|
Post by Hotdog on Jul 21, 2006 18:09:05 GMT -5
It could be an article of clothing, entertainment device or something else that some of the Servants might disapprove of in the home. How do you feel about hiding something? Hypocrisy? Respect for their brethern who might be hung up on exterior issues? I have heard both arguments here. Some feel that if their brether disapprove of a TV, they should watch it in secret. Others see this as blatant hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by justamom on Jul 21, 2006 18:16:33 GMT -5
I remember when we first got our TV back in the late 80's my now ex husband said we had to hide it... ...I could never figure out why..... but we hid it from his parents and from the friends and workers... looking back I now wonder if it was because he used to be in the work and felt funny having one in his home.. It wasn't till the early 90's that we had one out in the open when the workers came to visit... of course it didn't get turned on while they were staying with us... Have a great day...
|
|
|
Post by Greg Lee unplugged on Jul 21, 2006 18:33:52 GMT -5
It could be an article of clothing, entertainment device or something else that some of the Servants might disapprove of in the home. How do you feel about hiding something? Hypocrisy? Respect for their brethern who might be hung up on exterior issues? I have heard both arguments here. Some feel that if their brether disapprove of a TV, they should watch it in secret. Others see this as blatant hypocrisy. Paul said if eating meat offended his brother, then he would not eat meat. He did not say he would just not eat meat in front of them.
|
|
|
Post by withopeneyes (Mandy) on Jul 21, 2006 18:48:32 GMT -5
Some people are offended by everything though. I'm sure there are a few people that are offended by the fact I've decided to search out my beliefs, rather than accept what people tell me, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop. There's a line to be drawn somewhere.
Anyway, on the subject posted.... it's not really my place to deem anyone a hyprocrital example. Only God knows their hearts.
|
|
|
Post by gulp on Jul 21, 2006 19:03:16 GMT -5
I hid some porn magazines under the mattress of an unoccupied bed.
What a shock when the workers came to visit and were instructed to sleep in THAT room.
GULP
|
|
|
Post by bowhunter on Jul 21, 2006 20:31:43 GMT -5
I was told to hide my candy cigarettes(any one remember those?they even 'smoked' if you blew thru them!!)
I,of coarse promptly displayed and demonstrated them,much to my mother's horror-and probably some grins from others.I remember her being told it wasn't a big deal.
We never hid the TV but it was left off,as were radios when the workers were there.
|
|
|
Post by justamom on Jul 21, 2006 20:37:30 GMT -5
I remember the candy cigs.. my mom told us that we were NOT allowed to buy.. so we got our friends to buy them for us and we ate them at their house.. and 'smoked' them also.. lol We didn't have a TV growing up... but we did have a stereo with a record player.. and I would always know when Johnny Sterling was at our house because you could hear his Kris K. records playing all the way down the driveway.. and Johnny singing at the top of his lungs... lol... I would rush home and start singing with him..... I had all the records memorized... they were his records btw.. he kept them at our house.. for safe keeping... Those were some good times.... Have a great day..
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jul 22, 2006 8:44:59 GMT -5
It could be an article of clothing, entertainment device or something else that some of the Servants might disapprove of in the home. How do you feel about hiding something? Hypocrisy? Respect for their brethern who might be hung up on exterior issues? I have heard both arguments here. Some feel that if their brether disapprove of a TV, they should watch it in secret. Others see this as blatant hypocrisy. Paul said if eating meat offended his brother, then he would not eat meat. He did not say he would just not eat meat in front of them. Yes Greg, Paul did say that, but it was his personal decision, not a life-rule.
|
|
Brenda
Senior Member
Posts: 652
|
Post by Brenda on Jul 22, 2006 9:28:57 GMT -5
How about another example-- not hiding it at your house-- but going to friends, relatives, hotels etc and watching a ton of TV there?
Back when I was going to meetings still-- I used to go to Straw Hat Pizza almost every day to watch my daytime shows I liked. I would sit there for about 2 hours almost every day. Funny thing is there was another professing lady and daughter that came in quite a bit also-- hehe
|
|
|
Post by Zorro on Jul 22, 2006 10:05:41 GMT -5
Some people are offended by everything though. I'm sure there are a few people that are offended by the fact I've decided to search out my beliefs, rather than accept what people tell me, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop. There's a line to be drawn somewhere.This is exactly the same point my wife and I came to. Eventually we came to realize that the "line" was scripture. The problem facing so many professing folk is that the issues in question have no scriptural foundation. So far the example being used is a TV....where is the issue of TV found in scripture.....so logically, where is the justification for offense to TV found in scripture.....so logically, where is our need to be concerned about potential offence to a TV found in scripture? We are in an extremely legalistic area and had to deal with this issue in an unbelievable range of unwritten rules....I offended people by wearing tasseled shoes, flowered ties, colored shirts - I know this because people told me to my face. When I started wearing shorts, playing golf and going to football games you better believe I was labeled a rebel Ultimately, we became thankful for being forced through this process to sort through the issues for ourselves.
|
|
|
Post by spiderman on Jul 22, 2006 10:16:19 GMT -5
Some people are offended by everything though. I'm sure there are a few people that are offended by the fact I've decided to search out my beliefs, rather than accept what people tell me, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop. There's a line to be drawn somewhere.This is exactly the same point my wife and I came to. Eventually we came to realize that the "line" was scripture. The problem facing so many professing folk is that the issues in question have no scriptural foundation. So far the example being used is a TV....where is the issue of TV found in scripture.....so logically, where is the justification for offense to TV found in scripture.....so logically, where is our need to be concerned about potential offence to a TV found in scripture? We are in an extremely legalistic area and had to deal with this issue in an unbelievable range of unwritten rules....I offended people by wearing tasseled shoes, flowered ties, colored shirts - I know this because people told me to my face. When I started wearing shorts, playing golf and going to football games you better believe I was labeled a rebel Ultimately, we became thankful for being forced through this process to sort through the issues for ourselves. so true. And really glad you did! ;D
|
|
|
Post by troubled 2x2 on Jul 22, 2006 10:30:29 GMT -5
Zorro:
With regard to offending others, where to draw the line has been an issue of mine for years.
You mentioned drawing the line at scripture which to me makes a whole lot of sense, not that this is how I've done it - for years now I've drawn the line about halfway between scripture and what the "average" 2x2 expects (not really right, I know).
So I'm thinking that maybe I should draw the line at scripture, but I see what I think is an example in scripture of someone that did not draw the line at scripture (and its already been mentioned in this thread): Paul & eating meat... nothing scriptural about not eating mean, but he would abstain from it to avoid offence.
Any thoughts?
(And thank you for your post. Where to draw the line has always bothered me.)
|
|
|
Post by Zorro on Jul 22, 2006 10:54:54 GMT -5
So I'm thinking that maybe I should draw the line at scripture, but I see what I think is an example in scripture of someone that did not draw the line at scripture (and its already been mentioned in this thread): Paul & eating meat... nothing scriptural about not eating mean, but he would abstain from it to avoid offence.
Actually, eating meat was a scriptural issue at that time. OT law dealt with eating certain meats, meat offered to idols, etc. Really, Paul was consistently trying to help people see that Jesus brought a new and living way and Paul had the spiritual liberty that the natural issues didn't matter to him one way or the other. Two places in particular that I found very helpful was Romans 14 and Colossians 2, which teaches just exactly the opposite of what is generally expressed: 20Since you died with Christ to the basic principles of this world, why, as though you still belonged to it, do you submit to its rules: 21"Do not handle! Do not taste! Do not touch!"? 22These are all destined to perish with use, because they are based on human commands and teachings.
|
|
|
Post by spiderman on Jul 22, 2006 13:27:59 GMT -5
amen, brother Zorro
|
|
|
Post by nitro on Jul 22, 2006 13:43:01 GMT -5
Heb 13 9 Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein. Emphasis on Strange Doctrines.
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 23, 2006 3:37:16 GMT -5
jxr said that paul had personal decisions which were not life rules why would paul say something about his private beliefs when he was writing to all the churches and he must have known his work would form a new bible? what paul says applies to us all - ie i shall not drink wine if i understand that my drinking may encourage someone else to do it who may be harmed
|
|
|
Post by Correction on Jul 23, 2006 4:03:45 GMT -5
troubled 2x2...
Zorro and Spiderman are twisting things up here...
Actually, eating meat was a scriptural issue at that time.
Only for those who rejected the new law (Jesus).
OT law dealt with eating certain meats, meat offered to idols, etc.
But Paul was no longer bound to OT traditions.
Really, Paul was consistently trying to help people see that Jesus brought a new and living way and Paul had the spiritual liberty that the natural issues didn't matter to him one way or the other.
And we should be the same way. Natural issues are NOT what's important... but if a natural issue can offend another, there is virtue in us abstaining from it.
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jul 23, 2006 4:36:02 GMT -5
jxr said that paul had personal decisions which were not life rules why would paul say something about his private beliefs when he was writing to all the churches and he must have known his work would form a new bible? what paul says applies to us all - ie i shall not drink wine if i understand that my drinking may encourage someone else to do it who may be harmed Prue, I know that Paul was full of himself, but do you really think that he had any idea that the letters he wrote to specific churches would be included in this compilation we call The Bible? Take a reality check Prue. Additionally, you should read the words he wrote exactly as they are written. Don't read into them any pre-conceived notions until after you understand who he was writing to and what he was getting across. In this instance, Paul was commenting on his personal method of making sure he didnt offend someone. I stand by what I wrote earlier. This wasn't an instruction, it was commended testimony. You can't turn that into life-rules. How about an alternative example: I shall drink alcoholic beverages responsibly in order to set a good example to others and encourage them to be responsible themselves. Is that approach not also worthy? Abstinence is not always the best example.
|
|
|
Post by spiderman on Jul 23, 2006 12:20:36 GMT -5
troubled 2x2... Zorro and Spiderman are twisting things up here... Actually, eating meat was a scriptural issue at that time.Only for those who rejected the new law (Jesus). OT law dealt with eating certain meats, meat offered to idols, etc.But Paul was no longer bound to OT traditions. Really, Paul was consistently trying to help people see that Jesus brought a new and living way and Paul had the spiritual liberty that the natural issues didn't matter to him one way or the other.And we should be the same way. Natural issues are NOT what's important... but if a natural issue can offend another, there is virtue in us abstaining from it. Who got what twisted up? Where does "correction" draw the line? Have you ever bought gas on Sunday? Have you ever bought anything from a store on Sunday? Did you ever wear jeans on Sunday? Do you get dressed before you read and pray and eat your breakfast? Do you always wear a white shirt and tie on Sunday? Did you ever wear open toed shoes? If you're a woman did you ever leave the house without pantyhose? Have you ever been seen in a sleeveless blouse? Have you ever been later than ten minutes before a meeting? Have you ever owned or ridden in a red car? Have you ever listened to a radio? Watched a TV? Gone swimming with the opposite sex? It seemed to me that some people loved to be offended. Loved to tell the offender that they WERE offended. These things may sound silly to you, and you may say I've never heard anything like that, but I did, WITH MY OWN EARS, TO MY OWN FACE. Now, thankfully, I'm not offending anyone. And I only wear pantyhose in the winter when my tan goes away. My advice to people in general is TRY NOT TO BE OFFENDED. When you become offended you make someone else the offender. Anyway I'm not dealing with people so easily offended any longer. ;D
|
|
|
Post by nitro on Jul 23, 2006 12:42:50 GMT -5
troubled 2x2... issue at that time. [/b] . Now, thankfully, I'm not offending anyone. And I only wear pantyhose in the winter when my tan goes away. My advice to people in general is TRY NOT TO BE OFFENDED. When you become offended you make someone else the offender. Anyway I'm not dealing with people so easily offended any longer. ;D [/quote] Not that it would offend me but I hope this is Mrs. Spiderman and not Mr. ;D
|
|
|
Post by IllinoisGal on Jul 23, 2006 12:45:57 GMT -5
I dont want to purposely offend anyone but what I find more interesting than offending on this thread is its the workers everyone talks about..
What about Jesus and what he thinks? Hes the one Im most worried about and what he has to say about the situation.
|
|
|
Post by spiderman on Jul 23, 2006 13:39:56 GMT -5
I dont want to purposely offend anyone but what I find more interesting than offending on this thread is its the workers everyone talks about.. What about Jesus and what he thinks? Hes the one Im most worried about and what he has to say about the situation. Good point Ill. Gal. What did Jesus say about Sunday, white shirts and ties, skirts, TV's, red cars, wine, etc etc etc.?
|
|
|
Post by spiderman on Jul 23, 2006 13:42:11 GMT -5
troubled 2x2... issue at that time. [/b] . Now, thankfully, I'm not offending anyone. And I only wear pantyhose in the winter when my tan goes away. My advice to people in general is TRY NOT TO BE OFFENDED. When you become offended you make someone else the offender. Anyway I'm not dealing with people so easily offended any longer. ;D [/quote] Not that it would offend me but I hope this is Mrs. Spiderman and not Mr. ;D[/quote] No, nitro, that was SpiderMAN. Just a poor attempt at humor! Sorry if I offended anyone. (not!)
|
|
|
Post by spidey fan on Jul 23, 2006 14:00:58 GMT -5
Not that it would offend me but I hope this is Mrs. Spiderman and not Mr. ;D No, nitro, that was SpiderMAN. Just a poor attempt at humor! Sorry if I offended anyone. (not!) Uhm are there any real spiderman (as in the superhero) fans here? Have you [/b]seen his costume?
|
|
|
Post by Simple on Jul 23, 2006 18:29:00 GMT -5
troubled 2x2... Zorro and Spiderman are twisting things up here... Actually, eating meat was a scriptural issue at that time.Only for those who rejected the new law (Jesus). OT law dealt with eating certain meats, meat offered to idols, etc.But Paul was no longer bound to OT traditions. Really, Paul was consistently trying to help people see that Jesus brought a new and living way and Paul had the spiritual liberty that the natural issues didn't matter to him one way or the other.And we should be the same way. Natural issues are NOT what's important... but if a natural issue can offend another, there is virtue in us abstaining from it. Who got what twisted up? Where does "correction" draw the line? Have you ever bought gas on Sunday? Have you ever bought anything from a store on Sunday? Did you ever wear jeans on Sunday? Do you get dressed before you read and pray and eat your breakfast? Do you always wear a white shirt and tie on Sunday? Did you ever wear open toed shoes? If you're a woman did you ever leave the house without pantyhose? Have you ever been seen in a sleeveless blouse? Have you ever been later than ten minutes before a meeting? Have you ever owned or ridden in a red car? Have you ever listened to a radio? Watched a TV? Gone swimming with the opposite sex? It seemed to me that some people loved to be offended. Loved to tell the offender that they WERE offended. These things may sound silly to you, and you may say I've never heard anything like that, but I did, WITH MY OWN EARS, TO MY OWN FACE. Now, thankfully, I'm not offending anyone. And I only wear pantyhose in the winter when my tan goes away. My advice to people in general is TRY NOT TO BE OFFENDED. When you become offended you make someone else the offender. Anyway I'm not dealing with people so easily offended any longer. ;D It is like a game of chicken with the devil.....Not being offended. Not being offended is a great place to be. We have to be so small to get there. Having just goodwill and love to trust in. Seeing things for what they are without judgement. That will make a yoke light. So simple !
|
|
|
Post by my dad on Jul 23, 2006 22:26:13 GMT -5
When I was being raised 2x2, I developed a keen appetite for the forbidden fruit of television. I would watch TV at the homes of non-professing neighborhood pals, and at the homes of non-professing relatives. At the age of 17 my parents allowed me to own a black & white portable TV. I kept it in my bedroom, or in my basement room. My professing dad sometimes watched programs with me. Mom never really approved...but didn't fuss about it. Almost 40 years later I still have TV, and my 84 year old dad (still professing) has a VCR & DVD player with which he watches movies. Most of what he views are old-time movies, John Wayne, Gregory Peck etc. He tries not to watch anything raunchy...although sometimes he does get hold of some stinkers.
|
|
|
Post by IllinoisGal on Jul 24, 2006 6:15:25 GMT -5
[quote author= sometimes he does get hold of some stinkers.[/quote] Maybe ya need to let him know there is an OFF button on the TV for when that happens
|
|
|
Post by howard on Jul 24, 2006 8:39:15 GMT -5
I think there's a more serious aspect of hiding things from workers.
How many have discovered something they don't like - either lies being told, or doctrines being twisted etc, and then failed to tell those workers. Do you assume they know? If YOU fail to raise such a subject, what right have you to mention it here?
There are some who have mentioned things they do not agree with, and have been made to suffer as a result. Thats not right, but nor is hiding it.
If every problem raised on this board was raised with workers first, then some action might result instead of bleating here about stuff.
|
|