|
Post by ex-teenager on Feb 26, 2008 17:27:01 GMT -5
Maybe those living in this area could share their experiences? Whether you are currently part of the fellowship or an ex.
T
|
|
|
Post by Ok I see on Feb 27, 2008 16:40:51 GMT -5
We have had the genesis of this board, now you are asking for the revelations? makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Feb 27, 2008 17:12:41 GMT -5
A "wether" is a male sheep isn't it?
But to answer, I am part of that fellowship. I live in this area.
|
|
|
Post by at least on Mar 1, 2008 11:46:12 GMT -5
If you start a thread, Teenager, at least post something worth reading on it!!
|
|
|
Post by o on Mar 1, 2008 16:26:52 GMT -5
If you start a thread, Teenager, at least post something worth reading on it!! Don't be unkind. I suppose we could give the thread direction. I'd like to know whether anyone thinks it appropriate for a bishop of a meeting who feels strongly on an issue, say, within his own meeting or even in the field, and is not convinced that workers are handling the problem correctly, to go to the workers and discuss how it should be handled? Or perhaps, the "Lectures" that are mentioned in another thread, should there be some consultation with the bishops in the country perhaps by letter inviting opinions on what to say, where to say it, how to say it and indeed, should it be said? I'd be interested to know what others think. It seems to me that the workers claim they are accountable to God, but workers have made mistakes before and perhaps with the advice of good and Godly men that have experienced real life in the real world and not the world that the workers know, should be just as sound as that of the workers, especially if the Spirit is working.
|
|
|
Post by ex-teenager on Mar 1, 2008 16:32:27 GMT -5
If you start a thread, Teenager, at least post something worth reading on it!! Don't be unkind. I suppose we could give the thread direction. I'd like to know whether anyone thinks it appropriate for a bishop of a meeting who feels strongly on an issue, say, within his own meeting or even in the field, and is not convinced that workers are handling the problem correctly, to go to the workers and discuss how it should be handled? Or perhaps, the "Lectures" that are mentioned in another thread, should there be some consultation with the bishops in the country perhaps by letter inviting opinions on what to say, where to say it, how to say it and indeed, should it be said? I'd be interested to know what others think. It seems to me that the workers claim they are accountable to God, but workers have made mistakes before and perhaps with the advice of good and Godly men that have experienced real life in the real world and not the world that the workers know, should be just as sound as that of the workers, especially if the Spirit is working. I think I know were you are coming from. I feel that the elders/bishops should be consulted more in regard to issues. Its definately better to get a wide "take" on things, rather than one or two people making a decision. Ofcourse God needs to be consulted also.
|
|
|
Post by o on Mar 1, 2008 16:49:40 GMT -5
I think I know were you are coming from. I feel that the elders/bishops should be consulted more in regard to issues. Its definately better to get a wide "take" on things, rather than one or two people making a decision. Ofcourse God needs to be consulted also.[/quote]
Well, that is in essence what I meant about the Spirit guiding. Is it right that the workers should assume an authority on God and His wishes? Can they say, as Walter Milligan does, that God speaks through the workers? Is this scriptual?
Are they not to concern themselves with seeking the lost souls as mentioned in Acts etc.? Are they not to feed the lambs and sheep? Are they not to encourage the flock? Does a shepherd beat and bully his flock to move them from danger? No, he encourages them; he is quiet and gentle so as not to alarm them and cause them to stumble into danger and perhaps death through careless ministering. People aren't so different from sheep after all.
|
|
|
Post by include God on Mar 6, 2008 9:43:03 GMT -5
Don't be unkind. I suppose we could give the thread direction. I'd like to know whether anyone thinks it appropriate for a bishop of a meeting who feels strongly on an issue, say, within his own meeting or even in the field, and is not convinced that workers are handling the problem correctly, to go to the workers and discuss how it should be handled? Or perhaps, the "Lectures" that are mentioned in another thread, should there be some consultation with the bishops in the country perhaps by letter inviting opinions on what to say, where to say it, how to say it and indeed, should it be said? I'd be interested to know what others think. It seems to me that the workers claim they are accountable to God, but workers have made mistakes before and perhaps with the advice of good and Godly men that have experienced real life in the real world and not the world that the workers know, should be just as sound as that of the workers, especially if the Spirit is working. I think I know were you are coming from. I feel that the elders/bishops should be consulted more in regard to issues. Its definately better to get a wide "take" on things, rather than one or two people making a decision. Ofcourse God needs to be consulted also. Well, can you believe that? Teenager even thinks that she will include God in the consultation!! Be sure of this no wholehearted professing person will post any of their business on a site where it will be up for criticism such as we find here. Their business is God's business and of a sacred nature. The only people who post here are honest exes and people who are half-heartedly professing. Some sshizophrenic posts too, with a foot in each world.
|
|
|
Post by unkind on Mar 6, 2008 9:48:07 GMT -5
If you start a thread, Teenager, at least post something worth reading on it!! Don't be unkind. I suppose we could give the thread direction. I'd like to know whether anyone thinks it appropriate for a bishop of a meeting who feels strongly on an issue, say, within his own meeting or even in the field, and is not convinced that workers are handling the problem correctly, to go to the workers and discuss how it should be handled? Or perhaps, the "Lectures" that are mentioned in another thread, should there be some consultation with the bishops in the country perhaps by letter inviting opinions on what to say, where to say it, how to say it and indeed, should it be said? I'd be interested to know what others think. It seems to me that the workers claim they are accountable to God, but workers have made mistakes before and perhaps with the advice of good and Godly men that have experienced real life in the real world and not the world that the workers know, should be just as sound as that of the workers, especially if the Spirit is working. unkind? How unkind? A new thread needs an opening offering. Inviting experiences should be reciprical.
|
|
|
Post by GuestGuest on Mar 6, 2008 9:54:32 GMT -5
I think I know were you are coming from. I feel that the elders/bishops should be consulted more in regard to issues. Its definately better to get a wide "take" on things, rather than one or two people making a decision. Ofcourse God needs to be consulted also. Well, that is in essence what I meant about the Spirit guiding. Is it right that the workers should assume an authority on God and His wishes? Can they say, as Walter Milligan does, that God speaks through the workers? Is this scriptual? Are they not to concern themselves with seeking the lost souls as mentioned in Acts etc.? Are they not to feed the lambs and sheep? Are they not to encourage the flock? Does a shepherd beat and bully his flock to move them from danger? No, he encourages them; he is quiet and gentle so as not to alarm them and cause them to stumble into danger and perhaps death through careless ministering. People aren't so different from sheep after all. [/quote] Are you saying that Walter Milligan does this, all of this, some of this, or none of this. From what I have heard from Irish friends, Walter is regarded as a great worker, one whose advice is widely sought by young and old.
|
|
|
Post by ex-teenager on Mar 6, 2008 11:08:02 GMT -5
I think I know were you are coming from. I feel that the elders/bishops should be consulted more in regard to issues. Its definately better to get a wide "take" on things, rather than one or two people making a decision. Ofcourse God needs to be consulted also. Well, can you believe that? Teenager even thinks that she will include God in the consultation!! Be sure of this no wholehearted professing person will post any of their business on a site where it will be up for criticism such as we find here. Their business is God's business and of a sacred nature. The only people who post here are honest exes and people who are half-heartedly professing. Some sshizophrenic posts too, with a foot in each world. teenager = HE! get it right
|
|
|
Post by he she on Mar 6, 2008 23:03:55 GMT -5
Evidence?
Most indications are that Teenager is not a masculine teenager but mascarading!
|
|
|
Post by correction on Mar 6, 2008 23:06:00 GMT -5
Neither masculine nor teen!!
|
|
Claire
Senior Member
Posts: 489
|
Post by Claire on Mar 7, 2008 1:26:06 GMT -5
male. not sure about the teen bit ...
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Mar 7, 2008 2:33:39 GMT -5
I've done some research and discovered his name. Guess that he doesn't want it on here, or he'd do that himself. But he's male, teen (soon 20), and does indeed live on that island to the west of Scotland and England.
|
|
|
Post by known on Mar 7, 2008 12:51:54 GMT -5
They know who Aileen is too!
|
|
Irish2
Junior Member
Posts: 87
|
Post by Irish2 on Mar 8, 2008 16:06:07 GMT -5
I've done some research and discovered his name. Guess that he doesn't want it on here, or he'd do that himself. But he's male, teen (soon 20), and does indeed live on that island to the west of Scotland and England. I guess your same source (must be Irish if you claim to have found out who Teenager is) could kindly advise/update you that tv's are NOT acceptable in Ireland- 'Hellevision' as one worker calls it.
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Mar 10, 2008 14:58:13 GMT -5
Oh I'm fully aware of the Irish situation in that respect. I don't think I said that TV was acceptable there did I? If I did that was my error.
Even some of them don't like radios. Would perhaps be shocked in my house then...
|
|
|
Post by not shocked on Mar 16, 2008 19:36:09 GMT -5
Not shocked We all know Aileen is not a fully committed member. Is she then not fully responsible for her assertions?? or every idle word...
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Mar 17, 2008 2:46:01 GMT -5
I what way do you judge me "not a fully committed member"?
I consider myself fully committed.
|
|
|
Post by fully commited on Mar 17, 2008 19:22:27 GMT -5
I what way do you judge me "not a fully committed member"? I consider myself fully committed. Aileen, the suggestion that you are not "fully committed" is from your claims that workers happily gather round your telly (48" flat screen, no doubt) and watch soccer in the room where you've meeting. I know you claim England is liberal but I've friends and rellies the length and breadth of the country and I know the standard so the idea that television is acceptable is plain nuts. That you are deluded enough to imagine otherwise is enough for me to think that you are not "fully committed". And yeah, I know, I've read your stories about the cheerleadin', highkickin' sister workers passing round the popcorn in the interval. Nuts. Plain nuts. Did I say that already?
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Mar 18, 2008 12:09:00 GMT -5
To "full committed"
I assume that you mean that you are the same person as "not shocked" above??
Anyway, granting your variable identifier, lest address the issue.
You have exaggerated way beyond anything I've said. You dresss it up with words like "happily", claim a screen size with absolutely no justification (you have no information about that), you call football "soccer" (mistake that), and you say I claimed England to be liberal. Now you add further gross exaggeration with cheerleading sister workers, popcorn etc.
Thats so lacking in credibility as to be laughable. And you question my credibility??
So your claim of my being less than "fully committed" goes into room 101, despatched to the scrapheap of TMB claims, joining so many other lies and exaggerations where it will no doubt smoulder for eternity.
I imagine you think that you've done part of your service in portraying untruth as truth like this.
|
|
Sunday Service In Ireland
Guest
|
Post by Sunday Service In Ireland on Mar 20, 2008 11:33:45 GMT -5
Dear Teenager (former) - My wife and myself will be in Ireland on Sunday, July 13, 2008 and would be interested in attending a Sunday Meeting in Ireland. We will have a rental car and will arrive at the Shannon Airport. We live in the United States, but my wife is 3rd generation out of Ireland. (Sheehan, McCormick, etc.
How do I make a direct contact to someone in Ireland or yourself.
|
|
|
Post by ex-teenager on Mar 20, 2008 13:11:08 GMT -5
Dear Teenager (former) - My wife and myself will be in Ireland on Sunday, July 13, 2008 and would be interested in attending a Sunday Meeting in Ireland. We will have a rental car and will arrive at the Shannon Airport. We live in the United States, but my wife is 3rd generation out of Ireland. (Sheehan, McCormick, etc. How do I make a direct contact to someone in Ireland or yourself. Hi, can you somehow register and I can maybe assist you. Regards T
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Mar 21, 2008 15:22:57 GMT -5
To "full committed" I assume that you mean that you are the same person as "not shocked" above?? Anyway, granting your variable identifier, lest address the issue. You have exaggerated way beyond anything I've said. You dresss it up with words like "happily", claim a screen size with absolutely no justification (you have no information about that), you call football "soccer" (mistake that), and you say I claimed England to be liberal. Now you add further gross exaggeration with cheerleading sister workers, popcorn etc. Thats so lacking in credibility as to be laughable. And you question my credibility?? So your claim of my being less than "fully committed" goes into room 101, despatched to the scrapheap of TMB claims, joining so many other lies and exaggerations where it will no doubt smoulder for eternity. I imagine you think that you've done part of your service in portraying untruth as truth like this. Intelligent dialogue and logic are wasted on our Aileen. Leave her with her fantasies and playing at representing the 2X2s. She is connected with the group somehow but hasn't a clue, is not articulate in her posts, contradicts herself, cannot take facts at face value. Her only defense is to suggest that posters are the same person because she cannot conceive the idea that many people see through her fascade. Her understanding and usage of the English language is probably part of her confusion. Not the whole shilling. Treat her with care.
|
|
|
Post by Bishop meetings on Mar 21, 2008 19:18:17 GMT -5
If you start a thread, Teenager, at least post something worth reading on it!! Don't be unkind. I suppose we could give the thread direction. I'd like to know whether anyone thinks it appropriate for a bishop of a meeting who feels strongly on an issue, say, within his own meeting or even in the field, and is not convinced that workers are handling the problem correctly, to go to the workers and discuss how it should be handled? Or perhaps, the "Lectures" that are mentioned in another thread, should there be some consultation with the bishops in the country perhaps by letter inviting opinions on what to say, where to say it, how to say it and indeed, should it be said? I'd be interested to know what others think. It seems to me that the workers claim they are accountable to God, but workers have made mistakes before and perhaps with the advice of good and Godly men that have experienced real life in the real world and not the world that the workers know, should be just as sound as that of the workers, especially if the Spirit is working. In England they have bishops meetings from time to time. They tend to be elitist however. Not every bishop gets invited.
|
|
|
Post by Read own Posts on Mar 22, 2008 14:02:28 GMT -5
To "full committed" I assume that you mean that you are the same person as "not shocked" above?? Anyway, granting your variable identifier, lest address the issue. You have exaggerated way beyond anything I've said. You dresss it up with words like "happily", claim a screen size with absolutely no justification (you have no information about that), you call football "soccer" (mistake that), and you say I claimed England to be liberal. Now you add further gross exaggeration with cheerleading sister workers, popcorn etc. Thats so lacking in credibility as to be laughable. And you question my credibility?? So your claim of my being less than "fully committed" goes into room 101, despatched to the scrapheap of TMB claims, joining so many other lies and exaggerations where it will no doubt smoulder for eternity. I imagine you think that you've done part of your service in portraying untruth as truth like this. For goodness sake Aileen, read your own posts. What do you take us all for? We are not fools. Your posts are unbelievably lacking and you wonder why they are thought to be lacking in credibility. Come on Aileen, cop on. We also know the requirements for a committed twobytwo. You know it yourself. Who do you think you are fooling? ?
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Mar 23, 2008 7:22:04 GMT -5
What do my posts lack?
I don't claim (as some) that my experiences are those of others, I just tell my own experience as it is. That yours might be different I don't dispute, but for someone to tell me how it is for me personally, different to what it really is is just pure fantasy.
|
|