|
Post by as I c it on Jun 18, 2007 13:29:03 GMT -5
Ah Nathan,
Thank you for the encouragement "to keep on asking good and interesting questions".
Of course, now you're going to be sorry you were so kind to me...because now I'm going to ask you to take on the Holy Spirit issue. (From what I've said).
What do you think??
Where do you stand (or lean) on this one?
|
|
|
Post by TubeTrain on Jun 18, 2007 15:29:01 GMT -5
Nathan.
You wrote: "....~~~ That is between him and God. I say let his light so shine before men that they might know he is a child of God. People can tell whether he is born again or not by his words, actions and the spirit of Christ which manifest from his heart to others around him. Anyone can say he is born again but does his life shows it? is the real test. Time will tell. ..."
What is the difference between the thief on the cross and this ex-gang member? They both had accepted christ, acknowledged him, repented before they died. They have died so how can they show this in their life. I'm sorry but I have to call you a dumbass for that.
You are showing again how selfcentered, self righteous, self everything you are. Over and over again. I've been on here for a short while thinking there are understandable people here but it's people like you are just like the thorns amongst the roses who are trying to bloom. Even BRAD speaks better sense than you.
You want to be a 2x2. You miss the social life. You want people to once again respect you but you act like a old fashioned grumpy worker. You twist words, verses. Are you just fullfilling your fantasies?
What is your game?? Just come out with it. Who is your sunday morning meeting folks? let me have their numbers so that I can call them and ask them if you are going to meetings and gospel meetings and conventions.
Do the F&W know you are an internet-worker? Our workers don't agree with that. They say you are a LUNATIK.... and laughed while they said it.
|
|
|
Post by TubeTrain on Jun 18, 2007 15:32:50 GMT -5
Nathan.
I'm really sorry....
I just re read you comments and .... I still think you are a dumbass.
|
|
|
Post by Zorro on Jun 18, 2007 16:24:06 GMT -5
Speaking of the reactions of others, where'd Zorro go in this discussion??? I was hoping he'd stay continue to be part of it here (and on the other thread).
I've just returned from a business meeting. I do have a comment I'd like to make that seems more specific to the other thread, so I'll go over there in a bit. But there is a point being made about the conversion of the gang member that brings an extremely challenging spiritual exercise to my mind. In Max Lucado's book In the Grip of Grace he tells the story of Jeffrey Dahmer, which of course is a shock to the sensibilties of any normal person. But the thing Lucado says is the most difficult thing of all to deal with is Dahmer's conversion to Christianity. From what I read, I got the impression that Max hadn't fully resolved it yet, which is understandable. Honestly, it's such a shocking turn of events I haven't been willing to even consider the possibilty yet, let alone accept it. Quite a spiritual challenge, wouldn't you say?
|
|
|
Post by as I c it on Jun 18, 2007 17:26:06 GMT -5
Zorro,
Good to see you here again!
Boy...Jeffrey Dahmer...huh...
That's a very tough one to believe!! Can someone who (as a boy) tortured and killed animals (first): and then tortured and killed humans, possibly even be reached???
Seems to me he had a very dark (and very cold) heart--that he could do such things--over and over again...and feel nothing: and have no conscience kick in...
I know Saul committed murder, but his intentions were good. (He thought he was doing it for God).
But Jeffrey...did it all for himself and liked it....
I don't buy it. But guess time will tell...
|
|
|
Post by as I c it on Jun 18, 2007 21:11:19 GMT -5
Thanks Nathan,
This thread has sure been an eye-opener for me. So many different perspectives (on everything)--yet the wonderful thing is we could all meet for a Sunday meeting and walk away thinking we all agreed on--everything!!!
The other thing I realized is that we could all get together (in person) have a very lively discussion (with all of us agreeing and disagreeing on everything)--and yet--I think this batch of 2x2's could depart as friends.
if you can survive the internet and not get hostile then you have to be fairly well-balanced.
Thanks for explaining your belief on the 3. It was very nice and easy to grasp.
Which is not to say the exes aren't.
It just surprises me to see such differing opinions among the same group.
|
|
|
Post by as I c it on Jun 18, 2007 22:40:21 GMT -5
OOOPS!!!
I meant to say that it surprised me to see such differing opinions among us 2x2's!!!
I didn't mean among the exes.
|
|
|
Post by as I c it on Jun 18, 2007 23:16:12 GMT -5
Nathan,
Thanks for the invitation to look you up. If I ever am in your area, I'll do so: and we can continue to agree/disagree over the Vietnamese food!
|
|
|
Post by man of God on Jun 19, 2007 0:43:52 GMT -5
OOOPS!!! I meant to say that it surprised me to see such differing opinions among us 2x2's!!! I didn't mean among the exes. I have been reading these message boards more than 10 yrs even among the exes they too have differing of opinions, belief, and understanding on doctrines. Most of the exes who left the 2x2s fellowship can't even attend the same denomination.... they go so many different directions after they left. Nathan, what is an ex? Please explain. An ex from what, God? Or a man-made religion. Anxious to hear.
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Jun 19, 2007 0:51:44 GMT -5
OOOPS!!! I meant to say that it surprised me to see such differing opinions among us 2x2's!!! I didn't mean among the exes. I have been reading these message boards more than 10 yrs even among the exes they too have differing of opinions, belief, and understanding on doctrines. Most of the exes who left the 2x2s fellowship can't even attend the same denomination.... they go so many different directions after they left. But Nathan, "exes" don't claim to be united by denomination. In fact, "denominationalism" is exactly the thing that many of us reject. I would submit that with many of us, our experience with the 2x2 religion has caused us to examine our faith to be sure it is in God, and not in the doctrine of man. As Christians, we should be united in our love for God. I my 38 years of experience in the 2x2 fellowship, there was much claiming of unity of doctrine, when in fact that was not the case. Most of the unity I saw was a united vision that all who were "outside of the way" were lost. Juli
|
|
|
Post by ali on Jun 19, 2007 7:06:52 GMT -5
Thanks Juliette. Although I've not experienced "out and out exclusivity" in the churches I've attended , I've certainly seen airs of spiritual superiority in some people... which sometimes then, and always now makes me uncomfortable. (And at one point, I almost started to feel that way myself, but realized my error. Whoops) If there's one thing I want to teach my children, it's too not become too enamored with the people you fellowship with and put them or the leaders on a pedestal. Love and respect them...yes...but realize that others can be on the same path..just at a different spot. Moving forward is good....like Hank Williams said "Even if you're on the right road, if you just stay still, you'll get hit."
|
|
|
Post by ali on Jun 19, 2007 7:41:50 GMT -5
Just turned on the radio...lo and behold someone is speaking against telling children at a young age that they are part of a certain denomination i.e.YOU are a "name of denomination" child.
|
|
|
Post by as I c it on Jun 19, 2007 11:12:46 GMT -5
Zorro,
You got exed over the Jesus is God issue, didn't you??? So,
I don't get the problem here.
1) The Bible says both
2) The workers (according to their beliefs/areas) say both
3) And hymn refers to "God our Savior"
Why was it then a problem for you to say? (Whichever one you said)?...when others have heard it preached as such?
|
|
|
Post by inconsistency on Jun 19, 2007 11:22:37 GMT -5
what we see in this fellowship is more than mere differences of opinion.
In most churches there is a consistency in what the church teaches---then there are a few people who have differences of opinon.
For example the Catholic church--which is huge and widespread across many cultures--believes that abortion is wrong. This is the official church opinion no matter where in the world you go or which church representative you talk to. True, there are members who disagree with cchurch teaching, but it is out there in black and white what the church beleives. These people have differences of opinion about church teachings.
However in this group, there is no consistent teaching at all. Each overseer has a different view, each worker has a different view, each elder, each family, each individual. Truly there can hardly be a consistent "church teaching" for people to even have differences of opinion from.
It was not this way in the early church--I have read a series of books "Faith of the Early Fathers" which document church practice and beliefs in the early years. True there were heretics and splits--but the very fact that there were splits indicated that there was a consistently held church belief to depart from. And this belief was known and taught.
This way is as full of confusion as the Tower of Babel.
|
|
|
Post by as I c it on Jun 19, 2007 11:38:34 GMT -5
inconsistency,
That's WHY I'm having a problem understanding all this:
How can you be saying (or teaching) a wrong teaching--when other workers have taught (or said )what you're now saying or believing?
And when the Bible says it?
Depending on the scripture you're quoting (or looking at) it IS confusing to know if Jesus was God also.
Therefore, I can understand the confusion over that whole topic.
But since all the overseers/workers haven't reached a common consenus on it--how then, can you be in violation of it?
That's where my confusion is coming from.
And that's also one of the issues I'm hoping our overseers will solve (and resolve).
As long as they don't (and you're quoting the Bible) then how can what you're saying/believing--be wrong???
|
|
|
Post by trigger on Jun 19, 2007 11:43:14 GMT -5
Here's a few items:
1.The truth and nothing but the truth in all things. No more twisting, coverups. Let's just humble ourselves and acknowledge the truth.
2.Acknowledge our errors past and present and try to make amends for them where possible.
3.Recognition that God is active outside our fellowship. We are not the only ones saved by any means so let's not be so self righteous about it. Let's have a welcoming open fellowship to all believers.
4.Let's have a fellowship where the primary activity is to serve the members. Let the least be the greatest and the greatest the least. Let the elder serve the younger. No more worker idolatry.
5.Let's have a fellowship that is defined by those in and out by divine love. No more beating up on our brethren for their faults but work with them to help them turn from sin. No more verbal beating up on all the "unsaved" Christian believers or anyone for that matter.
To clearday:
Thank you ever so much for your list. I couldn't agree more with your points, and although I have come to the conclusion that organized religion is just not for me, if I were looking for a church the one laid out in your list would be my pick hands down. I'd be on the train! Despite my own personal experiences and hurts within the 2x2 way, and the occassional bitterness I suffer and succumb to as a result, I really do hope that there can be positive changes because there really are so many good people in it and they deserve a faith that is based on what you have listed above. I admire you very much for sticking with and for standing up for what you believe; as I tried to decide whether or not to leave the truth I really struggled with whether I should stay to try and make a difference. In the end I guess you could maybe say I was selfish, I wanted out, I didn't want to deal with it anymore or try to be strong. I wanted my freedom. I'm very thankful, for the sakes of those still in the fellowship, for people like you who stay and try to make things better.
All the best of luck to you in your efforts.
|
|
|
Post by inconsistency on Jun 19, 2007 11:50:50 GMT -5
I'm sorry but I can't help. This is my biggest problem with the fellowship.
To me one of the purposes of religion is to provide direction on issues of morality like abortion to give believers a unification because they believe the same things and to give comfort about the unanswerable questions. Ie what happens to our soul when we die? This is one where you will get a wide variety of answers some think the soul goes right to god, some believe in sleeping souls, some in soul purification, some soul recycling, some souls in a state of suspended animation. How can this be a religion if there is no shared concept of faith and morals?
They share an external method but to me this is trivial. Religion is about faith and morality not externals of how big a building the group meets in.
If anyone comes up with answers please tell me.
|
|
|
Post by TubeTrain on Jun 19, 2007 12:02:01 GMT -5
Nathan9
Where in the bible does it speak about being an internet-worker?
|
|
|
Post by random thought on Jun 19, 2007 12:04:43 GMT -5
Nathan9 Where in the bible does it speak about being an internet-worker? Probably the same chapter where it talks about driving cars to Church. Did the Bible try to predict technology?
|
|
|
Post by Zorro on Jun 19, 2007 12:13:54 GMT -5
Zorro,
You got exed over the Jesus is God issue, didn't you??? So,
I don't get the problem here.
1) The Bible says both
2) The workers (according to their beliefs/areas) say both
3) And hymn refers to "God our Savior"
Why was it then a problem for you to say? (Whichever one you said)?...when others have heard it preached as such?
I don't know that I'd say I was "exed" because of this issue, but rather that my disagreement with the overseer on the issue was the "beginning of the end".
One point that I'd like to make, which will also touch on the "inconsistency" issue is that after listening to countless workers express thoughts from all over the map regarding nearly every point of doctrine, I asked some workers about it. I asked them if we could consider the overseers to be the standard bearers regarding the overall doctrinal beliefs of the group as a whole. The answer was always "yes". So.....I started to pay particular attention to what overseers said in conventions and on special meeting rounds. I started to direct my questions directly to overseers.
In my discussion with my overseer (actually I had 2 regarding Christ's deity, 3 about grace) I heard a direct and clear statement denying his deity. We specifically discussed Heb 1.8 and basically I was told that Jesus was "no less than equal to God, but not God". I mentioned that "no less than equal" means "equal", but in the end we simply had to agree to disagree. I then heard no less than 4 overseers directly and specificly deny Christ's deity from convention platforms. During this time it was crystal clear that the gears were turning against me (I was literally shunned by the meeting...and I was the elder!!) and at this point the only thing I had done wrong was disagree with the overseer about Christ's deity and salvation by grace (he insisted it was license to sin). There were many false rumors flying, but that's all it boiled down to. So there you have it.
|
|
|
Post by Zorro on Jun 19, 2007 12:15:40 GMT -5
BTW, pull out your hymnbook and you'll see that "God our God" was changed to "Christ our Savior".
|
|
|
Post by comprehnsion on Jun 19, 2007 12:24:02 GMT -5
...salvation by grace (he insisted it was license to sin).... This has been stated a number of times. Interesting that Paul wrote that the believers saved by grace were accused of having the license (allowability) to sin. And to this day the accusations and rejection of God's grace continues by the self-righteous.
|
|
|
Post by as I c it on Jun 19, 2007 12:38:51 GMT -5
Zorro,
(I only recall the words, but not the hymn). Which one was it?)
I don't think our church would shun our elder. But then, I believe we have a spiritually mature set of believers in our church, who are also very intelligent.
And, unfortunately, since protecting others from pain is my downfall, and hot spot....
|
|
|
Post by Zorro on Jun 19, 2007 13:41:10 GMT -5
Zorro,
(I only recall the words, but not the hymn). Which one was it?)
When I Survey. I'm sorry but I said it wrong...the words were changed from "Christ my God" to "Christ my Lord".
|
|
|
Post by Charles Storck on Jun 19, 2007 14:19:18 GMT -5
I am encouraged that my post has put forth good discussion directed to the issues. One point if I may.
The issues of that fellow that I knew; Watched go down hill with his health; Had fellowship with on quite a regular basis to read and discuss Gods Love for him; Observing his chastening and conversion of heart.
I watched as he became humbled/Turning to full Trust in the Lord--And then he was taken home out of his broken failing body.
Heb:12:7: If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
Heb:12:11: Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.
6: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7: If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
The issue is not IF HE FOUND SALVATION---But more so WHY WOULD ANY OTHER CHRISTIAN DOUBT?
Some say only God knows. Well that very well may be true. But, then we can take that logic to the next step. If only God knows then how can any group including the F&W's make claim that they are right? They really do not know if what they are doing will bring them salvation either. This to me is a failure in accepting the Grace of God.
Another point has been echoed more then once. The issue of all the bibles which have dictionaries that discuss the "Trinity", "Incarnation" and "Godhead". If it is wrong then perhaps the F&W's should look for another Bible which does not embrace these concepts? I don't know of any Bibles that don't (embrace these concepts) with the exception of the Koran.
I have enjoyed the discussions. Keep thinking.
P.S. For Nathan--Know I have not been posting those responses to you. However - I wish you would just stand down on your actions and statements towards them. As you say you have been posting for a long time and know that it will not change.
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Jun 19, 2007 14:25:05 GMT -5
I believe that at least one worker was put out of the work over the Jesus is God issue. I don't have the details, but if my friend Skippyjones sees this, maybe she could eleborate.
|
|
|
Post by VERY CLEAR on Jun 19, 2007 14:49:16 GMT -5
nathan says he believes in salvation by grace alone....but he doesn't really.
nathan says that the workers believe in salvation by grace alone...but they don't either.
|
|
|
Post by about not for on Jun 19, 2007 15:11:19 GMT -5
nathan says he believes in salvation by grace alone....but he doesn't really. nathan says that the workers believe in salvation by grace alone...but they don't either. When you write non-sense like you did in your post in how I believe and what I say be sure to include your real name in your post when you speak for me. Since when did I appoint you as an anonymous to speak for me? please, don't try to speak for me next time. I can speak for myself so next time post under your real name. He is talking about you, not for you. You believe in salvation by grace? Yes or no then: You can be saved without accepting the workers' ministry even though you know about it. Yes or no only please.
|
|