|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Aug 28, 2010 17:58:58 GMT -5
Oops - Got a phone call from a cousin, which resulted in a lengthy chat, and what was left of the morning slipped out the door . . .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2010 18:05:31 GMT -5
Oh sure Al--next time it will be "my dog ate my notes." Uh huh!!!!
|
|
|
Post by tank on Sept 2, 2010 8:38:26 GMT -5
A couple of years ago I heard a worker at convention speaking about Lambs and Sheep. They stated that new belivers (not born into the fellowship) are the lambs and those that have been in the fellowship for life were the sheep. This really cut through me because I knew several in the fellowship (life timer's) that were living double lives and to speak of them a sheep did not set well in my mind. If nothing else, I really began to pay more attention to behaviors of those in the fellowship.
Can one of you ex-workers explain the lambs and sheep to me?
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Sept 2, 2010 15:38:25 GMT -5
A couple of years ago I heard a worker at convention speaking about Lambs and Sheep. They stated that new belivers (not born into the fellowship) are the lambs and those that have been in the fellowship for life were the sheep. This really cut through me because I knew several in the fellowship (life timer's) that were living double lives and to speak of them a sheep did not set well in my mind. If nothing else, I really began to pay more attention to behaviors of those in the fellowship. Can one of you ex-workers explain the lambs and sheep to me? That's a new one to me. As Nathan mentioned above, there are verses referring to both lambs and sheep, and of course these can be taken many ways, as interpretation is always subjective. I have heard workers say different things, but I think the generally accepted idea is that "lambs" have only recently professed. But isn't the greater concern our own relationship with the shepherd, rather than becoming too taken up with someone's definition/ interpretation? Jesus spoke everything very personally and directly, not as something that someone else would need to define or interpret for them. I know that at times, in discussing (among workers) why people in a particular region of the world don't respond to the workers' message in greater numbers, someone would invariably squelch the conversation with "They don't profess because they aren't sheep." There are a lot of points that could be discussed around this, of course, but, in regard to the original question on lambs/sheep, as well as this board's purpose in talking about experience as workers (not doctrinal discussions but how we experienced it all), this implies to me that some workers at least regarded sheep as anyone out there who would eventually be "saved." Again, doctrine is not specifically taught as such among workers (at least in my experience). Things are more or less "picked up" from other workers and companions, as well as through personal experience, study, etc. All I can say is there are discussions about what makes a person a lamb or a sheep, and ideas do vary . . .
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 2, 2010 23:53:55 GMT -5
A couple of years ago I heard a worker at convention speaking about Lambs and Sheep. They stated that new belivers (not born into the fellowship) are the lambs and those that have been in the fellowship for life were the sheep. This really cut through me because I knew several in the fellowship (life timer's) that were living double lives and to speak of them a sheep did not set well in my mind. If nothing else, I really began to pay more attention to behaviors of those in the fellowship. Can one of you ex-workers explain the lambs and sheep to me? That's a new one to me. As Nathan mentioned above, there are verses referring to both lambs and sheep, and of course these can be taken many ways, as interpretation is always subjective. I have heard workers say different things, but I think the generally accepted idea is that "lambs" have only recently professed. But isn't the greater concern our own relationship with the shepherd, rather than becoming too taken up with someone's definition/ interpretation? Jesus spoke everything very personally and directly, not as something that someone else would need to define or interpret for them. I know that at times, in discussing (among workers) why people in a particular region of the world don't respond to the workers' message in greater numbers, someone would invariably squelch the conversation with "They don't profess because they aren't sheep." There are a lot of points that could be discussed around this, of course, but, in regard to the original question on lambs/sheep, as well as this board's purpose in talking about experience as workers (not doctrinal discussions but how we experienced it all), this implies to me that some workers at least regarded sheep as anyone out there who would eventually be "saved." Again, doctrine is not specifically taught as such among workers (at least in my experience). Things are more or less "picked up" from other workers and companions, as well as through personal experience, study, etc. All I can say is there are discussions about what makes a person a lamb or a sheep, and ideas do vary . . . Others would link it to the doctrine of predestination or of election. That is, there are sheep out there that the shepherd has not yet brought to the fold, but are yet destined to come.
|
|
tex
Junior Member
Posts: 72
|
Post by tex on Sept 6, 2010 17:21:04 GMT -5
Since the Coffee Talk Board is only for workers/ex-workers I am posting my comments to a couple posts regarding Submitting as Younger Companions here. Hopefully, this is the right place.
Yesterday at 3:05pm, dollface wrote: People are more ready to believe a lie than the truth.
That seems to be the basis for this particular religion.
ts: I would only quantify your statement by saying that SOME people are more ready to believe a lie than the truth. There are many reasons why a person would remain silent rather than speak out...that applies to everyone. It isn't necessarily because they are believing a lie. Thank goodness that those in the fellowship are waking up and speaking up.
dollface: Regarding your statement that this seems to be the basis for the fellowship...please consider this...it is not unique to this "religion". Some people don't take the time or make the effort to search these things out for themselves. They rely on ministers to tell them. When there is a deep trust between people it is more likely to happen. It depends on each individual, what their experiences have been and how they learn from them in how they assimilate scripture. Though I go to meetings I do NOT see things the way I once did and if I was confronted with similar experiences again I would not react the way I did. I search the scriptures daily and I don't rely on others, even very trusted ones, to decipher, interpret or explain them to me. It is written that the Bible is of no private interpretation. God reveals to each of us as we go through life. We don't all learn at the same rate and we don't grow at the same rate. Children don't, why should we expect that of each other?
I sincerely hope I haven't upset either of you. That is not my intention. I'm just relating what I've learned from my experiences. Each person has to work through issues in their own time and way. Still friends I hope? tex
|
|
|
Post by ts on Sept 6, 2010 18:32:36 GMT -5
Since the Coffee Talk Board is only for workers/ex-workers I am posting my comments to a couple posts regarding Submitting as Younger Companions here. Hopefully, this is the right place. Yesterday at 3:05pm, dollface wrote: People are more ready to believe a lie than the truth. That seems to be the basis for this particular religion. ts: I would only quantify your statement by saying that SOME people are more ready to believe a lie than the truth. There are many reasons why a person would remain silent rather than speak out...that applies to everyone. It isn't necessarily because they are believing a lie. Thank goodness that those in the fellowship are waking up and speaking up. dollface: Regarding your statement that this seems to be the basis for the fellowship...please consider this...it is not unique to this "religion". Some people don't take the time or make the effort to search these things out for themselves. They rely on ministers to tell them. When there is a deep trust between people it is more likely to happen. It depends on each individual, what their experiences have been and how they learn from them in how they assimilate scripture. Though I go to meetings I do NOT see things the way I once did and if I was confronted with similar experiences again I would not react the way I did. I search the scriptures daily and I don't rely on others, even very trusted ones, to decipher, interpret or explain them to me. It is written that the Bible is of no private interpretation. God reveals to each of us as we go through life. We don't all learn at the same rate and we don't grow at the same rate. Children don't, why should we expect that of each other? I sincerely hope I haven't upset either of you. That is not my intention. I'm just relating what I've learned from my experiences. Each person has to work through issues in their own time and way. Still friends I hope? tex Thanks, Tex. You haven't upset me. I readily recognize that the friends and workers are wonderful folks. I am glad that the friends are waking up, as you say. They would have never admitted that they were asleep. Neither would the workers admit that they were sleeping on the job. If they do admit that they WERE, they would not currently believe that they ARE sleeping on the job. The workers got stalked by an elephant and they somehow got caught flat footed. They didn't see it coming. Had they been walking circumspectly, like they preach, this would not have happened. I am glad that the workers have sought even one course from the outside(Ministrysafe). They need preaching from the outside, also. But they will no more admit that now than they would have admitted the need for ministrysafe two years ago. I do hope the friends and workers get their consciences freed up more and more, allow themselves to have real spiritual fellowship with outsiders, learn from them and not condemn each other for it.
|
|
tex
Junior Member
Posts: 72
|
Post by tex on Sept 7, 2010 10:50:56 GMT -5
Here I am enjoying a cup of coffee but no one is here. Please come on in - it's lonely.
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Sept 11, 2010 6:24:35 GMT -5
The aim is to provide this board for workers and ex-workers to chat, kind of like over a coffee while the rest of us eavesdrop from nearby tables. All in an idyllic al fresco setting (dream French Riviera café). Waiter, two more lattes please! This is the space for all us eavesdroppers to whisper conspiratorially... Why?
|
|
shushy
Royal Member
Warning
50%
Posts: 8,009
|
Post by shushy on Sept 11, 2010 6:26:35 GMT -5
Here I am enjoying a cup of coffee but no one is here. Please come on in - it's lonely. chatroom might be the place for you
|
|
|
Post by ts on Sept 11, 2010 7:32:33 GMT -5
You guys can chat over here in the eavesdropper page....Just don't come over to the workers' table :-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2010 20:33:12 GMT -5
Al, If you're around....what's your take on the history of wine vs grape juice in the US? You've been silent too long--give us something to listen in on.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Nov 17, 2010 20:49:24 GMT -5
Yes, I'm around, waiting for questions, topic suggestions . . .
As far as wine vs grape juice, I really don't know much about the history or any debate on it, but I thought it was interesting that one highly-respected elder here in in Hawai`i always used wine. I was startled the first time I tasted it in his meeting years ago!
I generally heard that the reason for using grape juice was in case there were to be a recovering alcoholic in the meeting, though I suspect it tied in with larger arguments regarding alcohol in general too.
I really don't have a lot to say on the topic, since I'm trying to stay focused on personal experience here in Coffee Talk. I suppose there are lots of doctrinal arguments around it for the other boards . . .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2010 20:57:32 GMT -5
Just wondered if you heard any discussion about it while in the work; thanks.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Nov 17, 2010 21:09:38 GMT -5
I remember some mild discussions, but the vagueness of my memory probably points out the it wasn't a significant controversy, at least in my mind. I do think some of the talk and what I regard as (usually) "unspoken" rules in regards to alcohol are problematic. Maybe that would make a good topic . . . lemme think on it a bit, see if I can conjure up enough memories to make much of a posting . . .
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Nov 17, 2010 21:38:09 GMT -5
An example like this also points out a dynamic that I find very interesting. I think that if certain elders had attempted to use wine, something would have been said to them about it, and they may have been considered questionable. The particular elder I am speaking about was very highly regarded by the workers, and it seemed to be okay in his case. I don't know the history of when meeting was placed in his home, and who placed it there - these things have a bearing on it too, of course.
Incidentally, I also have a very high opinion of this man. He died a few years ago, but he stands out in my memory as an example of what Jesus brought and how it affected people's lives. I in no way regard him as someone favored by the workers because of wealth or other "status marker."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2010 21:47:30 GMT -5
Cool! I had actually been looking for an historical perspective; I wasn't really thinking so much of doctrine as wondering if the US once did in some areas and then switched. The Puritan influence, prohibition with its catchy phrases like "lips that have touched wine shall never touch mine," and all the early evangelical preaching against drinking I'm sure had some effect on the decision.
It'll be fun to see what you come up with.
Like you, I find social dynamics fascinating. What one person can carry off, another sometimes can't--and analyzing why is interesting.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on Nov 22, 2010 16:44:16 GMT -5
My understanding was that George Walker switched the East Coast to grape juice due to his Methodist background... Just my understanding, quizzer
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2010 16:48:58 GMT -5
My understanding was that George Walker switched the East Coast to grape juice due to his Methodist background... Just my understanding, quizzer That seems pretty likely.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Nov 22, 2010 22:10:10 GMT -5
My understanding was that George Walker switched the East Coast to grape juice due to his Methodist background... Just my understanding, quizzer That could well be, quizzer, though I can't verify it at all. I think it's interesting - and important - to recognize the cultural/historical factors involved in decisions. None of us live in a vacuum - our thinking and actions all arise from a specific context.
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Jan 10, 2011 10:22:50 GMT -5
In trying to keep conversations and responses where they should be, I thought I would comment on something John W posted this morning here on the eavesdropper thread. Just a reminder to the rest of us.... We should be leaving the other threads to the workers and ex-workers and responding on this thread as appropriate. (and I am pretty sure that I haven't followed that rule totally.....) At this point in my experience, I choose to continue attending meetings. Yes, there are things spoken in meetings that are inaccurate, unscriptural, unedifying and/or discouraging. There are at times behaviors that can be frustrating and disappointing. However, in balance, I continue to feel that, for me, the positives outweigh the negatives, and my meeting participation is more blessing than burden. I hope it may ever be so.This is a pretty common thought that I have heard from quite a few professing people over the last few years. They have a genuine love for the fellowship, mainly tied to the idea of the home meetings that they have grown up in and continue to attend. Their issues are with the gospel/special meetings and conventions where the emphasis is moved from the personal relationship an individual has with Jesus/God and placed on the relationship one has with the church instead. (that is a general statement, and not meant to be universally true to all workers) At the same time, I have known people who found themselves in situations where that was not the case; the mixture in the bag changed to the point that the positives no longer outweighed the negatives. Again, this is also what I have heard from many people both prior to leaving the truth fellowship and afterward. While I mourn the loss to the fellowship when such individuals decide to separate themselves -- usually after long stretches of praying and crying and seeking for resolution -- I also understand a lot of the circumstances that can prompt such a decision, and attempt to respond with care and support instead of condemnation and shunning. Two comments here. When people have contacted me and shared that they are struggling with issues within the truth fellowship and are thinking of leaving, I ALWAYS suggest what you pointed out. I never recommend that they leave the fellowship, but rather they pray about the situation and follow the prompting/leading of the Holy Spirit in their decision. He will never lead us wrong, so whether the decision is made to stay or leave..... it will be the right one! The other point is concerning the attempt to respond with care and support instead of condemnation and shunningThis is one of the very worst aspects that I have heard about. My sis-in-law experienced this, and when talking to me about it was in tears describing the actions of those who she had considered friends of hers turning their backs on her and shunning her. While she would go to pot-lucks and other types of get-togethers for a while, she had to stop doing so because of the treatment that she received from the professing folks that were there. There was one lady that continued to be her friend during that time, and I talked about this with that lady shortly before my sis-in-law passed away. There was this statement posted on my sis-in-laws facebook wall after she passed away: I keep getting a notice to write on your wall, Cheryl. I wish now I'd written on your wall when you could reply. You are a beautiful soul. I wish when I lived in Belgrade I would have had the courage to get to know you better so I could understand you and your journey, rather than judging you, like I am being judged... now for my choices. I miss you, Cheryl. I hope we meet again on a higher level. Hugs....I want to personally thank you John for your attitude toward those of us who are considered exes. Your thoughts are always appreciated. Scott
|
|
|
Post by emy on Jan 28, 2011 14:53:19 GMT -5
Thank you AL for relating some lessons learned from companions. I hope others will also contribute.
|
|
|
Post by Linford Bledsoe on Jan 28, 2011 15:50:19 GMT -5
My understanding was that George Walker switched the East Coast to grape juice due to his Methodist background... Just my understanding, quizzer I had heard that and asked George himself about it. He said he had never laid down any such edicts. It was often evident to me that people would use George's name to authorize their own ideas. It's like if all the people that were said to have come over on the Mayflower were true,there wouldn't have been a large enough ship even existing today.
|
|
moline
Junior Member
Posts: 132
|
Post by moline on Jan 29, 2011 1:31:07 GMT -5
we have used wine here in north west vic australia for all my proffesing life of 49 years i have never known anything else
|
|
|
Post by emy on Mar 24, 2011 16:34:58 GMT -5
Had to look a little to find this thread for comments!!
About correspondence. It's mostly a moot question now since workers use email about as much as the rest of us do, but in snail mail correspondence, I don't think any worker should feel guilty about writing a copy letter. I do think that adding a personal note is pretty much imperative, though.
As for getting letters from people you don't know... if it is a letter that affects your spirit for good, it may be someone who will become a soul mate some day. If your reaction is pretty much neutral, a copy letter would certainly do, with or without a personal note. If your reaction is negative, file it in the circular file! But keep the address, just in case you get a different perspective someday!
Just my 2c - or less.
|
|
|
Post by Alan Vandermyden on Mar 24, 2011 17:07:04 GMT -5
About correspondence. It's mostly a moot question now since workers use email about as much as the rest of us do, but in snail mail correspondence, I don't think any worker should feel guilty about writing a copy letter. I do think that adding a personal note is pretty much imperative, though. As for getting letters from people you don't know... if it is a letter that affects your spirit for good, it may be someone who will become a soul mate some day. If your reaction is pretty much neutral, a copy letter would certainly do, with or without a personal note. If your reaction is negative, file it in the circular file! But keep the address, just in case you get a different perspective someday But we can still apply these same things to e-mail too, in making them more meaningful - but of course there are differences too, as in the ease of responding and/or forwarding . . . And I certainly don't mean to sound "down" on letter-writing either. I've found that I allowed myself to get in bondage to some things, and it sounds like others did too - and reflection helps to determine what's helpful and what's not . . . we all value human connections, and work to create meaningful ones. You make valid points!
|
|