|
Post by elizabethcoleman on May 4, 2015 5:31:21 GMT -5
It was 1991 and Elizabeth was just sixteen years old when she entered her first English class of the year at a brand new school and laid eyes on a stranger seated across the room... [Excerpt of book below] 'What would you say if somebody told you that was the man you were going to marry one day?'
It went through my mind exactly as if I had read it on a wall, a rudely confronting and unwelcome mental graffiti that shook me to the core. Inaudible, but shouted down the megaphone of my consciousness; phrased as a bizarre question rather than a prophetic statement. I stood frozen in the doorway, eyes unwillingly fixed on ‘the man’ undoubtedly in question, who was actually not much more than a boy, having barely turned sixteen...
Apart from a complete lack of attraction on my part, forming a relationship at school was out of the question. I was a professing member of God’s only true church on earth and we didn’t get involved with outsiders... I was fully committed to my faith in the 'only true way', and nothing was going to jeopardise that.
I was to find out the hard way that God had different plans.Current Reviews:‘This is an excellent book, and I don’t give praise lightly. Elizabeth is a gifted writer, and has expressed her journey to freedom extremely well in this intriguing narrative of growing up in a sect that claims to be God’s only right way. This unique and fascinating true story provides a revealing glimpse into a nameless worldwide home church.’ Cherie Kropp, www.tellingthetruth.info and author of The Church Without a Name and the Life, Ministry and Legacy of William Irvine
‘Reading this book brought tears, smiles and thankfulness for what I consider is a book that everyone should read. It is so well written and holds your interest throughout. It is a book that should be made available to every person who is currently part of this group, anyone considering fellowship with them, or anyone who has never heard of this church which claims to have no name. I wish it had been available many years ago as I think it would have changed the course of my life ... but then I wouldn't have known so many dear people who have experienced more difficulties than I, and are rejoicing today as ex-Two-by-Twos.’
Joan F Daniel, Compiler of Reflected Truth - Former Workers and Followers Unmask Life in a Large, Little-known Sect ‘Elizabeth Coleman writes a fresh and clear description of her spiritual journey from growing up in a family that had long religious connections with the sect variously known in the USA, Australia, and other countries as ‘The Way’, ‘The Church’, ‘The Two-by-Twos’, and also by other names internationally. A carefully structured juxtaposition between the preachers’ teachings and Elizabeth’s belief in her right to question them demonstrates the courageous pathway she took as a young adult when she chose to challenge them. Release from the shattering heritage of workers’ influence on her mind and spirit opened the way to joy in belief in Jesus Christ as Saviour but she wisely notes that with separation from the fellowship, time for recovery and healing from embedded beliefs was needed. This brave work reveals the true colours of the power to silence that preachers believe they hold over quietly obedient members of the fellowship. I recommend this book to any reader interested in the ‘Two-by-Two’ fellowship, and also in the practise of conditioning of cult or sect members.’ Helen Parker, co-author with Doug Parker of The Secret Sect I had been a member of this church for 22 years, I have been out for almost 2 years. This book is well researched in the church's history and clearly explains the doctrine its members/workers believe. I was glad the author shared her personal experiences in the fellowship and her journey of faith that lead to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, unmediated by the workers and friends. Thank you, this book has been healing for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2015 6:40:18 GMT -5
Yes, I have been reading Dawkins' "The God Delusion." Apparently there is no God and religion is the cause of all our problems. It's quite heavily researched.
I have been reading "James the Just" by Robert Eisenman. Apparently Christianity was all made up. It's quite heavily researched.
Been listening to some podcasts by Seth Andrews, "The thinking atheist". Apparently believers don't think. It's quite heavily researched.
The people who have read the material mentioned in this thread, and claim to have had a new revelation about how to worship God, seem to be SELECTIVE in what they are reading. Why? Don't you respect "research" by genuine scholars?
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 4, 2015 9:15:25 GMT -5
Yes, I have been reading Dawkins' "The God Delusion." Apparently there is no God and religion is the cause of all our problems. It's quite heavily researched. I have been reading "James the Just" by Robert Eisenman. Apparently Christianity was all made up. It's quite heavily researched. Been listening to some podcasts by Seth Andrews, "The thinking atheist". Apparently believers don't think. It's quite heavily researched. The people who have read the material mentioned in this thread, and claim to have had a new revelation about how to worship God, seem to be SELECTIVE in what they are reading. Why? Don't you respect "research" by genuine scholars? So, do any of these "heavily researched" books that you read, ever give you new perspectives, new questions to ponder? Or do you read them from a perspective that they are all wrong and you can prove it? I am in the middle of reading Steven Pinker's "The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined". This is an author who yknot has referenced from time to time in this forum. It is quite heavily researched. I must confess, as I read, I sometimes have the thought "Bert really needs to read this". (I do hope you read it sometime - with a somewhat open mind.)
|
|
|
Post by Mary on May 4, 2015 15:48:49 GMT -5
Review wrote: "Another author used it in a booklet a number of years ago and then on this forum conceded it was incorrect and has removed it from the on line copy of the book".
The change was from cult, to cult like traits. It seems you are agreeing, review.
|
|
|
Post by blacksheep on May 4, 2015 16:58:51 GMT -5
People in cults everywhere seem to take offense to their cults being called cults....
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 4, 2015 18:04:04 GMT -5
I didn’t expect to like this book, as I have a profound disagreement with the “c” word of the title being used in this context. (We ALL have tribal roots – it’s not always a bad thing.) But I did like it. I really did. It was creatively written and generously shared. Worth reading. Yep. Loved the Crocodile Dundee story. (I saw it too, and I was still a member.) The appendix story is beyond poignant. I identified with the author’s husband about the porridge and the stew – though I have come to appreciate both in recent years. Holy cow – the author found “The Secret Sect” on her grandparents bookshelves? I also know what it is to be “Kate in disguise” – invisible and anonymous. I also strongly identified with “The Truman Show”. I agree that people are more important than the “system” - but, in my case, even outside of “Christianity”. (Ummmm… Christians don’t see people as “in” or “out” ??) A lot of Truth in the anecdotes. However, from my personal experience, I feel sorry that the author does not have more feelings of peace and acceptance about all of this being part of her past. The tempers (from both sides) that flared so quickly at the grandfather’s funeral. What was that all about? Really? There are current members who I have profoundly superficial relationships with. I don’t have a problem with that. It speaks to who they are, and who I am. But there are a number, not all blood relatives, but who are “family” nevertheless. Some of these have known me, ever since my mom would have brought me in her arms to my first meeting, my first special meetings, my first convention. People who have known me all my life. (In a weird way, I feel more “real”, because they have been witnesses to so much of my life.) All I feel from them is a deep and abiding love. And, as I watch more and more of them go through the end-of-life challenges, I feel nothing but love and a deep respect for who they are. The author writes: “There they will be satisfied to remain as long as they are content to live out their lives without questioning the status quo with too much rigour. As long as they are willing to relinquish responsibility for their spiritual welfare to those who seem to know best, and feed only upon what they are given, life in the nest will seem like the only logical and safe place to be. They are permanent nest dwellers, held safely aloft from the world, their wings stunted and clipped into conformity, lest they ever learn to soar for themselves and gain autonomy from mother bird.” I would suggest that you may have redrawn the boundaries, and that you may live in a larger world. But there is a whole other world out there, waiting to be explored. I dare you. I double dare you.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 4, 2015 18:19:15 GMT -5
Thanks Sharon.
Quotes like the one in your second to last paragraph kill any desire I might have had to read the story. They are so untrue, yet are always stated as if they are universal bed rock truths. I don't see why so many authors critical of fellowship do that. In doing it so many of them become as judgmental as they portray the fellowship to be.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on May 4, 2015 18:31:36 GMT -5
Sharon, I might have to give the book a read after reading your review. I was put off by the cult reference, as even though I've left the fellowship and attend another church, I just don't see the fellowship as a cult. I respect and appreciate that part of my life, but as my hubby feels very differently about his past, I am always interested in how others have dealt with their hurt. Thx for posting.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on May 4, 2015 18:57:16 GMT -5
I didn’t expect to like this book, as I have a profound disagreement with the “c” word of the title being used in this context. (We ALL have tribal roots – it’s not always a bad thing.) But I did like it. I really did. It was creatively written and generously shared. Worth reading. Yep. Loved the Crocodile Dundee story. (I saw it too, and I was still a member.) The appendix story is beyond poignant. I identified with the author’s husband about the porridge and the stew – though I have come to appreciate both in recent years. Holy cow – the author found “The Secret Sect” on her grandparents bookshelves? I also know what it is to be “Kate in disguise” – invisible and anonymous. I also strongly identified with “The Truman Show”. I agree that people are more important than the “system” - but, in my case, even outside of “Christianity”. (Ummmm… Christians don’t see people as “in” or “out” ??) A lot of Truth in the anecdotes. However, from my personal experience, I feel sorry that the author does not have more feelings of peace and acceptance about all of this being part of her past. The tempers (from both sides) that flared so quickly at the grandfather’s funeral. What was that all about? Really? There are current members who I have profoundly superficial relationships with. I don’t have a problem with that. It speaks to who they are, and who I am. But there are a number, not all blood relatives, but who are “family” nevertheless. Some of these have known me, ever since my mom would have brought me in her arms to my first meeting, my first special meetings, my first convention. People who have known me all my life. (In a weird way, I feel more “real”, because they have been witnesses to so much of my life.) All I feel from them is a deep and abiding love. And, as I watch more and more of them go through the end-of-life challenges, I feel nothing but love and a deep respect for who they are. The author writes: “There they will be satisfied to remain as long as they are content to live out their lives without questioning the status quo with too much rigour. As long as they are willing to relinquish responsibility for their spiritual welfare to those who seem to know best, and feed only upon what they are given, life in the nest will seem like the only logical and safe place to be. They are permanent nest dwellers, held safely aloft from the world, their wings stunted and clipped into conformity, lest they ever learn to soar for themselves and gain autonomy from mother bird.” I would suggest that you may have redrawn the boundaries, and that you may live in a larger world. But there is a whole other world out there, waiting to be explored. I dare you. I double dare you. Sharon, while you are a very nice person, are you sure that you should take all the credit for the close relationships you have maintained with the fellowship members? It seems that at least several factors would be at play, like the character of your professing family members and friends and their exclusivity level, your age at leaving the meetings/how long you were professing, the reason why you left the meetings, the circumstances of your leaving the meetings. I haven't read the book (yet), but could it be that Elizabeth's circumstances were at least somewhat different?
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 4, 2015 19:00:34 GMT -5
I didn’t expect to like this book, as I have a profound disagreement with the “c” word of the title being used in this context. (We ALL have tribal roots – it’s not always a bad thing.) But I did like it. I really did. It was creatively written and generously shared. Worth reading. Yep. Loved the Crocodile Dundee story. (I saw it too, and I was still a member.) The appendix story is beyond poignant. I identified with the author’s husband about the porridge and the stew – though I have come to appreciate both in recent years. Holy cow – the author found “The Secret Sect” on her grandparents bookshelves? I also know what it is to be “Kate in disguise” – invisible and anonymous. I also strongly identified with “The Truman Show”. I agree that people are more important than the “system” - but, in my case, even outside of “Christianity”. (Ummmm… Christians don’t see people as “in” or “out” ??) A lot of Truth in the anecdotes. However, from my personal experience, I feel sorry that the author does not have more feelings of peace and acceptance about all of this being part of her past. The tempers (from both sides) that flared so quickly at the grandfather’s funeral. What was that all about? Really? There are current members who I have profoundly superficial relationships with. I don’t have a problem with that. It speaks to who they are, and who I am. But there are a number, not all blood relatives, but who are “family” nevertheless. Some of these have known me, ever since my mom would have brought me in her arms to my first meeting, my first special meetings, my first convention. People who have known me all my life. (In a weird way, I feel more “real”, because they have been witnesses to so much of my life.) All I feel from them is a deep and abiding love. And, as I watch more and more of them go through the end-of-life challenges, I feel nothing but love and a deep respect for who they are. The author writes: “There they will be satisfied to remain as long as they are content to live out their lives without questioning the status quo with too much rigour. As long as they are willing to relinquish responsibility for their spiritual welfare to those who seem to know best, and feed only upon what they are given, life in the nest will seem like the only logical and safe place to be. They are permanent nest dwellers, held safely aloft from the world, their wings stunted and clipped into conformity, lest they ever learn to soar for themselves and gain autonomy from mother bird.” I would suggest that you may have redrawn the boundaries, and that you may live in a larger world. But there is a whole other world out there, waiting to be explored. I dare you. I double dare you. Sharon, while you are a very nice person, are you sure that you should take all the credit for the close relationships you have maintained with the fellowship members? It seems that at least several factors would be at play, like the character of your professing family members and friends and their exclusivity level, your age at leaving the meetings/how long you were professing, the reason why you left the meetings, the circumstances of your leaving the meetings. I haven't read the book (yet), but could it be that Elizabeth's circumstances were at least somewhat different? Ummm... I am quite sure that I should take almost none of the credit. What would ever make you think differently?
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 4, 2015 19:10:46 GMT -5
Sharon I really liked the answer you deleted.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on May 4, 2015 19:20:21 GMT -5
Thanks Sharon. Quotes like the one in your second to last paragraph kill any desire I might have had to read the story. They are so untrue, yet are always stated as if they are universal bed rock truths. I don't see why so many authors critical of fellowship do that. In doing it so many of them become as judgmental as they portray the fellowship to be. I myself see the quoted paragraph as describing the general professing culture (not every single friend or worker). My personal conclusion is that most professing folks just want to "fit in" and would not stand up for what is right if it would cause them to be seen as trouble-makers by the rest of the fellowship. Sorry. I don't know how to say it in a more palatable way. I have found out that people either blindly accept whatever the workers say, or if they disagree with the workers, they don't say it openly. There is a fear of independent thinking and contradicting the workers that is very evident. Why, even we ourselves were told that they are "the anointed ones," so how could we dare contradict and openly disagree with them? Before anyone tells me how wrong I am, please describe a time you openly stood up for something you believed was right in opposition to the workers and how it was received. If there was never a need in your life for such an action, let me know and I can give you some material to research and inquire about from the workers. I would love to know what answers you get and how your questions were received.
|
|
|
Post by mdm on May 4, 2015 19:25:13 GMT -5
Sharon, while you are a very nice person, are you sure that you should take all the credit for the close relationships you have maintained with the fellowship members? It seems that at least several factors would be at play, like the character of your professing family members and friends and their exclusivity level, your age at leaving the meetings/how long you were professing, the reason why you left the meetings, the circumstances of your leaving the meetings. I haven't read the book (yet), but could it be that Elizabeth's circumstances were at least somewhat different? Ummm... I am quite sure that I should take almost none of the credit. What would ever make you think differently? "However, from my personal experience, I feel sorry that the author does not have more feelings of peace and acceptance about all of this being part of her past. The tempers (from both sides) that flared so quickly at the grandfather’s funeral. What was that all about? Really? There are current members who I have profoundly superficial relationships with. I don’t have a problem with that. It speaks to who they are, and who I am. But there are a number, not all blood relatives, but who are “family” nevertheless. Some of these have known me, ever since my mom would have brought me in her arms to my first meeting, my first special meetings, my first convention. People who have known me all my life. (In a weird way, I feel more “real”, because they have been witnesses to so much of my life.) All I feel from them is a deep and abiding love. And, as I watch more and more of them go through the end-of-life challenges, I feel nothing but love and a deep respect for who they are. "Based on your answer, it appears that I miss-judged the intent of the above quoted text.
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 4, 2015 19:32:09 GMT -5
Sharon I really liked the answer you deleted. Yeah, I was having problems with the editor, and decided that it wasn’t worth the trouble to sort out the html. But, what I said was to the effect that the members I have profoundly superficial relationships with, I accept equal (or more) responsibility. For the handful of members from whom I feel a deep and abiding love, it speaks much more to who they are than who I am.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 4, 2015 20:52:59 GMT -5
There it is, maja quoted it. I admire your objectivity! It's refreshing to see here on TMB.
|
|
|
Post by faune on May 4, 2015 22:27:44 GMT -5
The title of the book itself gives it away! Another author in recent years tried to stick to 'cult label' to the group. He tried hard, has threads on this forum asking if posters thought it was a cult etc. The closest he could come was in an academic and contrived religious/theological sense of the word. Another author used it in a booklet a number of years ago and then on this forum conceded it was incorrect and has removed it from the on line copy of the book. A respected Irish non government organisation that researches cultism/groups with cultish practices was unable to agree that the group had the characteristics and practices that would give it the definition of a cult in the common and sociological meaning of the word. Then as has been noted the book reviewers that have been quoted bring a wry smile. Is this a credible or auspicious launch of a new book? I guess the author thinks so and she is quite entitled to that. Review005 ~ After reading your post, I couldn't help but wonder how much you actually know about what classifies a religious group as a cult? Perhaps you can give us your definition of the same? To become more familiar with the characteristics of a cult and how they affect people's lives, I would suggest you check out this excellent PDF article which covers this topic very thoroughly. I might also add that it was written by two members who belong to different cults, but they could agree on all the basic tenets connected to being a member of a cult for a number of years and how it affected their emotions years afterward along with their basic ability to trust God. The title of this article is also "From Cult to Christ" and agrees with much that Elizabeth Coleman shared in her own book. Personally, I feel it takes somebody who has experienced this reality firsthand to be able to describe it with such clarity as Elizabeth does in her book. I really enjoyed reading about her journey of faith and observations from being born and raised within a Bible cult. Perhaps you should check it out on Amazon, which provides a free Kindle app. for your a number of devices, including your computer. I have already read her book and was very favorably impressed myself. www.ptm.org/uni/resources/PDFs/FromCultToChrist.pdf
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 5, 2015 0:09:24 GMT -5
Faune, I think the definition of cult in your link is quite good...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 0:35:59 GMT -5
Interesting definition. On one hand it describes Jesus to a t. And on the other it describes the Roman Catholic Church.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 5, 2015 1:34:32 GMT -5
Interesting definition. On one hand it describes Jesus to a t. And on the other it describes the Roman Catholic Church. How does it describe Jesus? He used strong words to condemn religious leaders.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 1:42:19 GMT -5
Sorry Bert to disagree but definition certainly does not fit Jesus. As for the Catholic Church think maybe you should attend and get some first hand knowledge about them. However as an ex 2x2 do think defintion fits them to a t.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 3:10:53 GMT -5
Quote - Authoritarian Leadership: A charismatic or messianic leader rules with absolute authority. Often he is a dominant, paternal male who claims to be omniscient, infallible and the only agent of God on earth today. Followers are expected to demonstrate unquestioning loyalty to this leader.
And who is more Messianic or charismatic with absolute authority than Jesus? Then try dominant, paternal male, omniscient, infallible and agent of God.
Quote - Oppositional: The group places itself in an adversarial role against another dominant group and promotes an "us" versus "them" mentality that accuses the outside culture of ignorance, hostility and/or persecution.
That's Jesus, too. Oppositional. He opposed the religious authorities, he opposed the academic authority, he opposed the financial institutions, he opposed the Jews, he opposed his own townsfolk and to some extent - he opposed his own brothers and sisters.
Quote - Esoteric: Secrecy and deception about the group's purpose, beliefs, leaders and history are used to recruit or keep members. There is a vast difference between the image projected to the world and the reality of the inner workings of the group.
None could get a straight answer out of Jesus. One minute he's Joseph's son, then he's God's son - sort of, if you get his drift and his play on words. Claimed the truth was from the beginning when everyone knew it wasn't. And what exactly WAS going on with Judas - Jesus told them all to mind their own business. What was the name of his church? When did it all start? (spare the "before Abraham I am") Whose the crook(s) in your organization?
Quote - Exclusivistic: The cult is the only group that knows the truth. All others are considered deceived, so leaving the group places the defector in danger of losing his salvation.
No-one was more exclusive than Jesus. All who did not follow him were going to hell, plain and simple. No tolerance, no deviance, no alternative living. My way or the highway.
Quote - Legalistic: Rules and regulations are established not only for spiritual matters but also for the details of everyday life. In most Bible-based cults, the leaders determine the correct way to handle any circumstance the Bible does not directly address. Members gradually lose the ability to think and feel independently or make decisions for
As with Paul, fifty percent of everything Jesus said was a rule or a threat.
Quote - Sanction-Oriented: Members who do not conform to the practices and beliefs of the cult are threatened with punishment or excommunication. Rebellion, breaking the rules or simply asking too many questions can result in severe physical or emotional abuse.
Where do we start? Jesus said that no only would all the Jews die, but their children would be put to the sword too. And that would be the end of the Jews and Israel for a very very very long time.
I can draw the same conclusions with the Roman Catholic Church. But then, so can you all.
THE BEST DEFINITION OF "CULT" - A TERM APPLIED TO ANY CHURCH GROUP YOU DON'T LIKE.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 3:48:20 GMT -5
Bert, you probably have the best 2x2 mind in the business. Congratulations. You do have that aquired skill to turn everything around to suit the 2x2 cause. Some of us have managed to think beyond that, thank God. Do think you do it for entertainment, keep having fun.
Buy the book Bert, could change your mind. I ordered a copy from Fishpond, good value at $23.35 and you get free postage. Look forward to receiving it, should be a good read.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 5, 2015 4:36:40 GMT -5
Well if we look at Mark 11:19 or Luke 7:34 we will see that Jusus and his apostles were called names too; whats in name, when it comes to the salvation of our souls? God will be the judge, and a Righteous Judge too , cult or no cult.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on May 5, 2015 5:54:46 GMT -5
Congratulations Elizabeth on writing your book about your experiences. Waiting to read it !
|
|
|
Post by irvinegrey on May 5, 2015 9:02:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 5, 2015 12:25:09 GMT -5
So are we 2x2's condemned to hell? Answer with a yes or no.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 5, 2015 12:30:00 GMT -5
I'd like to see straight answers to the question from the book's cheering section.
|
|
|
Post by faune on May 5, 2015 13:18:23 GMT -5
I'd like to see straight answers to the question from the book's cheering section. Jesse ~ Perhaps you will accept this summation at the end of Elizabeth's book as a "straight answer from the book's cheering section." I feel it hits the "nail on the head" in more ways than one when you compare the 2x2's to most mainline Bible-based churches today? “The Two-by-Twos, like many cults, have set themselves up as the only true spiritual authority, not the Bible. Everything in the Bible is filtered by the group leaders, who give their own interpretation and definition of everything therein. Mind, conscience and logical powers of thinking are often surrendered to groups such as The Fellowship. Of course, this can bring much disquiet if serious issues arise, but few are willing to stick their head above the parapet and attract attention for having a wrong spirit, which denotes that you are not acting in the best interests of the group; by implication you are being selfish by damaging its reputation. The reputation of the system is everything - The Way is perfect. If you have a problem, it is you who are deficient in some way. After leaving The Fellowship and attending a new church for some time, it dawned on me that ministers of Christian churches rarely if ever mention themselves. If they do, it is usually to confess their own shortcomings and need of grace. The workers, on the other hand, talk of almost nothing but themselves. Where ministers use the Bible to point to Christ and to expound the gospel, workers look for ways to have it point to themselves - their work of ministry, their religious format. While ministers constantly point to the sacrifice of Jesus, workers constantly point to their own sacrifice of forsaking all. Despite workers claiming that they are the most humble and lowly of all God’s servants on earth, they sure do spend a lot of time talking about themselves and directing attention away from Christ. In constantly pointing people to their own ministry and efforts, the workers neglect the actual message of the gospel. The envelope has become far more important than the message it is supposed to carry. Somewhere along the way, the message has fallen out, and the envelope is now empty. The workers have inadvertently created another Old Testament Levitical priesthood, standing between the people and God, ‘sacrificing’ themselves to bring people to God, and trying, by their own efforts and the efforts of The Friends, year after year, to make themselves good enough to stand before God. They have created the same type of ministry that Jesus came to completely do away with. By continually pointing to their ministry, they are continually pointing to themselves, and away from Jesus. To all who look at the workers and say ‘here is The Way’, Jesus says no, ‘I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’ (John 14: 6)”. P.S. ~ Here's the link to the "White Envelope Analogy" that Elizabeth referred to in her concluding remarks above. thelibertyconnection.info/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=388:white-envelope-analogy&catid=9:analogies&Itemid=13
|
|