|
Post by Seriously Now on Aug 29, 2007 7:06:02 GMT -5
In other threads, a few people keep insisting that change in the Truth Church is necessary for the church to continue. For example:
1) The church should adopt an official zero-tolerance policy with regard to sexual misconduct among church members.
2) The church should publish and distribute among its members a document stating its policy regarding sexual misconduct.
3) The church should begin running extensive background checks on each candidate for the work.
4) The church should start allowing married couples to be in the work.
This would all be very nice if it were to actually happen. But honestly, does anyone expect that it really will?
Come on!
I was raised in this church and we were always taught that "God's true way never changes" and that "change in worldly churches is a sign of ungodliness". Of course change did happen but it was so gradual that it was just barely noticeable within the span of a generation.
This church never adopts an official policy, much less publish and distribute it. This church has never screened candidates for the work; They believe God does all the screening and if it isn't in his will, it somehow just won't happen. As for married couples in the work, it took them 40 years to get rid of this and I don't think they're in a hurry to bring it back.
Seriously folks!
What makes some of you think this leopard is going to change his spots? Especially overnight?
The way I figure it is this: By the time the Truth Church gets around to adopting policies to keep sexual predators out of the work, technology will be such that undesirable behaviors (sexual or otherwise) will be detectable with a brain scan on a routine doctor visit and correctable with some kind of neuron zapping nano-bot laden capsule swallowed in the presence of a doctor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2007 7:18:46 GMT -5
Yes, our church has changed tremendously.
Back when everyone went to church on Sunday I drove an old 1930's Buick to the meeting, and wore a vested suit and braces for my pants.
Back in the days when people said that you could be a Christian without going to church, I used to drive an old EK Holden to the meeting, dressed in plain trousers and a business shirt.
These days, when anything but Christianity is acceptable, I go to the meeting in a Nissan Pulsar, but I still have a business shirt (and Prue reckons its still the same one!)
|
|
|
Post by ANDREW M on Aug 29, 2007 7:28:53 GMT -5
Regarding background checks.
I understand Workers do run background checks on candidates for the work.
Cherie mentioned her brother was asked by an examining panel of Workers whether or not he had a "good suitcase !"
As Workers do not possess "cupboards" the only place you are going to find any "skeletons" is in their "suitcases !"
These Workers were looking in the right place.
"Ouch !" My tongue just pierced through my cheek !
|
|
|
Post by same ol same ol on Aug 29, 2007 7:42:31 GMT -5
Yes, our church has changed tremendously. Back when everyone went to church on Sunday I drove an old 1930's Buick to the meeting, and wore a vested suit and braces for my pants. Back in the days when people said that you could be a Christian without going to church, I used to drive an old EK Holden to the meeting, dressed in plain trousers and a business shirt. These days, when anything but Christianity is acceptable, I go to the meeting in a Nissan Pulsar, but I still have a business shirt (and Prue reckons its still the same one!) Dodging the point, as usual.
|
|
|
Post by interesting on Aug 29, 2007 9:39:42 GMT -5
Holden...Aussie car. But next year in America you can buy the Holden Monaro as a Pontiac G8. Pontiac GTO 2004 was a Holden.
|
|
|
Post by I would assume on Aug 29, 2007 9:53:54 GMT -5
I would assume that if say a man of GOD like Abraham showed up and wanted to speak at a convention the workers would reject him. If the man of GOD wanted to join them they would tell him to wait for a 6 months to a year to prove to them he was good enough. Can you imgine that. Good enough when God sends you. No they do not let GOD decide. The Worker men decide based on if you fit the mold they (The Workers) have for you. Usurping the will of GOD. Things that need to change. Write down exactly what doctrines they believe. What is GodHead? Is Jesus the 2nd part of the Trinity? Is Propitiation real? Are these Scriptures to be believed: Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;What does not allowing D&R to take part for a period prove? And so forth. Real issues of Doctrine need to be address.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2007 10:09:42 GMT -5
quote - I would assume that if say a man of GOD like Abraham showed up and wanted to speak at a convention the workers would reject him. Abraham was an old man before God was ready to tell him to go to the promised land.If the man of GOD wanted to join them they would tell him to wait for a 6 months to a year to prove to them he was good enough. And the young arrogant Moses killed the Egyptian. But God sent him to the back of the desert for 40 years until he had become the meekest man in all the world.Can you imgine that. Good enough when God sends you. I don't have to imagine it, its there in the bible.Things that need to change. They have this theology course for lots of church people. You memorise lots of stuff and they give you a degree as a man or woman of God. Pull the other leg.Write down exactly what doctrines they believe. That would take a lot of writing. The doctrine is the bible, mostly lived out as example.What is GodHead? Please explainIs Jesus the 2nd part of the Trinity? Maybe Jesus is the third part, or maybe the Holy Ghost is first, and then Jesus, or maybe God is .... And can we be the fourth part of the Trinity if we are "one" with God?Is Propitiation real? Probably, depends on what you want the term to mean.Are these Scriptures to be believed: Not these, in any case.Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; That's right.What does not allowing D&R to take part for a period prove? What?And so forth. Real issues of Doctrine need to be address. Have you found a church which has "addressed" these issues to your satisfaction? Do they have a web site?
|
|
|
Post by guesto on Aug 29, 2007 10:17:52 GMT -5
quote - I would assume that if say a man of GOD like Abraham showed up and wanted to speak at a convention the workers would reject him. Abraham was an old man before God was ready to tell him to go to the promised land.Can you imgine that. Good enough when God sends you. I don't have to imagine it, its there in the bible.Things that need to change. They have this theology course for lots of church people. You memorise lots of stuff and they give you a degree as a man or woman of God. Pull the other leg.Write down exactly what doctrines they believe. That would take a lot of writing. The doctrine is the bible, mostly lived out as example.What is GodHead? Please explainIs Jesus the 2nd part of the Trinity? Maybe Jesus is the third part, or maybe the Holy Ghost is first, and then Jesus, or maybe God is .... And can we be the fourth part of the Trinity if we are "one" with God?Is Propitiation real? Probably, depends on what you want the term to mean.Are these Scriptures to be believed: Not these, in any case.Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; That's right.What does not allowing D&R to take part for a period prove? What?And so forth. Real issues of Doctrine need to be address. Have you found a church which has "addressed" these issues to your satisfaction? Do they have a web site?funnie ..
|
|
|
Post by ANDREW M on Aug 29, 2007 10:32:52 GMT -5
Write down exactly what doctrines they believe.
That would take a lot of writing. The doctrine is the bible, mostly lived out as example.
That must have been an extremely intense theological course the Ethiopian Eunuch went through ? Wait a minute - Did Philip even have a Bible with him ?
Ah, I get it. The Eunuch was told to attend a Gospel Mission when he got to Adis Ababa. Then he would "gety" what Philip was on about !
|
|
|
Post by sharp cookie on Aug 29, 2007 10:37:47 GMT -5
Write down exactly what doctrines they believe.
That would take a lot of writing. The doctrine is the bible, mostly lived out as example.That must have been an extremely intense theological course the Ethiopian Eunuch went through ? Wait a minute - Did Philip even have a Bible with him ? Ah, I get it. The Eunuch was told to attend a Gospel Mission when he got to Adis Ababa. Then he would "gety" what Philip was on about ! the Eunuch must have been a sharp cookie, and professed in Phillip's first mtg. . Nothing ''wrong'' with that testimony, is there?
|
|
|
Post by ANDREW M on Aug 29, 2007 10:45:01 GMT -5
I was forgetting the Eunuch had the OT with him. He listened to the NT from Philip, accepted it and was baptized all in the "one" meeting !
Of course if he hadn't got baptized then he would have had a l-o-n-g time to wait until convention to get done !
|
|
Oh how utterly funny
Guest
|
Post by Oh how utterly funny on Aug 29, 2007 10:46:07 GMT -5
Yes, they are... I was given green lights by different senior brothers and sisters workers who knew me when I first professed to the overseer/s as a good candidate before entering the work. You call this a background check? Ha ha ha ha ha. A personal reference maybe, but a background check? He ha ha ha ha. My employer did a background check done on me once so I could get a government security clearance. They did some real digging. They talked to people I hadn't seen in 30 years including a relative I didn't even know how to contact anymore (in fact I'd figured she was long since dead). Now that's a background check! Ha ha ha ha ha. Sorry. I'm still laughing at what you call a background check. Thanks, Nathan. You've made my day.
|
|
makes more sense this way
Guest
|
Post by makes more sense this way on Aug 29, 2007 10:55:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Some on Aug 29, 2007 11:47:48 GMT -5
Would prefer to not believe in scripture like these.
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.= Messiah, Emmanual, The Christ
Rom:1:20: For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Col:2:9: For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
Nope don't matter who you believe Jesus is. Yea Right. Anyone who teaches Jesus is not the fulness of the Godhead and God "manifest in the flesh" is teaching false Gospel.
|
|
|
Post by iagree on Aug 29, 2007 11:59:58 GMT -5
Would prefer to not believe in scripture like these. And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.= Messiah, Emmanual, The Christ Col:2:9: For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. [/color] Nope don't matter who you believe Jesus is. Yea Right. Anyone who teaches Jesus is not the fulness of the Godhead and God "manifest in the flesh" is teaching false Gospel. [/quote] ....
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Aug 29, 2007 12:07:59 GMT -5
Hey! How did you do that!? I had to turn my screen upside down to read it! (Not!) No, really! How did you do that? E
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Aug 29, 2007 12:27:42 GMT -5
E After you type your response, THEN you turn your screen upside down before you hit the''post reply" button. ;D Scott
|
|
|
Post by Freedom on Aug 29, 2007 22:04:34 GMT -5
E After you type your response, THEN you turn your screen upside down before you hit the''post reply" button. ;D Scott LOL!
|
|
|
Post by ranman77007 on Aug 29, 2007 22:14:03 GMT -5
quote - I would assume that if say a man of GOD like Abraham showed up and wanted to speak at a convention the workers would reject him. Abraham was an old man before God was ready to tell him to go to the promised land.Can you imgine that. Good enough when God sends you. I don't have to imagine it, its there in the bible.Things that need to change. They have this theology course for lots of church people. You memorise lots of stuff and they give you a degree as a man or woman of God. Pull the other leg.Write down exactly what doctrines they believe. That would take a lot of writing. The doctrine is the bible, mostly lived out as example.What is GodHead? Please explainIs Jesus the 2nd part of the Trinity? Maybe Jesus is the third part, or maybe the Holy Ghost is first, and then Jesus, or maybe God is .... And can we be the fourth part of the Trinity if we are "one" with God?Is Propitiation real? Probably, depends on what you want the term to mean.Are these Scriptures to be believed: Not these, in any case.Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; That's right.What does not allowing D&R to take part for a period prove? What?And so forth. Real issues of Doctrine need to be address. Have you found a church which has "addressed" these issues to your satisfaction? Do they have a web site?funnie .. i agree ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2007 22:17:49 GMT -5
Well, I do sympathize with people's ignorance of the scripture, but I think the upside down feature is neat! ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by But yet on Aug 29, 2007 22:27:59 GMT -5
Yes, they are... I was given green lights by different senior brothers and sisters workers who knew me when I first professed to the overseer/s as a good candidate before entering the work. You call this a background check? Ha ha ha ha ha. A personal reference maybe, but a background check? He ha ha ha ha. My employer did a background check done on me once so I could get a government security clearance. They did some real digging. They talked to people I hadn't seen in 30 years including a relative I didn't even know how to contact anymore (in fact I'd figured she was long since dead). Now that's a background check! Ha ha ha ha ha. Sorry. I'm still laughing at what you call a background check. Thanks, Nathan. You've made my day. While you laugh in ignorance you fail to realize that no background check will reveal behavior that has yet to manifest itself. What is the big deal with talking to a relative that you had not had contact with for many years? People who have known an individual for a few years are much more likely to know about problems than your vaunted 'deep' background check with people you didn't know were still alive.
|
|
|
Post by to the twit on Aug 29, 2007 23:04:25 GMT -5
Well, I do sympathize with people's ignorance of the scripture, but I think the upside down feature is neat! ;D ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by hmmmmmmmmmmm on Aug 30, 2007 0:18:51 GMT -5
While you laugh in ignorance you fail to realize that no background check will reveal behavior that has yet to manifest itself. I never said otherwise. Don't drink and post. I was illustrating a point. I'm sorry it slipped past your minuscule attention span. Yes, and they interviewed them too. It was all part of being thorough. It's obvious you don't like the idea of thorough background checks. Who or what are you hiding?
|
|
|
Post by ii on Aug 30, 2007 3:54:03 GMT -5
Yes, our church has changed tremendously. Back when everyone went to church on Sunday I drove an old 1930's Buick to the meeting, and wore a vested suit and braces for my pants. Back in the days when people said that you could be a Christian without going to church, I used to drive an old EK Holden to the meeting, dressed in plain trousers and a business shirt. These days, when anything but Christianity is acceptable, I go to the meeting in a Nissan Pulsar, but I still have a business shirt (and Prue reckons its still the same one!) bet chu wish you still had the old buick and holdunga now?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2007 4:25:21 GMT -5
quote - "bet chu wish you still had the old buick and holdunga now?"
Yeah. What irritates me is that I got rid of the following HR holden HD holden FC holden EK holden Zephur (don't know the year)
... when these cars were just sitting in our paddock.
We had all the room for them! I got fed up with them, and we were worried because people were cruising around the public roads, checking on them.
|
|
|
Post by ii on Aug 30, 2007 4:44:36 GMT -5
quote - "bet chu wish you still had the old buick and holdunga now?" Yeah. What irritates me is that I got rid of the following HR holden HD holden FC holden EK holden Zephur (don't know the year)
... when these cars were just sitting in our paddock.
We had all the room for them! I got fed up with them, and we were worried because people were cruising around the public roads, checking on them.
make you weep aye prob all baked bean cans now
|
|
|
Post by las logged out on Aug 30, 2007 11:50:59 GMT -5
Yes it can change the WWCG did they lost half there members by owning up...but they admitted to being false and a cult
Remember that Garner ted armstrong eh?thats the one I mean
|
|
|
Post by seems2b on Aug 30, 2007 22:02:48 GMT -5
Seems there more hope for cars changing than the Truth cult.
|
|