Something to think about
Guest
|
Post by Something to think about on Sept 26, 2007 20:16:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Article on Sept 26, 2007 20:20:07 GMT -5
article:
Hey ya'll, this past weekend I was at a get together in Georiga, where there was a bunch of young people. Sunday morning meeting was great, alot of the kids spoke. Someone said something that i have not been able to get off my mind, and me answer scared me. He siad that he asked himself this question " If my family and friends stopped professing, would I still be there?" I know my answer sure scared me!! I am just so thankful and lucky that i grew up in a professing home, and I am so thankful for my friends that are there to help me.
MYSPACE.COM
Imagine if Irving Ross were their head worker and knew they were posting stuff about God's way on MYSPACE.COM:)
|
|
|
Post by a believer on Sept 26, 2007 22:43:37 GMT -5
What is it that scared you about that comment?
I don't go to convention and don't care if my family go or not.
When my family are getting ready to go to convention, I am so glad that I am free and don't go. I feel kind of nausea that my family are going to get brainwashed that their group is the only true way on the earth. I far prefer to be at a church and hear that Jesus is the way rather than a particular group. I said to my mother the other day when she was saying the meetings are the only way, I said Jesus is the only way, not a group, she said no he is not, our group is the way. She is 85 so I make allowances for her.
|
|
|
Post by ithascome on Sept 26, 2007 23:38:59 GMT -5
I said to my mother the other day when she was saying the meetings are the only way, I said Jesus is the only way, not a group, she said no he is not, our group is the way. She is 85 so I make allowances for her.
|
|
therose
Junior Member
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"
Posts: 135
|
Post by therose on Sept 27, 2007 0:36:10 GMT -5
Sadly, it is true that if most of the friends and family that you today know as professing were to go away - your true beliefs and faith would be tested. Many would not make it because a lot of those that I know and have known continue on only because of their parents, friends, and worker's influence and the fear of what someone woulld think if they did not continue in the way they were taught.
|
|
|
Post by diet coke on Sept 27, 2007 11:32:23 GMT -5
Sadly, it is true that if most of the friends and family that you today know as professing were to go away - your true beliefs and faith would be tested. Surely that would be a good thing? Only the most arrogant or brainwashed can believe they are right about something when everyone around them disagrees? Yes, I know that statement is absolutely contrary to 2x2 preaching, but shouldn't we afford our friends and relatives SOME pretense of having a brain in their heads?
|
|
|
Post by freespirit on Sept 27, 2007 14:24:50 GMT -5
Hmmm... that's a good question and definitely a good thing to ask yourself. But, and this is just food for thought, merely going to meetings is IMO a weak indication of a relationship with God. Yes, it might mean that one is following God. Or it might not. God knows the heart.
Maybe another meditation might be something like: If my friends and family stopped praying and having a relationship with God, would I still have one? Am I depending on them giving me something at the meetings rather than digging things out by myself and spending time with God? Or, well, you know, stuff like that.
food for thought only.
peace, freespirit
|
|
|
Post by ex-teenager on Sept 27, 2007 15:35:40 GMT -5
Might be a good question for all of us to ask ourselves. What if everyone turned against God, would we still serve Him?
|
|
|
Post by diet coke on Sept 27, 2007 16:10:05 GMT -5
Might be a good question for all of us to ask ourselves. What if everyone turned against God, would we still serve Him? Not the same question at all, is it? I guess I assumed the reason they left meetings was for doctrinal reasons, not a lust for sinful ways. If a close friend or family member leaves for doctrinal reasons, I definitely wanna hear what they have to say. And I'd like to think I was open-minded enough to actually learn something...possibly something life-changing.
|
|
|
Post by wanttobewithGod on Sept 27, 2007 16:17:16 GMT -5
diet coke, that is FAR from always the case. (of course, one NEVER wants to say always, never, etc....) but...I, ashamedly, left because of a lust for sinful ways, as you put it. Had nothing to do with doctrine in my personal experience. M.
|
|
|
Post by diet coke on Sept 27, 2007 17:28:58 GMT -5
oh...well...it might still be a life-changing learning experience.
|
|
|
Post by ex-teenager on Sept 27, 2007 18:18:11 GMT -5
Might be a good question for all of us to ask ourselves. What if everyone turned against God, would we still serve Him? Not the same question at all, is it? I guess I assumed the reason they left meetings was for doctrinal reasons, not a lust for sinful ways. If a close friend or family member leaves for doctrinal reasons, I definitely wanna hear what they have to say. And I'd like to think I was open-minded enough to actually learn something...possibly something life-changing. I didn't say it was the same thing. But I presume this person thinks that leaving the fellwoship, i.e. leaving meetings is leaving God. Hence I say its a good question to ask ourselves.
|
|
_
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by _ on Sept 27, 2007 18:29:55 GMT -5
When I was a hearty professing person, I strongly believed that those who left meetings were leaving God, his true way, his true ministry, and the only path to salvation...
|
|
Hol
Junior Member
Posts: 146
|
Post by Hol on Sept 27, 2007 20:10:14 GMT -5
If my family(/friends) stopped professing, I would have a CRAWFISH BOIL!
|
|
therose
Junior Member
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"
Posts: 135
|
Post by therose on Sept 27, 2007 20:34:27 GMT -5
I agree, Teenager - it is a very good question to ask ourselves.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 27, 2007 22:01:50 GMT -5
I don't go to convention and don't care if my family go or not.
I think it is important to value the souls of all men. I certainly care deeply for the souls of my family. If any of them left the Fellowship it would be an agony, both physical, spiritual and mental to me. I have wept uncontrollably in meetings because dear brethren have left. It is not something one wishes to be hardened to.
When my family are getting ready to go to convention, I am so glad that I am free and don't go. I feel kind of nausea that my family are going to get brainwashed that their group is the only true way on the earth.
So holding a belief that one's church is the only true church on the earth is the consequence of brainwashing? A lot of brainwashing took place during the Reformation then, and a lot of brainwashing must have occured for the next three-hundred years. And fifty years ago when Lutherans thought themselves the only true church, there must have been brainwashing involved as well? And even today, there are plenty of Roman Catholics who think Protestantism is false and only Roman Catholicism is correct - eg. Steve Ray, Dave Armstrong, the folks at Catholic Answers etc.
Why must you use an emotive, incorrect, and imprecise term such as "brainwashing" to refer to a specific doctrine of a specific church? Does that not demonstrate a lack of respect?
I far prefer to be at a church and hear that Jesus is the way rather than a particular group.
Jesus is the way. We agree. But there is only one true church on the earth - ours!
|
|
|
Post by obviously on Sept 27, 2007 22:39:53 GMT -5
...GIS is brainwashed.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 27, 2007 23:21:15 GMT -5
GIS is brainwashed.
An insult and an ad hominem assault.
In essence you are claiming that I, along with the rest of the Friends, have been mentally programmed. As a result, we speak and write not from personal conviction or from experience, but merely as the result of the prefabricated, tacked-together theology with which our weak minds have been filled. Our words are therefore suspect; and our worldview is not to be regarded with respect or courtesy, but as the sorts of rubbish one would find in the streets.
The fact that I am on these forums is a testament to the fact that I take the exe viewpoint seriously enough to bother myself interacting with it. Perhaps you could reciprocate by assuming we are intelligent human beings who are not mentally defective or "brainwashed" but have come to certain conclusions freely and of our own accord.
|
|
|
Post by dang on Sept 28, 2007 0:13:57 GMT -5
In essence you are claiming that I, along with the rest of the Friends, have been mentally programmed. Dang! Now my tongue is bleeding!
|
|
|
Post by a believer on Sept 28, 2007 2:32:13 GMT -5
GIT wrote: Jesus is the way. We agree. But there is only one true church on the earth - ours! A church that was started up 100 years ago by a man named Willima Irivine whose converts later claimed was a false teacher now has followers that claim they are the one true church.
The JWs , the Mormons and so all all claim that theirs is the one true church.
My Bible tells me that the true church is made up of those who are born again, it does not say the true church is a particular denomination such as yours.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 28, 2007 2:53:30 GMT -5
My Bible tells me that the true church is made up of those who are born again, it does not say the true church is a particular denomination such as yours.
The concept of the "invisible church" in which all true believers belong is almost a circular logic. And it did not find its genesis in the scriptures. This teaching emerged from the theology of John Calvin in response to multiple Protestant churches emerging as a result of the Reformation.
In other words, no one spoke about the existence of some "invisible church of born again Christians" until Calvin's Geneva 500 years ago. Let's get that in perspective. For more than a millennia no one had ever imagined that there was some kind of mystical Christian connection that joins people in all kinds of churches into one mystical harmony. No one had ever concieved of such an idea!
Your Bible does not teach that all "born again Christians" are part of the church. Indeed, I would challenge the presupposition that the Bible even teaches the existence of "born again Christians". A Christian is a person who is "born again" by definition. Having become a Christian, one does not then get "born again". I maintain that there is no such thing as a "born again Christian", any more than there is such a thing as a "cooked again roast chicken".
Your Bible teaches that there is one baptism, one church, one Lord over all, and his people are joined into one body partaking of one communion. The church is not some kind of theological Frankenstein's monster in which we take an appendage from over there among the Lutherans, and grab an organ from over here among the Anglicans, and stitch on a finger from the Baptists, and plaster on a foot from the Pentecostals. The invisible church conception is a patchwork quilt; and it is not proven by experience - we all know that people of different theological persuasions fight like cats and dogs.
What kind of testament is that to God? That he is well able to keep his Word pure, and he is well able to save "to the uttermost" those who are his, even destroying death and putting everything under his feet, and his glorious Spirit is ever clean and perfect and righteous, but despite all of this, he cannot call into existence a church and keep that church true, intact, united, and alive. Is God so weak? Does it bring honour to the Gospel to concieve that God has chosen to work through the fractured morass, and inter-denominational strife that masquerades as Christianity?
No. There is one Church. It is marked by adherence to the example of the Apostles, to submission to the Holy Spirit, to the testimony of the Word. And whilst ex-2x2s may deny the validity of the Church, it is nevertheless the one true Church. Yet despite my belief on this matter, I maintain the dicta that "salvation is possible outside of the Church, but not outside of Christ".
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 28, 2007 3:02:39 GMT -5
Dang! Now my tongue is bleeding!
I don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 28, 2007 3:06:31 GMT -5
The JWs , the Mormons and so all all claim that theirs is the one true church.
The old "poisoning-the-well" routine.
As you should well know there is very little similarity between the Mormons, JW's and the Fellowship. If you do not have a good understanding of Mormon, or JW theology then you should not be using them as examples in your assertions. It's plain dishonest.
The fact that there exists other organisations who claim to be the "true church" is not a basis upon which to deny that the Fellowship is the true church.
One wonders how you will stand when the false Christs emerge - does the existence of a man who claims to be Christ yet isn't suddenly preclude the existence of Jesus the Christ who is? No it does not. Any more than a church who claims to be the only true church and yet is false, somehow precludes the Fellowship from being the only true Church.
|
|
|
Post by too simple for GIT on Sept 28, 2007 8:29:41 GMT -5
As you should well know there is very little similarity between the Mormons, JW's and the Fellowship. The mormons, jw's and the 2x2s all claim to be the ONE TRUE CHURCH, a point to which you remain totally blind. I see you have given 2x2ism a name: "the Fellowship."
|
|
|
Post by lick your boots on Sept 28, 2007 8:31:59 GMT -5
The fact that I am on these forums is a testament to the fact that I take the exe viewpoint seriously enough to bother myself interacting with it. Perhaps you could reciprocate by assuming we are intelligent human beings who are not mentally defective or "brainwashed" but have come to certain conclusions freely and of our own accord. Well, lah dee dah, aren't you just one high falutin' yokel all full of himself. Puffed up with pride, are ye. Am I supposed to bow, grovel, and scrape in your presence, O HOLY GIT?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2007 8:34:13 GMT -5
from our web site, "Amongst themselves Jesus’ followers used terms such as “the way;” “brothers;” “saints;” “the Truth” and “disciples.”
Were any of these the official name of that first church? No.
|
|
|
Post by apples and oranges on Sept 28, 2007 8:37:36 GMT -5
2x2ism is not the "first church," bert, you brainwashed twit.
|
|
|
Post by gloryintruth on Sept 28, 2007 9:06:12 GMT -5
The mormons, jw's and the 2x2s all claim to be the ONE TRUE CHURCH, a point to which you remain totally blind.
No I don't remain blind to this fact. Unfortunately you did not bother to read, still less think about what I wrote in response to your post.
You are making a logical blunder, namely, that because a number of things (in this case, churches) share one quality in common (claiming to be the only true church), that everything about them must be likewise the same. This is utter idiocy that is disproven by simple common sense.
Consider this analogy. We line up three men, and because all of them are cripped in the left leg we make the assumption that all of them have exactly the same kind of thoughts, behave in exactly the same sorts of ways, have the same preferences, have the same educational background etc. And because one cripple is a murderer, all three cripples must be murderers.
No level-headed person would make such ridiculous assertions. But this is precisely what you are doing. The Roman Catholic Church, the Mormons, the Jehovah's Witnesses and a whole bunch of other churches all claim to be the "true church", as indeed does the Fellowship. The average person says, "So what? Examine their theology and beliefs and try the spirits". But you are saying they're all false precisely because they claim to be true.
Because is this not what you are maintaining? Are you not drawing a connection between denominations based on the one factor: claims of "trueness"? Your logic adds up to a false syllogism:
1. Mormons hold to doctrines which are obviously outrageous heresies, but Mormons claim to the "true church". 2. The Fellowship also claims to be the "true church". 3. Therefore the Fellowship must hold to outrageous heresies and be false too.
Your reasoning is not deductive or conclusive. It does not even follow basic patterns or proof and consistence - didn't you study set theory in mathematics?
I see you have given 2x2ism a name: "the Fellowship".
Purely for discussion purposes. I capitalise Fellowship to distinguish it from fellowship, though I consider both to be verbs or adjectives. I also do this due to the howls of protest whenever I have referred to the Church as "the Truth". I've heard the whole routine to the point of death: you're making your Church into Jesus! Let's discuss this for seven weeks and have an incestuous love fest in which we all congratulate each other for leaving "the cult" because look at how they talk about the "system" - as though it were God, (even though, as we all know, the Friends don't worship God, they worship the Workers - but who cares about internal consistency anyways? So long as we vent our hatred, that's all that really matters.)
|
|