|
Post by CherieKropp on Sept 5, 2015 12:23:27 GMT -5
what sort of percentage would you say weren't by those in the fellowship? I don't know - have never counted. But I do have a listing of all the hymns and their origins. Would be interesting to do a count. Are the F&W still using the Hymns Old & New from the 80s? By my count... 33% of the 335 hymns (112 total) were written by Outsiders in the 1951 Edition 26% of the 412 hymns (110 total) were written by Outsiders in the 1987 Edition
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 5, 2015 13:37:15 GMT -5
The Jesus Mysteries: Was the Original Jesus A Pagan God? Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy. Or have a look at any of this ladies writings www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1MSNA_enCA635CA635&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=elaine%20pagels%20booksOr Tom Harpur The Pagan Christ. People like to dismiss the enormous amount of similarities between the Christ story and earlier Christ stories. We know the RCC tried to support their literalist teachings by saying those earlier stories were just put there by Satan to discredit the real Jesus when he came to earth. What are the chances of that being true. The Vatican itself is built on earlier Pagan temple. The Gnostic Christians were some of the earliest Christians and the RCC tried their hardest to discredit them and their gospels, which does make one wonder. Constantine like the idea of one god and the Christian God was altogether too pagan for his uses. He wanted one God because he wanted Rome to be ruled by one emperor instead of 3. Justification for three came in Pagan teachings of many Gods, but the Christian God was needing to be brought together into one. Thus the Trinity doctrine was the doctrine he supported because it made the 3 into 1 which supported his political agenda. Anyone who has read Godfrey Higgins, Alvin Boyd Kuhn, or Gerald Massey would know just how similar the Christ story is to earlier mythology. And that's just the NT. Looking at the OT you get another look at revisionist history written by the Hebrews based on the Epic of Gilgamesh. So really, arguing to the degree people are over whether the trinity is right or not is really irrelevant considered the whole existence of anything of historical value even exists at all in the bible.
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Sept 5, 2015 15:31:16 GMT -5
Times have changed but the Bible hasn't. Jesus is still referred to as the Son of God there. Times have changed but 'trinity folk' still can't understand when monotheistic 'Bible believing folk' state that Jesus is divine and is the Son of God..... they never will as long as their trinity doctrine fills their minds. I appreciate all who uphold simple truth, needing nothing outside the terminology that the inspired NT writers used. NT: The Son of God 46x . . . . God the Son. . . 0x go figure! p. s. It would be VERY interesting to know Barry's or at least someone else beside the 'Jesus is God/trinity person's' comments on statements Barry supposedly said at a convention ! Until then I won't be putting too much on what walker03 reposts from what our 'cult expert' e colman came up with! Hi review, Am I correct in understanding that you are tri-theistic, as opposed to monotheistic, meaning , Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are NOT one God, as trinitarians believe? Alvin
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 5, 2015 15:46:04 GMT -5
Very similar to a lady worker in this part of the world. She would preach from John 1 and stop at verse 14 "The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth." She didn't like that part. But then there was an older lady worker in Victoria - Robinson was her surname and she would preach about the Holy Spirit being the "Blessed third person of the Trinity". It's sad that workers have strayed so much from the truth. Barry B is obviously trying to get them back on track. Yes, I agree 110%, Barry Barkley is trying to get the workers on track about the Godhead. He knew what he was up against! but he must telling them the Truth.There are other senior workers and the friends have tried to get the majority of workers back on track through the years... Well, it is certainly good that someone is trying to get the workers on track about the Godhead!
I mean, LOOK!
It is SO VERY ALL important whether one believes in three different gods; -god, the son and the holy spirit or all three gods in ONE!
I mean, look, -Heaven or Hell depends on which one you believe after all!
It is absolutely the VERY MOST IMPORTANT thing in your life , isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 5, 2015 15:57:19 GMT -5
Times have changed but the Bible hasn't. Jesus is still referred to as the Son of God there. Times have changed but 'trinity folk' still can't understand when monotheistic 'Bible believing folk' state that Jesus is divine and is the Son of God..... they never will as long as their trinity doctrine fills their minds. I appreciate all who uphold simple truth, needing nothing outside the terminology that the inspired NT writers used. NT: The Son of God 46x . . . . God the Son. . . 0x go figure! p. s. It would be VERY interesting to know Barry's or at least someone else beside the 'Jesus is God/trinity person's' comments on statements Barry supposedly said at a convention ! Until then I won't be putting too much on what walker03 reposts from what our 'cult expert' e colman came up with! Hi review, Am I correct in understanding that you are tri-theistic, as opposed to monotheistic, meaning , Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are NOT one God, as trinitarians believe? Alvin Sounds more like being poly-theistic, instead of monotheistic and that the Old Testament god has fallen by the wayside and the first two commandments are no longer followed.
"I am the LORD thy God" "Thou shalt have no other gods"
|
|
|
Post by learning on Sept 5, 2015 20:17:23 GMT -5
Yes, at Silverdale Convention (Sydney) during the mid 1990's there was senior Canadian worker who spoke about "the truth of the trinity" and then went on to speak very nicely about being adopted as children of Christ and co-heirs with Him. I asked a couple of people later whether they had heard the words "the truth of the trinity" and there were blank looks. I tested this a few weeks ago when a senior NSW worker said at a gathering "we know that Jesus was not God...". A couple I asked hadn't heard it. I asked what they heard and the comment was simply that the worker spoke very nicely. I'm come to the conclusion over the years that many do not actually listen to the detail of what workers say. Ross a couple of questions regarding this sly dig you make at members of our church: a)You are a great guy for coming up with highly suspect statistics. From your data bank are you able to pull out i)The percentage of sydney anglicans that actually do not listen to what their ministers say as compared to: The percentage of friends that actually do not listen to of what workers say? You say you have found something much better and I guess you'll have stats even on this point to prove it. ii) What percentage of sydney anglicans; (evangelical and otherwise) when tested at gatherings like infant baptisms listen to detail of the non biblical practises in their congregation and challenge their leaders about it? Do they simply say the priest/minister spoke very nicely? If they don't challenge these clearly non Biblical practices of their leaders please explain why they don't? Do they not accept the Word of God as infallible and their guide in such? cheers review Ross I am interested in hearing your reply to this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2015 21:27:05 GMT -5
yes thanks for that, i see Sam Johns wrote at least a third of those in our hymn book
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Sept 6, 2015 11:47:05 GMT -5
Good that review is taking a break from posting his meaningless posts. Yet he is asking Ross to keep posting answers to his questions. There are many posts and threads that answer the questions he has asked Ross and review asks them yet again.
The conclusion is that the workers themselves are not in harmony with each other about who Jesus is.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 6, 2015 18:05:23 GMT -5
What does Elohim mean Nathan?
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Sept 6, 2015 18:08:11 GMT -5
Pity some posting to this forum were not there to hear it. I wasn't at McCordsville but heard Barry recently at a convention on the East Coast. He was helpful every time he spoke but one thing in particular stood out to me when he said: "...Works are not contradictory to faith when the work is a work of faith." I think the reason why that rang so true to me is because of what so many hang onto by saying "by grace are you saved through faith." That's all good and true but the majority of the Christian world will stop there and minimize the importance of works.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Sept 6, 2015 18:21:39 GMT -5
Pity some posting to this forum were not there to hear it. I wasn't at McCordsville but heard Barry recently at a convention on the East Coast. He was helpful every time he spoke but one thing in particular stood out to me when he said: "...Works are not contradictory to faith when the work is a work of faith." I think the reason why that rang so true to me is because of what so many hang onto by saying "by grace are you saved through faith." That's all good and true but the majority of the Christian world will stop there and minimize the importance of works. I don't agree that churches are not into good works. They run soup kitchens, provide meals, drop in centres, run aid organizations and do many things to help the disadvantaged. What they don't believe is that they are saved by their works.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 6, 2015 18:28:36 GMT -5
Pity some posting to this forum were not there to hear it. I wasn't at McCordsville but heard Barry recently at a convention on the East Coast. He was helpful every time he spoke but one thing in particular stood out to me when he said: "...Works are not contradictory to faith when the work is a work of faith." I think the reason why that rang so true to me is because of what so many hang onto by saying "by grace are you saved through faith." That's all good and true but the majority of the Christian world will stop there and minimize the importance of works. When folks quote "by grace are you saved through faith" they should think about the original Greek word that is translated "faith".
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 6, 2015 19:14:10 GMT -5
Pity some posting to this forum were not there to hear it. I wasn't at McCordsville but heard Barry recently at a convention on the East Coast. He was helpful every time he spoke but one thing in particular stood out to me when he said: "...Works are not contradictory to faith when the work is a work of faith." I think the reason why that rang so true to me is because of what so many hang onto by saying "by grace are you saved through faith." That's all good and true but the majority of the Christian world will stop there and minimize the importance of works. I'm not sure I understand what Barry might have been driving at - he seems to be talking about the relationship between faith and works which is a slightly different question to being saved by grace. Ephesians 2 spells all this out quite clearly to my understanding. Firstly Paul tells what we were like in our natural state, "having no hope and without God in the world". He then speaks of a quickening, "even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ (by grace ye are saved)." Next he speaks of having "raised us up together, and made us sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Notice that there is no mention of any works we have done so far - now THAT is his grace at work. And at this stage how do you think God views us? Now comes God's expectations that will flow from grateful hearts : "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them." I hope you can understand why the majority of Christians speak of being saved by grace - they are talking about salvation not works, they are not seeing being saved as being dependent on some form of works.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 7, 2015 0:01:54 GMT -5
I wasn't at McCordsville but heard Barry recently at a convention on the East Coast. He was helpful every time he spoke but one thing in particular stood out to me when he said: "...Works are not contradictory to faith when the work is a work of faith." I think the reason why that rang so true to me is because of what so many hang onto by saying "by grace are you saved through faith." That's all good and true but the majority of the Christian world will stop there and minimize the importance of works. I'm not sure I understand what Barry might have been driving at - he seems to be talking about the relationship between faith and works which is a slightly different question to being saved by grace. Ephesians 2 spells all this out quite clearly to my understanding. Firstly Paul tells what we were like in our natural state, "having no hope and without God in the world". He then speaks of a quickening, "even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ (by grace ye are saved)." Next he speaks of having "raised us up together, and made us sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Notice that there is no mention of any works we have done so far - now THAT is his grace at work. And at this stage how do you think God views us? Now comes God's expectations that will flow from grateful hearts : "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them." I hope you can understand why the majority of Christians speak of being saved by grace - they are talking about salvation not works, they are not seeing being saved as being dependent on some form of works. The majority of Christians are in exclusive groups, believing in salvation by works.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 7, 2015 0:45:16 GMT -5
Nathan Hey say...I wonder if you are seeking to shame me or being manipulative? Seeking to use guilt on me? Saying it is sad I am a senior worker not a rookie saying I should know the Godhead by now, I don't really know Jesus blah blah blah. Look I'm sorry but it's water off a duck's back my friend! I can never subscribe to your trinity, as I have repeatedly said dozens of verses don't fit it! Why should I accept a theory formed under the oversight of a pagan Roman Emperor? I can not ,I will not. You are persuaded by it and I accept and respect that. Hopefully you'll come to accept and respect those who do not, will not accept the 4th century dogma! Ok... you come back with the 'last word' if you wish and we'll leave it at that until the next session of 'TMB round & round the triune mulberry bush game' starts. The Trinity is NOT mine own blah, blah... teaching, or the RCC bishops dogma and surely NOT Emperor Constantine's idea in the 4th century either... The Concept of Godhead= Father, Christ/Son and Holy Spirit teaching is expressed in the book of Genesis chapter 1, many books in the Old Testament, the New Testament gospels, and the apostles epistles. The key to understanding the word "God" in the bible is to understand the word "Elohim". There's one Almighty God the father, but Elohim is not unique to him.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 7, 2015 1:19:10 GMT -5
I'm not sure I understand what Barry might have been driving at - he seems to be talking about the relationship between faith and works which is a slightly different question to being saved by grace. Ephesians 2 spells all this out quite clearly to my understanding. Firstly Paul tells what we were like in our natural state, "having no hope and without God in the world". He then speaks of a quickening, "even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ (by grace ye are saved)." Next he speaks of having "raised us up together, and made us sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Notice that there is no mention of any works we have done so far - now THAT is his grace at work. And at this stage how do you think God views us? Now comes God's expectations that will flow from grateful hearts : "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them." I hope you can understand why the majority of Christians speak of being saved by grace - they are talking about salvation not works, they are not seeing being saved as being dependent on some form of works. The majority of Christians are in exclusive groups, believing in salvation by works. I don't understand what you are saying here fixit - could you please explain.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 7, 2015 5:47:00 GMT -5
The majority of Christians are in exclusive groups, believing in salvation by works. I don't understand what you are saying here fixit - could you please explain. There are 1.2 billion Catholics who would not be exactly "grace alone" Christians. 225-300 million Eastern Orthodox. 86 million Oriental orthodox Of the 800 million Protestants some will not be "grace alone" folks, so I think it would be safe to say that most Christians would not rely on grace alone.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 7, 2015 5:49:07 GMT -5
The key to understanding the word "God" in the bible is to understand the word "Elohim". There's one Almighty God the father, but Elohim is not unique to him. You need to focus on Isaiah 9:6 and Jeremiah 32:18 and work out whether Jesus is given the name Jehovah in the OT. That's a good idea. What's your definition of "Elohim"?
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Sept 7, 2015 6:15:23 GMT -5
Jesus is God (the son) NOT God the Father. Christ/the Son is separated from His Father. Christ and the Father both are God. Jesus is Both God and Man.
The Father is God ONLY and he has NEVER been/lived in a Man body himself but Christ/Son lived in a human body for 331/2 yrs. No man has seen the God the Father, they ONLY heard His voice from heaven. The word God/Elohim refers to the Father and Christ/Son.
Jesus Christ is both God and the Son of God. Jesus is God and Man.
The next round of. 'round and round the trimullberry bush'? Sorry I'll go with Jesus Christ the Son of God,the Bible writers knew it was correct 46x, so did the early workers, they left trinity talk with the lifeless churches they bravely & courageously stepped of amidst much persecution and opposition. Round and round the trimulberry bush. Ha ha ha that made me laugh! Anyway I asked in the meeting, and apparently Edward Cooney didn't believe Jesus was God, and I know he's not highly thought of by some people here. But, seeing as he was an early worker, I'm sure he believed as the others did. Which is, one God, his son Christ Jesus, and the holy spirit. All separate but one in heart and mind. And we are at one with them in the spirit when we follow Jesus and give God our heart!
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Sept 7, 2015 6:35:13 GMT -5
I wasn't at McCordsville but heard Barry recently at a convention on the East Coast. He was helpful every time he spoke but one thing in particular stood out to me when he said: "...Works are not contradictory to faith when the work is a work of faith." I think the reason why that rang so true to me is because of what so many hang onto by saying "by grace are you saved through faith." That's all good and true but the majority of the Christian world will stop there and minimize the importance of works. I don't agree that churches are not into good works. They run soup kitchens, provide meals, drop in centres, run aid organizations and do many things to help the disadvantaged. What they don't believe is that they are saved by their works. Never said we were saved by out works.
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Sept 7, 2015 6:38:30 GMT -5
I wasn't at McCordsville but heard Barry recently at a convention on the East Coast. He was helpful every time he spoke but one thing in particular stood out to me when he said: "...Works are not contradictory to faith when the work is a work of faith." I think the reason why that rang so true to me is because of what so many hang onto by saying "by grace are you saved through faith." That's all good and true but the majority of the Christian world will stop there and minimize the importance of works. I'm not sure I understand what Barry might have been driving at - he seems to be talking about the relationship between faith and works which is a slightly different question to being saved by grace. Ephesians 2 spells all this out quite clearly to my understanding. Firstly Paul tells what we were like in our natural state, "having no hope and without God in the world". He then speaks of a quickening, "even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ (by grace ye are saved)." Next he speaks of having "raised us up together, and made us sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Notice that there is no mention of any works we have done so far - now THAT is his grace at work. And at this stage how do you think God views us? Now comes God's expectations that will flow from grateful hearts : "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them." I hope you can understand why the majority of Christians speak of being saved by grace - they are talking about salvation not works, they are not seeing being saved as being dependent on some form of works. Never said we were saved by works but you should understand that works is the fruit of faith.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 7, 2015 7:24:12 GMT -5
I'm not sure I understand what Barry might have been driving at - he seems to be talking about the relationship between faith and works which is a slightly different question to being saved by grace. Ephesians 2 spells all this out quite clearly to my understanding. Firstly Paul tells what we were like in our natural state, "having no hope and without God in the world". He then speaks of a quickening, "even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ (by grace ye are saved)." Next he speaks of having "raised us up together, and made us sit in heavenly places in Christ Jesus." Notice that there is no mention of any works we have done so far - now THAT is his grace at work. And at this stage how do you think God views us? Now comes God's expectations that will flow from grateful hearts : "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained that we should walk in them." I hope you can understand why the majority of Christians speak of being saved by grace - they are talking about salvation not works, they are not seeing being saved as being dependent on some form of works. Never said we were saved by works but you should understand that works is the fruit of faith. Yes, but more succinctly, works are the result of being saved by grace through faith. I must have misunderstood your original post as you appeared to have had a bone to pick with those who believe in being saved by grace.
|
|
hberry
Senior Member
Posts: 743
|
Post by hberry on Sept 7, 2015 9:21:46 GMT -5
Never said we were saved by works but you should understand that works is the fruit of faith. Yes, but more succinctly, works are the result of being saved by grace through faith. I must have misunderstood your original post as you appeared to have had a bone to pick with those who believe in being saved by grace. I'm always puzzled when folks think that those of us who believe that we are saved by grace don't believe that works will follow as evidence of our salvation. As my pastor has said often "grace does not leave us where it finds us." As we sang in church yesterday (Grace Unmeasured): CHORUS Grace paid for my sins And brought me to life Grace clothes me with power To do what is right Grace will lead me to heaven Where I’ll see Your face And never cease To thank You for Your grace VERSE 2 Grace abounding, strong and true That makes me long to be like You That turns me from my selfish pride .......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 10:44:54 GMT -5
The key to understanding the word "God" in the bible is to understand the word "Elohim". There's one Almighty God the father, but Elohim is not unique to him. You need to focus on Isaiah 9:6 and Jeremiah 32:18 and work out whether Jesus is given the name Jehovah in the OT. Fixit is absolutely correct With what he posted above.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 10:52:04 GMT -5
Good that review is taking a break from posting his meaningless posts. Yet he is asking Ross to keep posting answers to his questions. There are many posts and threads that answer the questions he has asked Ross and review asks them yet again. The conclusion is that the workers themselves are not in harmony with each other about who Jesus is. The workers aren't in perfect agreement over this, you are correct. I've always been non trinitarian, but am always shocked when I hear "Jesus was God in the flesh" ect from a friend ?. I'm not 100 percent sure what goes through others' heads when statements like this are made. You know how it is: no one seems to discuss anything. People stand up and express their thought and feeling and no one ever disagrees or talks about it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2015 10:56:21 GMT -5
You need to focus on Isaiah 9:6 and Jeremiah 32:18 and work out whether Jesus is given the name Jehovah in the OT. Fixit is absolutely correct With what he posted above. And many bible passages have been quoted to show he's right, and many more could be quoted. But the pro-trinitarians aren't really commenting on them. They are just either silent about the passages, or they cut-and-paste or simply say 'I disagree."
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 7, 2015 14:27:25 GMT -5
The next round of. 'round and round the trimullberry bush'? Sorry I'll go with Jesus Christ the Son of God,the Bible writers knew it was correct 46x, so did the early workers, they left trinity talk with the lifeless churches they bravely & courageously stepped of amidst much persecution and opposition. Round and round the trimulberry bush. Ha ha ha that made me laugh! Anyway I asked in the meeting, and apparently Edward Cooney didn't believe Jesus was God, and I know he's not highly thought of by some people here. But, seeing as he was an early worker, I'm sure he believed as the others did. Which is, one God, his son Christ Jesus, and the holy spirit. All separate but one in heart and mind. And we are at one with them in the spirit when we follow Jesus and give God our heart! I'm reminded of the following quote:
|
|
|
Post by blandie on Sept 7, 2015 15:07:37 GMT -5
The word divine does not mean god. Its an adjective describing a 'god-like' quality or something proceding from or associated with a god like a law or a messenger or a temple or what have you. None of the F&Ws I know have any problem with 'divine' being used to describe Jesus but they do have a problem with Jesus being held as god because only the father is god to their way of thinking. They don't have any problem with the idea that Jesus was a person in which the holy spirit of god dwelt - some would even say thats god in the flesh - because the holy spirit dwells within all believers and that doesn't make them god. Its easy to mistake a statement that Jesus was divine as meaning that he is being said to be god but thats going way beyond what was said and that mistakes been used to claim that workers and friends who denied that Jesus was god were supporters of the trinity idea - and they didn't and some of them actually put out people of the meetings for taling that sort of belief. I think it would be simpler to just take the word divine out of the discussion to avoid confusing statements.
Someone who can contact Barry Barkley to directly confirm or deny what he said at Mccordsville? What we have in the original post here is not a reliable statement - its a second hand posting of an anonymous internet posting of a paraphrased summary that might not be first hand and is not even from convention notes and likely is colored by whatever the hearer already believed and maybe wanted to hear. Since the post was put out there supposedly reflecting his position I'd think Barkley would be interested in issuing a letter to circulate at least among the elders to make clearer his departure - or not - from the norm belief among the F&Ws that Jesus is not god but is the divine son of god. The 'god the son' thing isn't believed by many - probably few or none fully - there. Might review005 ask Barkley directly what he said or meant to say? A change this big deserves a clear and serious reply from him.
|
|