|
Post by emy on May 19, 2012 21:31:32 GMT -5
Not sure what you are unclear about. I don't know know how to clarify. Jesus was saying, look to your own sin first and as I understand it, Paul was saying the same: run from any tendency in your heart to act immorally. I agree. But that doesn't excuse complacency around sexual immorality in the fellowship. Do you think Paul was wrong to ask the Corinthians to judge those inside and to expel the wicked sexually immoral person from among them? 1 Corinthians 5 9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.” Judging a brother should be something done with a spirit of compassion and grieving with a hope that if it is necessary to remove one from fellowship it will not be permanent.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 19, 2012 21:35:58 GMT -5
Emy, do you think the power of godliness in a life is able to give friends and workers power over their zippers? There is quite a list of things the power of godliness in a life is able to give power over. The above would be included. Can any of us claim power over every thing that might be on the list, at all times?
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 20, 2012 5:08:01 GMT -5
There is quite a list of things the power of godliness in a life is able to give power over. The above would be included. Can any of us claim power over every thing that might be on the list, at all times? Emy, you're quick to excuse evil in the church, apportion blame to a child victim, or cast doubt on her testimony. If that doesn't work you say we must look to ourselves and not judge. All this makes you an enabler IMO. Here's a tale of two Steves: Steve R was a serial child sex abuser while in the work, had a shotgun wedding, admitted his evil deeds and was made an elder with Sunday AM meeting in his home. Steve B gave over 40 years of his life in the work, was dropped off the workers list and banned from meetings. Steve R was only a serial child sex abuser. Steve B committed a much worse sin it seems. I think it was something like preaching the grace of God in meetings. =========== =============== ============= ============ Matthew 7 15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 20, 2012 6:22:46 GMT -5
I read Darwin's famous "The Origin of Species" and did not spot a single erroneous statement. Really? In the first edition Darwin wrote that he believed that whales may have evolved from bears. I think this can be considered an error. As with any new theory, there are parts that need to be modified based on the evidence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2012 6:53:39 GMT -5
Really? Sorry but I didn't notice that. Maybe he was surmising, like his "little warm pond" theory. Rational I read last week that the so-called "missing matter" in the universe might be planets (one star for every thousand planets) - and these planets, on average, would intersect our solar system every 24 million years, transporting an average of 150 ton of matter (organic and inorganic) into and out of our system per visit. Thus the entire galaxy could have a vast organic conveyor belt running through it - and all resultant life is thus related, in an incredibly distant kind of way ;D
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on May 20, 2012 8:21:00 GMT -5
There is quite a list of things the power of godliness in a life is able to give power over. The above would be included. Can any of us claim power over every thing that might be on the list, at all times? Emy, you're quick to excuse evil in the church, apportion blame to a child victim, or cast doubt on her testimony. If that doesn't work you say we must look to ourselves and not judge. All this makes you an enabler IMO. Here's a tale of two Steves: Steve R was a serial child sex abuser while in the work, had a shotgun wedding, admitted his evil deeds and was made an elder with Sunday AM meeting in his home. Steve B gave over 40 years of his life in the work, was dropped off the workers list and banned from meetings. Steve R was only a serial child sex abuser. Steve B committed a much worse sin it seems. I think it was something like preaching the grace of God in meetings. =========== =============== ============= ============ Matthew 7 15 �Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep�s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: If so many people weren't getting hurt it would be comical. I have quoted that verse in Rev 2:2 many times, which demonstrates plainly that we are to keep the workers honest. But the verse is explained away by the friends and workers to mean only differentiating between worldly preachers and the workers. I submit that it is the duty of us all to vet anyone that say they are apostles. Bottom line: protecting the false living witness doctrine and the resulting evil fruit of that doctrine- the perfect ministry is more important than protecting the sexually abused on many worker's agendas. I have a hope that the silent majority of the fellowship will let it be known to the workers that their days of abusing their authority are over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2012 9:02:34 GMT -5
Emy, you're quick to excuse evil in the church, apportion blame to a child victim, or cast doubt on her testimony. If that doesn't work you say we must look to ourselves and not judge. All this makes you an enabler IMO. Here's a tale of two Steves: Steve R was a serial child sex abuser while in the work, had a shotgun wedding, admitted his evil deeds and was made an elder with Sunday AM meeting in his home. Steve B gave over 40 years of his life in the work, was dropped off the workers list and banned from meetings. Steve R was only a serial child sex abuser. Steve B committed a much worse sin it seems. I think it was something like preaching the grace of God in meetings. =========== =============== ============= ============ Matthew 7 15 �Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep�s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: If so many people weren't getting hurt it would be comical. I have quoted that verse in Rev 2:2 many times, which demonstrates plainly that we are to keep the workers honest. But the verse is explained away by the friends and workers to mean only differentiating between worldly preachers and the workers. I submit that it is the duty of us all to vet anyone that say they are apostles. Bottom line: protecting the false living witness doctrine and the resulting evil fruit of that doctrine- the perfect ministry is more important than protecting the sexually abused on many worker's agendas. I have a hope that the silent majority of the fellowship will let it be known to the workers that their days of abusing their authority are over. The handling of the SteveB case is positively nutty when we examine the SteveR case or the NZ CSA meeting elder case. I think you are quite right Sacerdotal that a lot of these distortions originate from the LWD. Protecting the "only Way" becomes more important than protecting children. The reality is, if you protect the children, the weak, the sick, the struggling souls, and the oppressed, you won't have to protect "the only Way". That is the Only Way.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 20, 2012 11:53:32 GMT -5
There is quite a list of things the power of godliness in a life is able to give power over. The above would be included. Can any of us claim power over every thing that might be on the list, at all times? Emy, you're quick to excuse evil in the church, apportion blame to a child victim, or cast doubt on her testimony. If that doesn't work you say we must look to ourselves and not judge. All this makes you an enabler IMO. Here's a tale of two Steves: Steve R was a serial child sex abuser while in the work, had a shotgun wedding, admitted his evil deeds and was made an elder with Sunday AM meeting in his home. Steve B gave over 40 years of his life in the work, was dropped off the workers list and banned from meetings. Steve R was only a serial child sex abuser. Steve B committed a much worse sin it seems. I think it was something like preaching the grace of God in meetings. =========== =============== ============= ============ Matthew 7 15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars: Did you answer my question? Steve B committed a much worse sin it seems.
I think it was something like preaching the grace of God in meetings.Truth is, you don't know the whole story and neither do I. Also, please provide examples of what you are accusing me of.
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 20, 2012 14:56:11 GMT -5
Did you answer my question? Steve B committed a much worse sin it seems.
I think it was something like preaching the grace of God in meetings.Truth is, you don't know the whole story and neither do I. Also, please provide examples of what you are accusing me of. Emy, you've done all of those things in your posts of the last few days. You seem unconcerned that Steve R, a serial child sex abuser, was made an elder with Sunday AM meeting in his home. You also seem unconcerned that Steve B, a good man who gave forty years of his life in the work, was totally wrung out then expelled from the work, abandoned by the sycophants. Steve B was forbidden to attend Sunday AM meetings. Steve R was made a Sunday AM meeting elder. "You don't know the whole story and neither do I" is classic enabler speak. What was your question?
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 20, 2012 15:05:54 GMT -5
The reality is, if you protect the children, the weak, the sick, the struggling souls, and the oppressed, you won't have to protect "the only Way". That is the Only Way. Yeah. It really is that simple.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 20, 2012 15:06:21 GMT -5
Emy, you've done all of those things in your posts of the last few days. Please quote examples.You seem unconcerned that Steve R, a serial child sex abuser, was made an elder with Sunday AM meeting in his home. Apparently you are reading with a filter.You also seem unconcerned that Steve B, a good man who gave forty years of his life in the work, was totally wrung out then expelled from the work, abandoned by the sycophants. You know that is not true.Steve B was forbidden to attend Sunday AM meetings. Steve R was made a Sunday AM meeting elder. "You don't know the whole story and neither do I" is classic enabler speak. Is that right? To me it is admission that I am not cognizant of all facts that may have been involved in a decision.What was your question? See reply #58
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 20, 2012 15:33:00 GMT -5
There is quite a list of things the power of godliness in a life is able to give power over. The above would be included. Can any of us claim power over every thing that might be on the list, at all times? No. Therefore a serial child sex offender worker can be a Sunday AM elder with meeting in his home?
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 20, 2012 17:21:22 GMT -5
There is quite a list of things the power of godliness in a life is able to give power over. The above would be included. Can any of us claim power over every thing that might be on the list, at all times? No. Therefore a serial child sex offender worker can be a Sunday AM elder with meeting in his home? At no time have I said that is appropriate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2012 17:37:12 GMT -5
No. Therefore a serial child sex offender worker can be a Sunday AM elder with meeting in his home? At no time have I said that is appropriate. Can you say this? "It is inappropriate to have a known child sex offender as a Sunday AM elder. All sex offenders who are Sunday AM elder meeting hosts should be required to step down."
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 20, 2012 18:04:25 GMT -5
Can you say this? "It is inappropriate to have a known child sex offender as a Sunday AM elder. All sex offenders who are Sunday AM elder meeting hosts should be required to step down." Why should they be required to step down? The crime was committed. More than once. The criminal has confessed and (I am assuming) repented. What is the logic for stepping down? On the other hand - someone preaching heresy could (I am supposing since I actually do not believe this) perhaps lead many of the faithful astray and, causing a lot more damage than the man who once molested younger women. Just looking at the other side.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 20, 2012 18:08:03 GMT -5
I don't know what this means, exactly, but perhaps it is thought to be blasphemy and that is way up there with the sinning crowd.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 20, 2012 18:12:05 GMT -5
At no time have I said that is appropriate. Can you say this? "It is inappropriate to have a known child sex offender as a Sunday AM elder. All sex offenders who are Sunday AM elder meeting hosts should be required to step down." That would be making a rule. Nearly everyone here agrees that rules don't work. But seriously, isn't it better to consider individual cases?
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 20, 2012 18:13:39 GMT -5
Can you say this? "It is inappropriate to have a known child sex offender as a Sunday AM elder. All sex offenders who are Sunday AM elder meeting hosts should be required to step down." Why should they be required to step down? The crime was committed. More than once. The criminal has confessed and (I am assuming) repented. What is the logic for stepping down? Rational, there is no sufficient repentance for CSA.On the other hand - someone preaching heresy could (I am supposing since I actually do not believe this) perhaps lead many of the faithful astray and, causing a lot more damage than the man who once molested younger women. Just looking at the other side.
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 20, 2012 18:22:22 GMT -5
I don't know what this means, exactly, but perhaps it is thought to be blasphemy and that is way up there with the sinning crowd. My understanding of salvation by the grace of God is simply God's decision, no matter what one believes or where one goes or what one does. This is contrary to "profess and obey those (the workers) that have the rule over you." If that is what SteveB preached, that might have gotten him booted.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 20, 2012 18:31:44 GMT -5
My understanding of salvation by the grace of God is simply God's decision, no matter what one believes or where one goes or what one does. This is contrary to "profess and obey those (the workers) that have the rule over you." If that is what SteveB preached, that might have gotten him booted. All I was saying was that someone preaching heresy would be more dangerous to a religious organization than a child abuser. Consider Martin Luther.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2012 18:42:37 GMT -5
Can you say this? "It is inappropriate to have a known child sex offender as a Sunday AM elder. All sex offenders who are Sunday AM elder meeting hosts should be required to step down." That would be making a rule. Nearly everyone here agrees that rules don't work. But seriously, isn't it better to consider individual cases? I don't know why you are against rules but whether or not they "work" is irrelevant. Known child sex offenders should not be placed into a position of trust around any children....ever. Any other policy is reckless and enabling. This is not an issue of repentance, nor is it an issue of the offender "paying his debt to society". It is also not a punishment. This is about managing the risk of offense against children by eliminating the special trust accorded to church elders who are offenders.
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on May 20, 2012 18:43:12 GMT -5
Can you say this? "It is inappropriate to have a known child sex offender as a Sunday AM elder. All sex offenders who are Sunday AM elder meeting hosts should be required to step down." Why should they be required to step down? The crime was committed. More than once. The criminal has confessed and (I am assuming) repented. What is the logic for stepping down? On the other hand - someone preaching heresy could (I am supposing since I actually do not believe this) perhaps lead many of the faithful astray and, causing a lot more damage than the man who once molested younger women. Just looking at the other side. Rat From these snippets I am flabbergasted by your suggestions from your world view. Is your use of repentence from Christian perspective or I am sorry that I got caught? ken
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on May 20, 2012 18:46:38 GMT -5
My understanding of salvation by the grace of God is simply God's decision, no matter what one believes or where one goes or what one does. This is contrary to "profess and obey those (the workers) that have the rule over you." If that is what SteveB preached, that might have gotten him booted. All I was saying was that someone preaching heresy would be more dangerous to a religious organization than a child abuser. Consider Martin Luther. Rat Since you touched on the subject. What do you consider heresy in the F&Ws chuch. ken
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 20, 2012 18:47:56 GMT -5
My understanding of salvation by the grace of God is simply God's decision, no matter what one believes or where one goes or what one does. This is contrary to "profess and obey those (the workers) that have the rule over you." If that is what SteveB preached, that might have gotten him booted. All I was saying was that someone preaching heresy would be more dangerous to a religious organization than a child abuser. Consider Martin Luther. You're on to it RAT.
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 20, 2012 18:50:17 GMT -5
Known child sex offenders should not be placed into a position of trust around any children....ever. Any other policy is reckless and enabling. This is not an issue of repentance, nor is it an issue of the offender "paying his debt to society". It is also not a punishment. This is about managing the risk of offense against children by eliminating the special trust accorded to church elders who are offenders. Exactly!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2012 18:51:12 GMT -5
All I was saying was that someone preaching heresy would be more dangerous to a religious organization than a child abuser. Consider Martin Luther. You're on to it RAT. I'll second that. Rational got the picture! I knew it was possible to make a breakthrough.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 20, 2012 22:11:17 GMT -5
Rat From these snippets I am flabbergasted by your suggestions from your world view. Why? You do not believe that a person preaching heresy, from a church's point of view, can cause more harm to the souls of men than a person who has molested some people? Just looking for reasons why the two people were treated as they were. It is certainly not a reflection of my belief! It is from the christian perspective. Isn't that the reason people are given a second chance? Part of the christian belief.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 20, 2012 22:20:04 GMT -5
Rat Since you touched on the subject. What do you consider heresy in the F&Ws chuch. ken You are asking the wrong person. I was looking at it from a logical point of view - what was the bigger threat? You people have more beliefs than Carter has little liver pills! I'm sure that gospel to one is heresy to another.
|
|