in private hands. And the public who might visit the rest of the treasures in museums can visit them now in the Vatican museums. They are not being hoarded. They are being preserved and displayed and widely enjoyed. I'd say, leave them there. Mitchel is yearning to enjoy even greater treasures in the keeping of the Catholic Church, he might start with the Bible. He would not have Scripture if the Church had not first written it, validated it, and handed it down to him through the centuries. Anyone who seeks to can enjoy the treasure of the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist. Anyone can enjoy membership and fellowship in the Church which Christ founded and the Holy Spirit has kept going for 20 centuries. ______________________________________… I believe that those who decry the "wealth" of the Vatican do so not out of altruistic reasons but due to a hope that the Church have no clout or influence in the world's affairs. This has nothing to do with "riches" but more to do with "power". Most people do not wish that the Church have a voice in matters political, humanitarian, ethical, etc., they would like to see her shut-up and ineffectual. God wishes otherwise and so do the true aspirations of the inner workings of humanity. "the gates of hell shall not prevail against thee." The ignorance of these simplistic self-righteous statements need not bother us - God is in control here - no worry. Fools be gone! If the Church had all the riches of the world (and she does on a much deeper level) no one should worry - we all should be happy if such a miraculous thing happened - for we'd be assured that all those riches would be distributed rightfully and justly, unlike the world. We'd be assured that the great works of art would be open for all and available to all. ______________________________________… Would they feel "better" if Egypt would sell the pyramids, France the Eiffel Tower, China the Wall, etc., etc., to feed their hungry? These people are real jokers, and they really do not know what the "treasures" of the Vatican are ... Maybe if they sell the Sistine Chapel, piece by piece of stone and mortar to another country, they will have more cash to increase their catholic contributions around the world ... Have you ever seen or heard of all the money that goes out of the Vatican to dozens of countries around the world each year to help? The help goes not only to Catholics, but to all ... "The Vatican Treasures" issue is a really old one ... always used by those that want to put down Catholicism at its roots ... The folks that criticize Catholics and the Vatican would feel much better if the Pope would live in a shack, in rags, and extreme poverty. ( observers say he actually lives an austere life of much penance, prayer, and fasting.)Well I have news for them ... The president of Argentina lives in the Pink House, the president of the USA lives in the White House, the Queen of England lives in Buckingham Palace (?), and the Pope lives in the Vatican. ca.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100117204358AAEpHEg
|
|
|
Post by someguy on Jan 30, 2010 0:04:21 GMT -5
Absolutely not... just saying that if you want 2x2s to visit your site, your site has to be "2x2 friendly"... I'm sorry for bringing all of this up again, Cherie, I know we've had this conversation once or twice in the past. I can accept the direction that you have taken with your website; it is just my sincere desire that everyone would be better "educated" re. the historical aspect of the fellowship that motivates me to write these things to you. You are absolutely right, it would be a LOT of work to create anything similar to your website, OR to "divorce" the editorial component of your present site from the "reportage" component. I do appreciate your offer to use articles that are on your site. I will likely copy some of them and include them on the TA site itself, while others I will link to (such as the Goodhand Pattison article, since your editorial comments on this article are invaluable.) No, I do not expect you to do the work for me to develop a website after my own desires... Sorry that I have bothered you with this issue yet again. -wanderer ~~ I wish you the best with your TA website, Wanderer. I hope it will be a friendly site. why wouldn't it be Nate. Wanderer is only putting up documents circulated by the f&W. sounds friendly to me.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Jan 30, 2010 14:55:15 GMT -5
What "editorial" info are you referring to? Specifically - please give some examples. Are you saying that I shouldnt have written my book? Absolutely not... just saying that if you want 2x2s to visit your site, your site has to be "2x2 friendly"... I'm sorry for bringing all of this up again, Cherie, I know we've had this conversation once or twice in the past. I can accept the direction that you have taken with your website; it is just my sincere desire that everyone would be better "educated" re. the historical aspect of the fellowship that motivates me to write these things to you. You are absolutely right, it would be a LOT of work to create anything similar to your website, OR to "divorce" the editorial component of your present site from the "reportage" component. I do appreciate your offer to use articles that are on your site. I will likely copy some of them and include them on the TA site itself, while others I will link to (such as the Goodhand Pattison article, since your editorial comments on this article are invaluable.) No, I do not expect you to do the work for me to develop a website after my own desires... Sorry that I have bothered you with this issue yet again. -wanderer Wanderer, if you link to TTT I won't be referring people to your site because within a few clicks the "get out of that abusive cult" message comes on strong. Say your site has this link to the Pattison Account: www.tellingthetruth.info/publications_index/pattisong.phpI click on the "testimonies" tab: www.tellingthetruth.info/testimonies_index/index.phpThen I click "The Process of Role Exit" which takes me to: www.tellingthetruth.info/testimonies_articles/roleexitb.phpThis tells me how to write my life story, and asks if I am interested in having my life story or exit letter published on the Veterans of Truth Website. I click on that link and this is what I see: Are you one of the "Walking Wounded" members of the 2x2 sect who feels sick & tired of what's underneath the polished veneer and deadly cover-ups of the workers & want to bring the "REAL" truth to the table? Jesus said: "I am the way, the Truth, and the life." John 14:6
Do you want to be liberated from man created rules that hold you captive? God's Gift of Grace frees us from bad leaders who are not men of merit and virtue but men who love preeminence over others. They crush freedom with bondage & suspicion.I'll discuss our church's history with anyone who asks, but I don't want to be responsible for encouraging my fellow church members to leave the fellowship.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jan 30, 2010 17:27:48 GMT -5
JO wrote:
FYI: I just changed it so this link now goes to the TTT email box - and not VOT.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 30, 2010 17:52:46 GMT -5
Not at all. None of what I said applies to Scripture which is ordained by God, and God has assured its accuracy through the ages. That claim does not apply to convention notes. Actually, I would guess that much of what is found in the Truth Archive is considered by its readers to be "inspired by God" and read and valued almost as much as the Bible itself... True, there is a question as to just how accurate the actual text is, but there is the same problem with the Scriptures. That should NOT be the case. Perhaps that's why workers are against circulating convention notes.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jan 31, 2010 0:21:56 GMT -5
No hard feelings wanderer--everyone has the right to set the boundaries for their website as they see fit. I have my criteria for TTT and others have theirs...each website owner is sovereign.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jan 31, 2010 17:43:10 GMT -5
Much of the Irvine history has a carnal focus, that was apparent even when I read the Secret Sect in the early 80s. When you understand God is able to raise up of stones children unto Abram and that we are not to be taken up with endless carnal oenologies, carnal history can be put in it's proper perspective. It's then we can understand the spiritual history of the matter, one which should go back to the shores of Galilee. I agree that we need to separate the spiritual and the carnal. This is something F&W continue to struggle with. The Living Witness heresy brought a human dimension to something that is purely spiritual. If we're born of the Spirit, man's involvement is immaterial. The identification of what's carnal is the whole point of the admonition to not be taken up with endless genealogies 1,2 and instead remember though the Pauls plant, the Apollos water, it is God who gives the blessing and increase. Paul was one who killed people of "this way", people needed to balance that carnal history with his planting/watering etc. If his efforts were blessed by God with a spiritual increase Paul's carnal history is spiritually immaterial. It seems to me that's the way to look at what's carnal, reaction to what's carnal can reveal where faith is; in a man-made system existing with none of God's spiritual blessing and/or increase, or; men yet carnal but who have been blessed by God with undeniable spiritual increase. That was my reaction to reading The Secret Sect and still is the way I feel about it today. I can't deny the spiritual blessing and increase I've witnessed all my life. Like many have mentioned, that's exactly what is missing on so many of the counter-advocacy sites. 1Don't let people waste time in endless speculation over myths and spiritual pedigrees. For these things only cause arguments; they don't help people live a life of faith in God. 2Do not get involved in foolish discussions about spiritual pedigrees* or in quarrels and fights about obedience to Jewish laws. These kinds of things are useless and a waste of time.
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Jan 31, 2010 18:47:01 GMT -5
Is it possible to acknowledge both carnal history and spiritual life?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jan 31, 2010 19:16:52 GMT -5
Is it possible to acknowledge both carnal history and spiritual life? Of course it is, the trick is in keeping them in perspective. The counter-advocacy tells me I'm nuts, brainwashed, braindead, if I think there is anything spiritual with the friends and workers, or that I haven't been lied to about Irvine. My real life experience tells me different. I'd include many friends and workers as the most balanced people I know.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2010 19:42:59 GMT -5
I agree that we need to separate the spiritual and the carnal. This is something F&W continue to struggle with. The Living Witness heresy brought a human dimension to something that is purely spiritual. If we're born of the Spirit, man's involvement is immaterial. The identification of what's carnal is the whole point of the admonition to not be taken up with endless genealogies 1,2 and instead remember though the Pauls plant, the Apollos water, it is God who gives the blessing and increase. Paul was one who killed people of "this way", people needed to balance that carnal history with his planting/watering etc. If his efforts were blessed by God with a spiritual increase Paul's carnal history is spiritually immaterial. It seems to me that's the way to look at what's carnal, reaction to what's carnal can reveal where faith is; in a man-made system existing with none of God's spiritual blessing and/or increase, or; men yet carnal but who have been blessed by God with undeniable spiritual increase. That was my reaction to reading The Secret Sect and still is the way I feel about it today. I can't deny the spiritual blessing and increase I've witnessed all my life. Like many have mentioned, that's exactly what is missing on so many of the counter-advocacy sites. 1Don't let people waste time in endless speculation over myths and spiritual pedigrees. For these things only cause arguments; they don't help people live a life of faith in God. 2Do not get involved in foolish discussions about spiritual pedigrees* or in quarrels and fights about obedience to Jewish laws. These kinds of things are useless and a waste of time. Strangely, it's for much of this reason that the history of the church needs to be defined in truth. A generation or two of friends have placed a great deal of faith in a genealogy going continuously back to Christ. This genealogical myth has caused a lot of problems and needs to be ended now....by the truth. How many churches have this kind of problem with their church history? None. They acknowledge their true history, make it known to anyone who wants to know, then get on with their mission. Our church has misled and bamboozled thousands of people on this issue and still can't stomach acknowledgment of the truth. So you are completely right Jesse, there has been a great deal of wasted time "in endless speculation over myths and spiritual pedigrees". The truth is: we have no genealogical pedigree as we have purported for decades. Now let's acknowledge it and get on with doing something productive. This issue of the history could have been resolved long ago and could be a total non-issue today, but the will simply isn't there, at least not yet.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jan 31, 2010 19:59:44 GMT -5
The identification of what's carnal is the whole point of the admonition to not be taken up with endless genealogies 1,2 and instead remember though the Pauls plant, the Apollos water, it is God who gives the blessing and increase. Paul was one who killed people of "this way", people needed to balance that carnal history with his planting/watering etc. If his efforts were blessed by God with a spiritual increase Paul's carnal history is spiritually immaterial. It seems to me that's the way to look at what's carnal, reaction to what's carnal can reveal where faith is; in a man-made system existing with none of God's spiritual blessing and/or increase, or; men yet carnal but who have been blessed by God with undeniable spiritual increase. That was my reaction to reading The Secret Sect and still is the way I feel about it today. I can't deny the spiritual blessing and increase I've witnessed all my life. Like many have mentioned, that's exactly what is missing on so many of the counter-advocacy sites. 1Don't let people waste time in endless speculation over myths and spiritual pedigrees. For these things only cause arguments; they don't help people live a life of faith in God. 2Do not get involved in foolish discussions about spiritual pedigrees* or in quarrels and fights about obedience to Jewish laws. These kinds of things are useless and a waste of time. Strangely, it's for much of this reason that the history of the church needs to be defined in truth. A generation or two of friends have placed a great deal of faith in a genealogy going continuously back to Christ. This genealogical myth has caused a lot of problems and needs to be ended now....by the truth. How many churches have this kind of problem with their church history? None. They acknowledge their true history, make it known to anyone who wants to know, then get on with their mission. Our church has misled and bamboozled thousands of people on this issue and still can't stomach acknowledgment of the truth. So you are completely right Jesse, there has been a great deal of wasted time "in endless speculation over myths and spiritual pedigrees". The truth is: we have no genealogical pedigree as we have purported for decades. Now let's acknowledge it and get on with doing something productive. This issue of the history could have been resolved long ago and could be a total non-issue today, but the will simply isn't there, at least not yet. Good Post!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2010 20:09:26 GMT -5
Sorry but we don't say that. Some might believe it, but we don't say that. Repeat - I know of no worker who has made that claim in the 50 odd years I have listened to the Gospel. We say the doctrine and the "way" goes back to the Apostles. We believe that other generations also enjoyed the opportunity of simply living this way as it is written.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jan 31, 2010 20:51:17 GMT -5
My experience matches Bert's, I've always understood "back to the shores of Galilee in a spiritual sense". Clearday, did you see the conversation on facebook someone here linked to where young professing people were discussing "the history"? I was surprised how many knew about Irvine and freely and calmly talked about it in a balanced way in spite of some adults who seemed to be trying to rile them up. I think it's going to be OK.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2010 21:11:31 GMT -5
Well, bert of the hundreds of thousands who have cycled through the church over the last century, you will be delighted to learn that you are one of the elite few of the "we" who got it right. Too bad for all the rest? In my half century, I have almost never heard the word "doctrine" being preached under any circumstances. In fact, I have actually heard that "we have no doctrine". If it had been preached that "this doctrine" goes back to Christ, there would be no issue today. Instead we have often heard that "this way goes back to the shores of Galilee" and that all the first century apostles and preachers were "workers".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2010 21:18:46 GMT -5
My experience matches Bert's, I've always understood "back to the shores of Galilee in a spiritual sense". Clearday, did you see the conversation on facebook someone here linked to where young professing people were discussing "the history"? I was surprised how many knew about Irvine and freely and calmly talked about it in a balanced way in spite of some adults who seemed to be trying to rile them up. I think it's going to be OK. You and bert have proven that two wrongs can make a right. It was preached wrong, you understood them wrong, and you came up with the right answer! Of course many young people know about Irvine et al......thanks to "archenemy" Cherie and no thanks to our own people. It will be OK in about 20 years from now........or will it? The real problem runs deeper than just being open about the facts. The experience demonstrates that we as a fellowship do not highly value the truth, and are perhaps too proud to admit error. If we continue with this, the history issue will die out in 20 years, but the fundamental problem will still remain and bite us on some other issue.
|
|
|
Post by ScholarGal on Jan 31, 2010 21:23:29 GMT -5
Is it possible to acknowledge both carnal history and spiritual life? Of course it is, the trick is in keeping them in perspective. The counter-advocacy tells me I'm nuts, brainwashed, braindead, if I think there is anything spiritual with the friends and workers, or that I haven't been lied to about Irvine. My real life experience tells me different. I'd include many friends and workers as the most balanced people I know. Thanks for the answer. I agree that perspective is important--that's why I think it is important for people to be aware of the carnal history. If they know the basics of the carnal history, they won't be tempted to claim that the carnal history is false. I've seen the reactions of people who believed that the carnal history went "back to the shores of Galilee" and then later learned that gospel meetings and conventions as we know them didn't exist in 1850. I wouldn't wish that disappointment on anyone. I'm glad I learned about the carnal history long before I made a personal decision to be a part of the church.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Jan 31, 2010 21:43:19 GMT -5
"Of course many young people know about Irvine et al......thanks to "archenemy" Cherie and no thanks to our own people"
How do you know that to be true? Would be interesting stat to nail down - if possible.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jan 31, 2010 22:13:50 GMT -5
My experience matches Bert's, I've always understood "back to the shores of Galilee in a spiritual sense". ... Ditto for me!
|
|
|
Post by kiwi on Jan 31, 2010 22:24:21 GMT -5
My experience matches Bert's, I've always understood "back to the shores of Galilee in a spiritual sense". I have always understood and said that this was so.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 31, 2010 22:56:52 GMT -5
I used to like the idea of not having a "carnal" history. Friends and workers die and are forgotten to posterity. No eulogies at funerals. Letters are received, read and burned. No history, no pride. I still find this kind of self-effacement appealing today. However, I believe that human nature abhors a vaccum. In the absence of actual information, we begin to make assumptions. Just tonight I heard a worker say that there was likely more than one church home in Philippi. This was just an incidental remark, in support of the idea that the NT states that churches must be in a home. Don't get me wrong: I like home churches, and scripture supports the idea. But I don't believe Scripture clearly dictates it. Among the friends though it's a cardinal assumption that church homes existed then (they did), they exist now, and although the in between period is kinda fuzzy, it's taken for granted that if we walked into a Sunday meeting in Philippi, it would be very similar to our meeting today, and not at all like this: In the absence of real "carnal" information, people make unreal "carnal" assumptions. Instead of working earnestly forward from actual carnal information, from an actual knowledge of history, they will make assumptions about their history that supports their current practices and behaviours. The real harmful effect of this is in thinking that particular behaviours of the group are morally superior. Do we do this? Every social group does this to some extent. I believe that it's important to know actual history and actual current events to offset this tendency. The problem is that we have moved, in a hundred years, from an attempt to restore the first century church to a belief that we, and only we, are the first century church. Let me provide a simple example. We come to cherish "the silence before the meeting". No harm in that, personally I enjoy it. But then we assume that not having that silence is a bad thing. We worry about cultures who can't seem to be quiet before the meeting. Again, no real harm in any of that. The harm is in beginning to think we are somehow superior because we have "silence before the meeting" and when we walk into another church, we see that they don't. Now ask one of the friends if they think that the church in Philippi had silence before their testimony meeting. I'll warrant that most will say "yes", without any particular shred of evidence. If we knew where the idea actually came from, we'd maybe see it as a useful practice, but not as inviolate doctrine.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jan 31, 2010 23:24:26 GMT -5
I used to like the idea of not having a "carnal" history. Friends and workers die and are forgotten to posterity. No eulogies at funerals. Letters are received, read and burned. No history, no pride. I still find this kind of self-effacement appealing today. However, I believe that human nature abhors a vaccum. In the absence of actual information, we begin to make assumptions. Just tonight I heard a worker say that there was likely more than one church home in Philippi. This was just an incidental remark, in support of the idea that the NT states that churches must be in a home. Don't get me wrong: I like home churches, and scripture supports the idea. But in the absence of real "carnal" information, people make unreal "carnal" assumptions. Instead of working earnestly forward from actual carnal information, from an actual knowledge of history, they will make assumptions about their history that supports their current practices and behaviours. The real harmful effect of this is in thinking that particular behaviours of the group are morally superior. Do we do this? Every social group does this to some extent. I believe that it's important to know actual history and actual current events to offset this tendency. The problem is that we have moved, in a hundred years, from an attempt to restore the first century church to a belief that we, and only we, are the first century church. It may be as you say, but this statement might give some indication of more than one church by using plurals: Philippians 1:1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2010 23:25:10 GMT -5
"Of course many young people know about Irvine et al......thanks to "archenemy" Cherie and no thanks to our own people" How do you know that to be true? Would be interesting stat to nail down - if possible. There have only been two proactive serious sources of the history story: The Secret Sect by Doug Parker and the Telling the Truth web site by Cherie Kropp. Do you know any other proactive source? The truth came out loud and clear around 1980 and we still can't come to terms with it. A few months ago I asked a long time worker what she told people about the history when asked. She said "I tell them there isn't much out there........" Jesse, if it wasn't for Parker and Kropp, everyone except you, bert, kiwi and a few others who misunderstood the church line on the history would still be in the dark, thinking that we are so righteous because our workers continuously went back to the shores of Galilee. I'm glad you got it right, but that doesn't give any comfort to the thousands who got it wrong.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Jan 31, 2010 23:50:05 GMT -5
I used to like the idea of not having a "carnal" history. Friends and workers die and are forgotten to posterity. No eulogies at funerals. Letters are received, read and burned. No history, no pride. I still find this kind of self-effacement appealing today. However, I believe that human nature abhors a vaccum. In the absence of actual information, we begin to make assumptions. Just tonight I heard a worker say that there was likely more than one church home in Philippi. This was just an incidental remark, in support of the idea that the NT states that churches must be in a home. Don't get me wrong: I like home churches, and scripture supports the idea. But in the absence of real "carnal" information, people make unreal "carnal" assumptions. Instead of working earnestly forward from actual carnal information, from an actual knowledge of history, they will make assumptions about their history that supports their current practices and behaviours. The real harmful effect of this is in thinking that particular behaviours of the group are morally superior. Do we do this? Every social group does this to some extent. I believe that it's important to know actual history and actual current events to offset this tendency. The problem is that we have moved, in a hundred years, from an attempt to restore the first century church to a belief that we, and only we, are the first century church. It may be as you say, but this statement might give some indication of more than one church by using plurals: Philippians 1:1 Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons:Perhaps. It's interesting to do a lookup (I use Blue Letter Bible) on the phrases "church in", "church of", "churches in", "churches of". My concern is more that we take these things as a commandment. Whereas a hundred years ago there may have been an earnest inquiry into the structure and organization of the NT church, we now just take this for granted. We work backward from the idea to the verses rather than the other way. Carnal information limits how we apply verses; it makes sure we don't get carried away. This is why the actual history of the movement is important.
|
|