Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2016 11:57:35 GMT -5
On the Youth 323, a lady of Indian descent claims she couldn't take part over marrying an unprofessing guy. Her grandparents cornered PM and she said he stuck his "arse" (her words) into their faces and said KICK ME. Amazing.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 15, 2016 13:15:41 GMT -5
On the Youth 323, a lady of Indian descent claims she couldn't take part over marrying an unprofessing guy. Her grandparents cornered PM and she said he stuck his "arse" (her words) into their faces and said KICK ME. Amazing. Kinky.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 15, 2016 19:23:01 GMT -5
I have heard PM speak. He is very Aussie in his accent.
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jul 15, 2016 21:41:25 GMT -5
Is he overseer?
|
|
|
Post by sharingtheriches on Jul 16, 2016 9:20:56 GMT -5
No, he's a senior worker in Queensland but his Head Worker is Malcolm Clapham. Queensland is a great place but interesting things happen up there in the 2x2 church. They "sit people down" for marrying outsiders (even if the outsider is a Christian) without even meeting the "outsider". The stated reason is that the professing person needs to be "publicly shamed". PM's behaviour, if correct, takes it to a whole new level! Reminds me of when we left that there was a lady at convention who was giving one of the workers a hard time publicly questioning him about doctrine etc. She was gesticulating quite a bit so the worker decided to grab her hand and force her to stop. It made things worse - she yelled that he was assaulting her. It created quite a scene. Ah - who'd be a worker! Reminded me of a couple who are D&R in one of the SE states. She had been married before to a man from professingparents. They lived with his mother. They treated her aabominably locking her in a room verbal abuse barely enough food to live. Finally her parents thought they'd go see how the newly weds were doing. So they traveled a long distance and when they got there it was a surprise on both sides. They found their daughter locked in her room so they demanded that she be let out. The mil tried to tell some long tale about her thievery etc. Her mother went in and saw her condition and screamed for her father to come. He was ready to commitmurder but refrained. Because all were professing they ddidn't call the authorities. They bottled their daughter up and whatever they saw was hers and took her home. They took her to a Dr who sent her to a psychiatrist. She finally gained ground and found a job. She met this man at conv and later they married. The workers told them they couldn't take part. Both stood ground and told the workers that they weren't going to take such abuse from them or any friends. Of course they told the workers what happened but mil denied it all and told the workers she was psychologically ill. So the new couple took part. I don't know what happened if they ever went out if state.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Jul 16, 2016 17:57:22 GMT -5
Worse if you marry a full on Christian of a strong theological background. That challenges.
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Jul 16, 2016 18:08:58 GMT -5
No, he's a senior worker in Queensland but his Head Worker is Malcolm Clapham. Queensland is a great place but interesting things happen up there in the 2x2 church. They "sit people down" for marrying outsiders (even if the outsider is a Christian) without even meeting the "outsider". The stated reason is that the professing person needs to be "publicly shamed". PM's behaviour, if correct, takes it to a whole new level! Reminds me of when we left that there was a lady at convention who was giving one of the workers a hard time publicly questioning him about doctrine etc. She was gesticulating quite a bit so the worker decided to grab her hand and force her to stop. It made things worse - she yelled that he was assaulting her. It created quite a scene. Ah - who'd be a worker! How bad was her out-of-control behavior? Was she on drugs, mental or what? Maybe a relative should have grabbed her hand instead. Sounds like her behavior was definitely out of control. Somebody needed to step in. I don't criticize the way it was handled.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 16, 2016 19:25:41 GMT -5
No, he's a senior worker in Queensland but his Head Worker is Malcolm Clapham. Queensland is a great place but interesting things happen up there in the 2x2 church. They "sit people down" for marrying outsiders (even if the outsider is a Christian) without even meeting the "outsider". The stated reason is that the professing person needs to be "publicly shamed". PM's behaviour, if correct, takes it to a whole new level! Reminds me of when we left that there was a lady at convention who was giving one of the workers a hard time publicly questioning him about doctrine etc. She was gesticulating quite a bit so the worker decided to grab her hand and force her to stop. It made things worse - she yelled that he was assaulting her. It created quite a scene. Ah - who'd be a worker! How bad was her out-of-control behavior? Was she on drugs, mental or what? Maybe a relative should have grabbed her hand instead. Sounds like her behavior was definitely out of control. Somebody needed to step in. I don't criticize the way it was handled. Were you there christiansburg?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 17, 2016 0:47:54 GMT -5
No, he's a senior worker in Queensland but his Head Worker is Malcolm Clapham. Queensland is a great place but interesting things happen up there in the 2x2 church. They "sit people down" for marrying outsiders (even if the outsider is a Christian) without even meeting the "outsider". The stated reason is that the professing person needs to be "publicly shamed". PM's behaviour, if correct, takes it to a whole new level! Reminds me of when we left that there was a lady at convention who was giving one of the workers a hard time publicly questioning him about doctrine etc. She was gesticulating quite a bit so the worker decided to grab her hand and force her to stop. It made things worse - she yelled that he was assaulting her. It created quite a scene. Ah - who'd be a worker! I've been advised that Peter Morrison has relocated in the last couple of years to Sri Lanka where indeed he is Head Worker. Most of the friends there still regard John Blair, who they are very fond of, as their overseer. John used to organise all the paperwork regarding foreign workers but understand Peter M has taken this over in the last year or so. Most people know that the foreign workers had to leave Sri Lanka in the last year because of issues with paperwork etc. They are back in now after it was sorted out. I guess these Aussies go in and try and take control.😊 Sounds like the 2x2 church might be in for some interesting times in Sri Lanka! 😊 I liked John Blair, he was always the gentleman. He has/had a brother Ken Blair who was a jeweller or watchmaker and had a shop selling that sort of stuff. I could not understand why workers could preach about people wearing jewellery and yet the brother of a senior worker could sell the stuff.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Jul 17, 2016 1:19:28 GMT -5
I've been advised that Peter Morrison has relocated in the last couple of years to Sri Lanka where indeed he is Head Worker. Most of the friends there still regard John Blair, who they are very fond of, as their overseer. John used to organise all the paperwork regarding foreign workers but understand Peter M has taken this over in the last year or so. Most people know that the foreign workers had to leave Sri Lanka in the last year because of issues with paperwork etc. They are back in now after it was sorted out. I guess these Aussies go in and try and take control.😊 Sounds like the 2x2 church might be in for some interesting times in Sri Lanka! 😊 I liked John Blair, he was always the gentleman. He has/had a brother Ken Blair who was a jeweller or watchmaker and had a shop selling that sort of stuff. I could not understand why workers could preach about people wearing jewellery and yet the brother of a senior worker could sell the stuff. Well, I'm a book seller and sometimes I wonder if it is ethical for me, -an atheist, -to sell bibles (at the moment I have at least 8 for sell) and other books of religious genre.
This past week I sold a bible for $50 and a small Lutheran catacisim. Am I "aiding and abetting" a belief I don't believe in?
I also have some on Eastern religions and a Jewish one for children and a Quran. Some of the ones I have of Eastern religions are beautifully illustrated.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 17, 2016 1:49:36 GMT -5
I liked John Blair, he was always the gentleman. He has/had a brother Ken Blair who was a jeweller or watchmaker and had a shop selling that sort of stuff. I could not understand why workers could preach about people wearing jewellery and yet the brother of a senior worker could sell the stuff. Well, I'm a book seller and sometimes I wonder if it is ethical for me, -an atheist, -to sell bibles (at the moment I have at least 8 for sell) and other books of religious genre.
This past week I sold a bible for $50 and a small Lutheran catacisim. Am I "aiding and abetting" a belief I don't believe in?
I also have some on Eastern religions and a Jewish one for children and a Quran. Some of the ones I have of Eastern religions are beautifully illustrated.I suppose you could always keep the bibles in the fiction section.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2016 3:53:35 GMT -5
Well, I'm a book seller and sometimes I wonder if it is ethical for me, -an atheist, -to sell bibles (at the moment I have at least 8 for sell) and other books of religious genre.
This past week I sold a bible for $50 and a small Lutheran catacisim. Am I "aiding and abetting" a belief I don't believe in?
I also have some on Eastern religions and a Jewish one for children and a Quran. Some of the ones I have of Eastern religions are beautifully illustrated. I suppose you could always keep the bibles in the fiction section. That might not be a bright idea if you are in business.Stop for a moment and consider the consiquence that might follow.
|
|
|
Post by reallyandtruly on Jul 17, 2016 4:42:05 GMT -5
No, he's a senior worker in Queensland but his Head Worker is Malcolm Clapham. Queensland is a great place but interesting things happen up there in the 2x2 church. They "sit people down" for marrying outsiders (even if the outsider is a Christian) without even meeting the "outsider". The stated reason is that the professing person needs to be "publicly shamed". PM's behaviour, if correct, takes it to a whole new level! Reminds me of when we left that there was a lady at convention who was giving one of the workers a hard time publicly questioning him about doctrine etc. She was gesticulating quite a bit so the worker decided to grab her hand and force her to stop. It made things worse - she yelled that he was assaulting her. It created quite a scene. Ah - who'd be a worker! I've been advised that Peter Morrison has relocated in the last couple of years to Sri Lanka where indeed he is Head Worker. Most of the friends there still regard John Blair, who they are very fond of, as their overseer. John used to organise all the paperwork regarding foreign workers but understand Peter M has taken this over in the last year or so. Most people know that the foreign workers had to leave Sri Lanka in the last year because of issues with paperwork etc. They are back in now after it was sorted out. I guess these Aussies go in and try and take control.😊 Sounds like the 2x2 church might be in for some interesting times in Sri Lanka! 😊 Take control from whom?
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Jul 17, 2016 15:51:22 GMT -5
As I understand it, John Blair. Like Curly said, I understand John is a very kindly man. I don't understand why these countries don't appoint one of their own rather than inserting foreign Head Workers. They do but very rare, they had a Japanese-Canadian as the overseer in Japan for many years. Yes, I agree they should put the native workers as the overseers and the foreigners workers as their right hand helpers. The foreigners want to be in charge so they can control all operations, and to implement their rules how things should be done.... Like they did in Vietnam.I have heard that Brazil is the only South American country with a native overseer, having rejected foreign overseership. The local fellowship probably has to be pretty established and developed in order to be confident enough to demand autonomy. I don't think that those in power would relinquish power voluntarily. Regarding power, one older worker lamented to us that "the fellowship is getting too organized for its own good," and that America is increasingly pushing its influence in other parts of the world. This was around 15 years ago.
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Jul 18, 2016 8:44:23 GMT -5
How bad was her out-of-control behavior? Was she on drugs, mental or what? Maybe a relative should have grabbed her hand instead. Sounds like her behavior was definitely out of control. Somebody needed to step in. I don't criticize the way it was handled. Were you there christiansburg? Was not there but I am only asking the logical questions when only one side of the story is posted. What we have her is not a complete description of what was said and what was done by both parties involved. Don't have to be there to ask that question.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2016 17:59:45 GMT -5
Conventions in my area lacked any real drama.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 20, 2016 14:59:33 GMT -5
As I understand it, John Blair. Like Curly said, I understand John is a very kindly man. I don't understand why these countries don't appoint one of their own rather than inserting foreign Head Workers. You could ask the Vietnamese that question.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 23, 2016 23:21:14 GMT -5
Conventions in my area lacked any real drama. It sounds like, from your opening post, that you should invite Peter Morrison across. From memory, some of the workers always created a bit of drama. Ted Rozemer (US working labouring in central America) created a fair amount of drama at Sydney Silverdale convention in the 1990's when he requested three things: - no professing Aussies visit the country where he laboured - he didn't want worldly influences affecting the "green patch" they had there - he didn't want Australian friends to write to people where he laboured because they might be negatively influenced Did he mention any specific ways -- besides white wedding dresses -- in which the Australians had evidently been influenced by worldliness? Were all the Australian convention-attenders worldly or only a large portion of them? Interesting. Did he say that it was specifically the "long white gowns" that he was disappointed in? Or maybe he'd already said what he had to say on that topic and he didn't feel the need to repeat himself! Interesting, maybe it was needed! It would be nice if you could also say that dress standards improved. But I suppose (based only on your previous posts) that you don't think Christians should have any standards. I wonder if Ted was concerned about more than just the color of wedding dresses! You could and should. But don't leave out that he wants you to live for him, to love him and to obey him because you love him.
|
|
|
Post by fred on Jul 24, 2016 7:16:51 GMT -5
Interesting discussion about what workers for many years taught in our state. Consulting with the Bible I don't find any NT instructions about what a woman ought to wear on her wedding day. The Bible has plenty of illustrations of a woman being prepared for this day and they pretty much all talk about special attire etc.
The workers took a different tack and taught that white ( a symbol of purity) was a bit 'off', they also pontificated about the length of the dress, and the guiding principle was a dress that could be worn to the Sunday meeting.
Not satisfied with this amount of control, they also 'suggested' that the wedding breakfast should have no more than forty guests. It was also very rarely that a worker would attend a wedding, even if it was quite practical to do so.
All this was motivated by the belief of the day that we must be seen to be different.
It is all quite different today, the girls are in very traditional wedding gowns, workers seem to attend and even have a part in proceedings, there are speeches, toasts (using non-alcoholic beverages) and all the trappings of a worldly wedding.
Not sure how Christ would view all this, but then wasn't he the one who turned water onto wine to keep the proceedings on track?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 24, 2016 13:42:31 GMT -5
There has been interesting goings on at funerals as well. The last three I have been to were run by the family and the workers only had small parts to play. They were also given strict instructions that it was not a gospel meeting. How times have changed.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Jul 24, 2016 13:50:07 GMT -5
All this was motivated by the belief of the day that we must be seen to be different. I wonder if some of the motivation was to do with marriage being seen as second best to going into the work. Entering the work was considered "the higher choice" so a wedding day was to be kept low key. From my observations, workers no longer try to interfere in weddings. They often attend and accept invitations to speak.
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Jul 24, 2016 19:30:16 GMT -5
Fixit Hi, 50 years ago(this year) they sent a guy to our wedding,never met him before a New Zealander,can,t even remember his name. Yes he gave a sort of scrambled talk and if we had any church christian credability prior to that amongst our friends and rellies it was certainly wiped out at that moment.We later that night revisiting such a wonderful day and got to the "only way sort of 2x2 way bit",we both cried. Went to a cousins meeting a bit later and it was presided over by a wonderful theologian (later an Arch Bishop,remember Bishop is Biblical-look up 1 Timothy 3)it was a total engulfment of a christian life together,in faith and service before God,not a denomination as we were taught to expect.The crowd there all were singing praise of the clarity of the picture given of a christian wedding.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 24, 2016 21:10:27 GMT -5
Interesting discussion about what workers for many years taught in our state. Consulting with the Bible I don't find any NT instructions about what a woman ought to wear on her wedding day. The Bible has plenty of illustrations of a woman being prepared for this day and they pretty much all talk about special attire etc. The workers took a different tack and taught that white ( a symbol of purity) was a bit 'off', they also pontificated about the length of the dress, and the guiding principle was a dress that could be worn to the Sunday meeting. Not satisfied with this amount of control, they also 'suggested' that the wedding breakfast should have no more than forty guests. It was also very rarely that a worker would attend a wedding, even if it was quite practical to do so. All this was motivated by the belief of the day that we must be seen to be different. That's a very dubious claim. Are you in a position to know the motivations? Here are some possible reasonable motivations for some of the above: - a dress that could be worn to the Sunday meeting 1) practical - avoids wasting hundreds of dollars on a dress that only gets worn once. What a ridiculous thing to do! 2) modest - a dress worn to Sunday meeting (or just about anywhere) should be modest, which includes sufficient length and coverage. 3) Biblical - the typical wedding dress certainly qualifies as "costly array"! See I Timothy 2:9. Is the white wedding dress a symbol of purity? Supposedly (according to Wikipedia), that was not actually the case: rather, blue was supposed to be a symbol of purity. It does say many people "assume" that white is a symbol of purity. Maybe if it's widely recognized as a symbol then it becomes a symbol? What then, in an era when the typical bride reveals to all that which should remain covered until she is alone with her bridegroom? The color is not effective as a symbol of purity when it's so widely worn in impurity.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 24, 2016 21:11:38 GMT -5
Fixit Hi, 50 years ago(this year) they sent a guy to our wedding,never met him before a New Zealander,can,t even remember his name. Yes he gave a sort of scrambled talk and if we had any church christian credability prior to that amongst our friends and rellies it was certainly wiped out at that moment.We later that night revisiting such a wonderful day and got to the "only way sort of 2x2 way bit",we both cried. Went to a cousins meeting a bit later and it was presided over by a wonderful theologian (later an Arch Bishop,remember Bishop is Biblical-look up 1 Timothy 3)it was a total engulfment of a christian life together,in faith and service before God,not a denomination as we were taught to expect.The crowd there all were singing praise of the clarity of the picture given of a christian wedding. Hi, magpie! Where do you see "Arch-Bishop" in the Bible?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 24, 2016 21:13:12 GMT -5
All this was motivated by the belief of the day that we must be seen to be different. I wonder if some of the motivation was to do with marriage being seen as second best to going into the work. Entering the work was considered "the higher choice" so a wedding day was to be kept low key. From my observations, workers no longer try to interfere in weddings. They often attend and accept invitations to speak. If that's the case, then where's the big ceremony every time someone enters the work?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 24, 2016 21:23:40 GMT -5
More about wedding dresses (from Wikipedia):
Should Christians be dressing in the height of current fashion with the "richest materials" possible to indicate social status and the extent of their families' wealth?!
Fancy white wedding dresses are a tradition. Traditions should be tested against principles. This particular tradition appears to have arisen through anti-Christian, worldly standards and there is no value in Christians upholding and perpetuating it, especially as it devolves into ever greater ungodliness.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Jul 24, 2016 21:32:17 GMT -5
Interesting discussion about what workers for many years taught in our state. Consulting with the Bible I don't find any NT instructions about what a woman ought to wear on her wedding day. The Bible has plenty of illustrations of a woman being prepared for this day and they pretty much all talk about special attire etc. The workers took a different tack and taught that white ( a symbol of purity) was a bit 'off', they also pontificated about the length of the dress, and the guiding principle was a dress that could be worn to the Sunday meeting. Not satisfied with this amount of control, they also 'suggested' that the wedding breakfast should have no more than forty guests. It was also very rarely that a worker would attend a wedding, even if it was quite practical to do so. All this was motivated by the belief of the day that we must be seen to be different. That's a very dubious claim. Are you in a position to know the motivations? Here are some possible reasonable motivations for some of the above: - a dress that could be worn to the Sunday meeting 1) practical - avoids wasting hundreds of dollars on a dress that only gets worn once. What a ridiculous thing to do! 2) modest - a dress worn to Sunday meeting (or just about anywhere) should be modest, which includes sufficient length and coverage. 3) Biblical - the typical wedding dress certainly qualifies as "costly array"! See I Timothy 2:9. Is the white wedding dress a symbol of purity? Supposedly (according to Wikipedia), that was not actually the case: rather, blue was supposed to be a symbol of purity. It does say many people "assume" that white is a symbol of purity. Maybe if it's widely recognized as a symbol then it becomes a symbol? What then, in an era when the typical bride reveals to all that which should remain covered until she is alone with her bridegroom? The color is not effective as a symbol of purity when it's so widely worn in impurity.
|
|
|
Post by pa on Jul 24, 2016 23:20:54 GMT -5
As one raised and married to a 2x2 in the 2x2's it was pretty much, no white dress 30 years ago. Off white (ivory) was OK, , no more than 40 guest which was a problem. Only younger workers attended. Nobody said anything about my expensive suite, neither anything about the expensive dresses and suits of the guests, neither anything about the expensive cars . "Sift out the gnat and swallow the camel" comes to mind.
|
|