|
Post by jphillips on Feb 21, 2009 22:48:45 GMT -5
How bad a shape is the fellowship in? We still have meeting every Sunday,and Wednesday night. Did God get weak. Is God blind. As it says "Is His hand shortened" I was at a gospel meeting in a major US city this week. There were about 25 attend. I attended many gospel mtgs in that city when I was young and it was a large vigorous group. Needless to say I was quite set back by the change over just one generation, even accounting for the economic refugees getting out of that city. The trend in the developed world is relentlessly down, as it is in some of the developing countries which were established many decades ago. There has to be a "new wineskin" of truth and love, we can't continue sewing new patches on old garments.Maybe, today, the seeds aren't being dutifully planted or there's a lackadaisical approach in harvesting.
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on Feb 21, 2009 23:45:06 GMT -5
I was not attacking the author. I was making a point that this revelation of Irvine,and the history is not a new drill,and don't expect it to do much harm. If they felt it was important,I believe it would be changed. If opposition to this way would kill it,it would have been dead long ago. As far as numbers are concerned,we live in a different age. They used to pack a school house. I don't think there is enough witnessing being done anyway by worker or member. The workers that started the false stories didnt' think it important to be honest about their beginnings so why should those who follow be any different? Sheep following sheep. You don't expect it to do much harm? It has done a lot of harm. siwells wrote: Wasn't it by that time, that all of the original workers were dead and gone? The author of the Secret Sect was able to interview some of these early workers so why couldn't those who questioned the book?
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Feb 22, 2009 0:02:01 GMT -5
Ron When stones are being thrown duck? LOL ...said the accomplished hurler.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Feb 22, 2009 0:03:39 GMT -5
How bad a shape is the fellowship in? We still have meeting every Sunday,and Wednesday night. Did God get weak. Is God blind. As it says "Is His hand shortened" Pretty bad, seeing how it continues to lie about itself.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Feb 22, 2009 0:05:35 GMT -5
I was not attacking the author. I was making a point that this revelation of Irvine,and the history is not a new drill,and don't expect it to do much harm. If they felt it was important,I believe it would be changed. If opposition to this way would kill it,it would have been dead long ago. As far as numbers are concerned,we live in a different age. They used to pack a school house. I don't think there is enough witnessing being done anyway by worker or member. I wouldn't expect truth to do "harm." Perhaps you do since you are so resistive to it.
|
|
|
Post by JO on Feb 22, 2009 3:35:19 GMT -5
I was not attacking the author. I was making a point that this revelation of Irvine,and the history is not a new drill,and don't expect it to do much harm. If they felt it was important,I believe it would be changed. If opposition to this way would kill it,it would have been dead long ago. As far as numbers are concerned,we live in a different age. They used to pack a school house. I don't think there is enough witnessing being done anyway by worker or member. Lin, I would be happy to put a lot of effort into witnessing and I know others who would be keen also. However, there would have to be some changes before I would be comfortable about inviting others to meetings. One important change would be honesty about the church's history. Those who think they're doing the Lord's work by defending the status quo are getting in the way of a spiritual revival IMO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2009 4:27:46 GMT -5
I suspect the great fear is that the real history exposes the group as just another Christian sect. This is at the root of the evasiveness. Some don't want to even regard Irvine's mission (pre-2x2 church) in the same light as the Faith Mission. Somehow the former was right but the latter was wrong. This is the sort of thing the real truth is up against. Many "want" to be different or better than the "other churches." Exclusivity certainly has its fan club.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2009 7:45:31 GMT -5
I suspect the great fear is that the real history exposes the group as just another Christian sect. This is at the root of the evasiveness. Some don't want to even regard Irvine's mission (pre-2x2 church) in the same light as the Faith Mission. Somehow the former was right but the latter was wrong. This is the sort of thing the real truth is up against. Many "want" to be different or better than the "other churches." Exclusivity certainly has its fan club. Ram, I have searched for reasons for the reluctance to be open and honest about the history and always come back to the same conclusion as you. The desire to be a special exclusive group is extremely strong and many fear that the history will diminish that. Somehow, we have become proud of our One True Way church and aren't going to give that up easily with a history that appears to be a beginning like any other church group. The true story of the beginnings of the workers' mission is quite inspirational. However, I suppose it is considered not as inspirational as the story that the workers go all the way back to the shores of Galilee, hence the reluctance to tell the truth.
|
|
|
Post by ronhall on Feb 22, 2009 9:17:16 GMT -5
Is this the Goliath of today?
Is the situation in a stale mate because of it?
If so, who is to be the David?
Fair questions?
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Feb 22, 2009 10:59:34 GMT -5
I suspect the great fear is that the real history exposes the group as just another Christian sect. This is at the root of the evasiveness. Some don't want to even regard Irvine's mission (pre-2x2 church) in the same light as the Faith Mission. Somehow the former was right but the latter was wrong. This is the sort of thing the real truth is up against. Many "want" to be different or better than the "other churches." Exclusivity certainly has its fan club. Sounds pretty much like childhood mentality! "My daddy can whip your daddy" ......time to put away childish things, isn't that what Paul wrote?
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Feb 22, 2009 11:06:30 GMT -5
I was not attacking the author. I was making a point that this revelation of Irvine,and the history is not a new drill,and don't expect it to do much harm. If they felt it was important,I believe it would be changed. If opposition to this way would kill it,it would have been dead long ago. As far as numbers are concerned,we live in a different age. They used to pack a school house. I don't think there is enough witnessing being done anyway by worker or member. The workers that started the false stories didnt' think it important to be honest about their beginnings so why should those who follow be any different? Sheep following sheep. You don't expect it to do much harm? It has done a lot of harm. siwells wrote: Wasn't it by that time, that all of the original workers were dead and gone? The author of the Secret Sect was able to interview some of these early workers so why couldn't those who questioned the book? It seems to be a pyschological fact, that if a person puts out a lie over and over and over, that soon it is the veritable truth to them. I have to admit I think that is the problem now, it's not easy to change what became a veritable truth 3-4 generations ago......I'm not sure it can be changed this many generations too late.... I'm thinking of man who sought to justify leaving his first wife and children, and to marry another divorced person with children and to get it recognized in a certain church...he had to proclaim his first wife was an adulteress! It was a bald face lie, but he lived that lie for 50 years, and he could not change it for himself and he could not change it for the children he had with his second wife....the facts were there to alter their thoughts, but it hasn't done so yet about 10 yrs. later......He also perpetuated the lie by declaring not all of his first wife's children were his....just about 48 yrs. later DNA was done on the majority of them and proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the father.....still that didn't change the lie in his mind. Simply because he'd told that lie and lived that lie all those years and the DNA didn't change how his children with his second wife thought about their father's first children! So lies are not easily change, when they been handed down for so many years and lives are spun around them....I'm not saying it cannot be done, but it just takes more then man's will and strength to get it done!
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 22, 2009 11:26:47 GMT -5
Just because a lie is told does not mean everybody believes it. Belief is a choice, not a command.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Feb 22, 2009 11:28:49 GMT -5
Very true. The 2x2 church lies about itself, and I no longer believe that lie.
Do you?
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 22, 2009 11:33:19 GMT -5
Which lie?
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Feb 22, 2009 11:39:58 GMT -5
Don't play dumb, lin.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 22, 2009 11:47:28 GMT -5
If it's a lie I don't believe it.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Feb 22, 2009 12:44:34 GMT -5
I don't believe you.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 22, 2009 13:35:25 GMT -5
You think that sinks my boat?
|
|
|
Post by JO on Feb 22, 2009 13:49:16 GMT -5
1. Is this the Goliath of today? 2. Is the situation in a stale mate because of it? 3. If so, who is to be the David? 4. Fair questions? 1. Quite possible. 2. I believe so. How can we expect spiritual prosperity when we worship a method/system/theory more than the Christ who purchased the church with his own blood? How can we expect God to entrust us with the care of new believers when we can't be honest with them about something so straightforward as the history of the mission? 3. I dunno, but it will come from an unlikely source which is despised by those who are expected to deal with the situation. 4. I think so.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 22, 2009 14:10:15 GMT -5
Is this the Goliath of today? Is the situation in a stale mate because of it? If so, who is to be the David? Fair questions? 1. No this is not a giant. It represents small thinking. 2. No 3. If so, he will come in the name of the Lord of Hosts not his own name. 4. Hypothetical
|
|
|
Post by JO on Feb 22, 2009 14:19:14 GMT -5
Is this the Goliath of today? Is the situation in a stale mate because of it? If so, who is to be the David? Fair questions? 1. No this is not a giant. It represents small thinking. 2. No 3. If so, he will come in the name of the Lord of Hosts not his own name. 4. Hypothetical Perhaps there is a flaw in the Goliath/David parallel. The king and the armies of Israel were paralysed with fear. However the leaders of our church seem to lack the vision to even see the enemy, so we can hardly expect them to deal with it. Perhaps the Eli/Samuel era would be a closer parallel.
|
|
|
Post by lin on Feb 22, 2009 14:21:14 GMT -5
I buy that. lack of teaching. It says there was no teaching priest in that day.
|
|
|
Post by ilylo on Feb 22, 2009 14:38:38 GMT -5
You think that sinks my boat? lin, I hate to break the news, but your boat sank in port.
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Feb 22, 2009 14:57:31 GMT -5
1. Is this the Goliath of today? 2. Is the situation in a stale mate because of it? 3. If so, who is to be the David? 4. Fair questions? 1. Quite possible. 2. I believe so. How can we expect spiritual prosperity when we worship a method/system/theory more than the Christ who purchased the church with his own blood? How can we expect God to entrust us with the care of new believers when we can't be honest with them about something so straightforward as the history of the mission? 3. I dunno, but it will come from an unlikely source which is despised by those who are expected to deal with the situation. 4. I think so. #3) The bible says when Jesus returns to the earth is He going to find faith? It doesn't say is He going to find denominations, social groups or cliches...it says "faith"...........and Jesus is the only "David" that will do. I've said it before....when Jesus returns there will be no "sects of religions"...Christian or otherwise....and that will happen in a very short time.....it is God's battle and He will be the victor and those who have true faith in Jesus will rejoice and reign with Him. 4) I do not see those who seem to be expected to deal with it, having the knowledge how to do so....it is almost more then some can "handle it" for themselves as individuals.....the inheritance of the sect is rigidity and that is so well ingrained in all of us....I see a lot of it even in those who are on this board even in those who've moved on with rich faith in Christ. It isn't easy to shrug off the mantle in which one has been born with and maybe in God's eyes it might not be that important as far as the whole sect is concerned, but He thinks it to be personal responsibility is enough???
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2009 15:38:26 GMT -5
Today at 7:17am, ronhall wrote:
1. Is this the Goliath of today?
Probably a mini-Goliath, we have yet to really start on Goliath because we can't even defeat this little guy.
2. Is the situation in a stale mate because of it?
Good parallel with the David/Goliath story there. Yes, the Goliaths have stopped our progress, we're just trying to hang on to what we have and not reaching out to a world in need.
3. If so, who is to be the David?
God knows.
4. Fair questions?
Yes
|
|
|
Post by JO on Feb 22, 2009 16:23:50 GMT -5
Of course, no biblical parallel will fit exactly. The big Goliath in our church I would say is the leaven of the Pharisees.
The history issue is connected to that.
|
|
|
Post by Sharon on Feb 22, 2009 16:30:19 GMT -5
Of course, no biblical parallel will fit exactly. The big Goliath in our church I would say is the leaven of the Pharisees. The history issue is connected to that. Isn't the leaven of the Pharisees all about the "appearance" or the "form"?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2009 16:39:32 GMT -5
"FWIW, I haven't met an ex yet who wasn't extremely glad they learned the truth about the origins-even tho they may have been shocked at first. Some thank God every day for this knowledge. How people react to the shock is their perogative...I'm just responsible to expose the falsehood. " Cherie, if your goal is to make "exes" then carry on... Beating a dead spirit with a falsehood is a very dangerous thing for what that spirit might beocome....I do not know how to press the urgency of care and love for any that might come into contact with your historical facts! Yes, I worry about them Why change anything if it doesn't make things better, eh.... Hello siwells, Thanks for your note above excerpted from a bit back in this thread. Just as a fwiw, knowledge of "the history" doesn't necessarily make ex's. It sure can and does, but I know many for whom it hasn't, doesn't and won't. I do know that this is one of the fears though, especially based on experiences and ill treatment I, we, and they have had to endure from some of the ex’s here and elsewhere. Many years ago now when I first read the history from the VOT website (my initial contact), I found it fascinating and of great interest. Btw, one book that seems to be intentionally not mentioned by ex’s that might be of interest to you and other friends and workers, is Patricia Roberts book The Life and Ministry of Edward Cooney. In some ways it’s not a happy story, but I think it does embody a lot of the ideals that we see up to today. Anyway, I too realized that the subject could be and was a delicate thing to bring up. Never the less, like Cherie, I too wanted it to be common knowledge. Largely because I didn’t want some ex’s beating them over the head with the blame game about it…. like they seemed to do. So during the course of a year or so I made a point of bring it up to all those in my meeting and also in the one my folks went to. I did this privately, or socially in small gatherings, depending on how it felt okay. No big deal it turned out. Rather exciting though, because I didn’t know how they’d take it, and because it did bring up a lot of discussion and was generally very interesting and I think helpful. I think I spent all of one convention doing nothing between meetings except talking about it to friends and strangers in the bunks, at the meal table, and on the foot paths. Again, it was all pretty neat and exciting. Again, no big negative reaction. In fact the most common reaction was initial standoffishness as to “where am I coming from with this???” Considering some of the attacks the workers and friends have had to endure from ex’s about it, I find it Very understandable. Once they saw I wasn’t going to criticize or condemn them or their faith or belief, but rather celebrated and loved our common heritage, then it was marvelous how they opened up and how this and other things became something of enthusiastic common interest. I liked the reaction of my favorite cousin, “Is that all she’s got?” Just as a further point of maybe interest, a few years later, after an especially lengthy stretch of some particularly virulent ex talk about the friends and workers on the venues, I got a little worried about the younger workers being waylaid by ex’s and ex wannabe’s, and those younger ones being unprepared. So I went to the overseer to see what if anything he’d been doing, what he’d been aware of, etc. Turns out yes he was aware of and yes he felt he/they had adequately let all their fellow, especially the younger ones starting out, laborers know. And no, there was no restriction on where they could or could not surf the internet on this and other questions. So yeah, on your point of this all being a delicate thing. I agree. I very much appreciate your sensitivity. I also agree that the ex’s have a lot less credibility about it among faithful (to God and friends) and free friends and workers, and are really the best ones to bring it up in a good context. Btw, sorry if a lot of this has all been discussed. Just happened to drop in and read a few notes, yours’ being one. Thanks again for posting.
|
|