|
Post by lloyds on Jul 6, 2006 18:31:20 GMT -5
I'll post a page per day...here is page one of the history chapter concerning the 2x2s
|
|
early history is hid
Guest
|
Post by early history is hid on Jul 6, 2006 20:26:31 GMT -5
I'll post a page per day...here is page one of the history chapter concerning the 2x2s What you talkin' about? I know the history, it began 2000 years ago, in plain sight, hidden from the wise and prudent and revealed unto babes.
|
|
|
Post by Arooooga on Jul 6, 2006 20:40:20 GMT -5
I'll post a page per day...here is page one of the history chapter concerning the 2x2s What you talkin' about? I know the history, it began 2000 years ago, in plain sight, hidden from the wise and prudent and revealed unto babes. We've been chasin' babes ever since!
|
|
|
Post by Bert on Jul 7, 2006 3:57:02 GMT -5
That's fine Lloyd - all these documents prove what? If our church is only ten years old, and started by yourself, that wouldn't be the standard we would judge it by. Please understand that. Bert
|
|
|
Post by a believer on Jul 7, 2006 4:48:16 GMT -5
That's fine Lloyd - all these documents prove what? If our church is only ten years old, and started by yourself, that wouldn't be the standard we would judge it by. Please understand that. Bert Bert, your post makes no sense. The standard we 'judge it by' is the lies that are told that yoru group was not started 100 years ago. But unlike other churches it goes back to Jesus. It is not different to any other church regarding it's history.
|
|
|
Post by a believer on Jul 7, 2006 4:52:34 GMT -5
The difference between your group and most other churches is that other churches do not lie about their history. The standard of the 2x2s falls down by their lying about their history
|
|
|
Post by true semantics on Jul 7, 2006 6:38:25 GMT -5
The difference between your group and most other churches is that other churches do not lie about their history. The standard of the 2x2s falls down by their lying about their history Semantics are true, though. You have to see it, it is hid from many.
|
|
|
Post by Bert on Jul 7, 2006 7:46:13 GMT -5
So, Lloyd decides to preach the gospel as laid out in Mathew 10. Lloyd shows how serious this is by giving up everything to do so. Lloyd doesn't bring clericalism or anti-clericalism Lloyd doesn't preach politics, the environment or social issues Lloyd speaks of things higher than the issues of the world Lloyd speaks about Jesus, the Savior of the world
Some call Lloyd the leader of a new way Lloyd is offended - what he is preaching is in the bible He tells them it is from the beginning
Some call Lloyd a liar because they "know" this is a new way. Who is right?
|
|
|
Post by lacpastorunplugged on Jul 7, 2006 7:56:35 GMT -5
What "Gospel " was preached by the apostles in Mt 10?
Karl
|
|
|
Post by Wake Up on Jul 7, 2006 8:00:54 GMT -5
The difference between your group and most other churches is that other churches do not lie about their history. The standard of the 2x2s falls down by their lying about their history You need to look into the history of more churches. The Mormons, for example, do not have a completely error-free history. The Catholics have made a number of corrections to their history. There are people telling a history. There are cover-ups and distortions to keep the church in the best possible light and promote the desired image.
|
|
|
Post by lloyds on Jul 7, 2006 8:59:55 GMT -5
Here is another page
|
|
|
Post by lloyds on Jul 7, 2006 9:01:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by lloyds on Jul 7, 2006 9:07:30 GMT -5
The difference between your group and most other churches is that other churches do not lie about their history. The standard of the 2x2s falls down by their lying about their history You need to look into the history of more churches. The Mormons, for example, do not have a completely error-free history. The Catholics have made a number of corrections to their history. There are people telling a history. There are cover-ups and distortions to keep the church in the best possible light and promote the desired image. I have checked most out pretty good
|
|
|
Post by Remind me on Jul 7, 2006 9:27:39 GMT -5
Weren't you covering something up yourself up on this board "Lloyd"? Please remind me of that issue
|
|
|
Post by Really Lloyd on Jul 7, 2006 9:31:35 GMT -5
You need to look into the history of more churches. The Mormons, for example, do not have a completely error-free history. The Catholics have made a number of corrections to their history. There are people telling a history. There are cover-ups and distortions to keep the church in the best possible light and promote the desired image. I have checked most out pretty good And only the F&W were covering anything up? You might want to recheck.
|
|
|
Post by paraphrazed on Jul 7, 2006 10:13:58 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing this thought, do you mind if I paraphraze it without changing your intent. Thanks So, LAC decides to preach the gospel as laid out in Mathew 10. LAC shows how serious this is by giving up everything to do so. LAC doesn't bring clericalism or anti-clericalism LAC doesn't preach politics, the environment or social issues LAC speaks of things higher than the issues of the world He speaks about Jesus, the Savior of the world
Some call LAC the leader of a ''new'' way of believing What he is preaching is in the beginning of the gospel He tells them it is from the beginning.
Some call LAC a liar because they "know" this is a ''new'' way. Who is right?
|
|
|
Post by LAC on Jul 7, 2006 11:19:51 GMT -5
Thanks for sharing this thought, do you mind if I paraphraze it without changing your intent. Thanks So, LAC decides to preach the gospel as laid out in Mathew 10. LAC shows how serious this is by giving up everything to do so. LAC doesn't bring clericalism or anti-clericalism LAC doesn't preach politics, the environment or social issues LAC speaks of things higher than the issues of the world He speaks about Jesus, the Savior of the world
Some call LAC the leader of a ''new'' way of believing What he is preaching is in the beginning of the gospel He tells them it is from the beginning.
Some call LAC a liar because they "know" this is a ''new'' way. Who is right? Who is LAC?
|
|
|
Post by las logged out on Jul 7, 2006 15:20:04 GMT -5
So what ya think Chad
|
|
|
Post by lloydswanson on Jul 7, 2006 16:19:25 GMT -5
i chewed and i chewed until i was all chad
|
|
LLoyd and Bert disagree
Guest
|
Post by LLoyd and Bert disagree on Jul 7, 2006 16:45:43 GMT -5
So, Lloyd decides to preach the gospel as laid out in Mathew 10. Lloyd shows how serious this is by giving up everything to do so. Lloyd doesn't bring clericalism or anti-clericalism Lloyd doesn't preach politics, the environment or social issues Lloyd speaks of things higher than the issues of the world Lloyd speaks about Jesus, the Savior of the world Some call Lloyd the leader of a new way Lloyd is offended - what he is preaching is in the bible He tells them it is from the beginning Some call Lloyd a liar because they "know" this is a new way. Who is right? You speak as if Lloyd is the author of what he posted. He is not. Lloyd is not so smart as to write the above. He wouldn't pass the spelling to get it past the printers. Lloyd is smart that he does not let others get him in a corner and shut him down. He believes in shouting it from the roof tops. Good on you Lloyd for speaking out the truth. Bert get your blinkers off, get out of denial as there is no way you can deny the truth, stop making excuses and start facing reality from which there is no escape. I've never heard anyone say that Lloyd is the leader of a new way and I've been on here a long time. That is 2x2 talk when someone exposes them they say they are trying to start a new church. The 2x2s are a relatively new church. What's all this about a new way. Jesus came 2,000 years ago and he did not make a new way that started just over 100 years ago. That also is workers jargon. Your posts make no sense at times, Bert. Maybe you need to go back to school and learn how to write what you mean and Lloyd go back to school to learn spelling. Put you both in the same classroom and see the fire. I had better do a spell check or I will end up in the same classroom with you both. Lloyd has a good sense of humor and can ruffle you up in a few words.
|
|
|
Post by to Bert on Jul 7, 2006 17:06:42 GMT -5
What "Gospel " was preached by the apostles in Mt 10? Karl
|
|
|
Post by To Bert on Jul 7, 2006 17:08:36 GMT -5
Bert do you even know what William Irv. taught and why he thought the way he did? research his "Alpha Revelation" And then He went bonkers in that he thought he was one of the two prophets in the book of Revelation. They (His new Converts) kicked him out and rejected him. Then the new converts hid WI final revelation and went back to the Alpha Message. Why?
You know all of the basic beliefs of the F&W's come from WI first Revelation. If it turned out that WI was wrong the second time why do you believe he was right the first time? WI revelations and the F&W history to include the form of worship are in fact one in the same.
Does it not say in the Bible that if a prophet will be found to be false when his projections do not come true. Well he was false in thinking he was a witness, He was false in thinking he was on of the chosen two in revelations and he was wrong in his first Alpha Revelation.
Go smoke on that one for a while-Maybe you can prove it is not true?
|
|
|
Post by Problem is on Jul 7, 2006 18:11:39 GMT -5
Bert do you even know what William Irv. taught and why he thought the way he did? research his "Alpha Revelation" And then He went bonkers in that he thought he was one of the two prophets in the book of Revelation. They (His new Converts) kicked him out and rejected him. Then the new converts hid WI final revelation and went back to the Alpha Message. Why? You know all of the basic beliefs of the F&W's come from WI first Revelation. If it turned out that WI was wrong the second time why do you believe he was right the first time? WI revelations and the F&W history to include the form of worship are in fact one in the same. Does it not say in the Bible that if a prophet will be found to be false when his projections do not come true. Well he was false in thinking he was a witness, He was false in thinking he was on of the chosen two in revelations and he was wrong in his first Alpha Revelation. Go smoke on that one for a while-Maybe you can prove it is not true? that you cant prove anything you are saying.. go smoke on that
|
|
|
Post by lloyds on Jul 7, 2006 19:41:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by faith2 on Jul 7, 2006 20:15:47 GMT -5
The Senior worker here stated at convention that 'the way' was started by a man, but he didn't mention his name. This worker also stated that this man was riased up by God to re-establish His true church! He also stated that to base our faith on apostolic succesion, or that this 'way' has continued since Jesus day, is weak. Some of the friends were finding out about the history and when questioned about it he did not deny it.
|
|
|
Post by a rebel on Jul 7, 2006 22:16:50 GMT -5
Bert do you even know what William Irv. taught and why he thought the way he did? research his "Alpha Revelation" And then He went bonkers in that he thought he was one of the two prophets in the book of Revelation. They (His new Converts) kicked him out and rejected him. Then the new converts hid WI final revelation and went back to the Alpha Message. Why? You know all of the basic beliefs of the F&W's come from WI first Revelation. If it turned out that WI was wrong the second time why do you believe he was right the first time? WI revelations and the F&W history to include the form of worship are in fact one in the same. Does it not say in the Bible that if a prophet will be found to be false when his projections do not come true. Well he was false in thinking he was a witness, He was false in thinking ... Some of what wi taught was true, other stuff was not true, so when others couldn't get him to straighten, they boot him. That is the way it goes for rebels in all generationa.
|
|
|
Post by a rebel on Jul 7, 2006 22:18:22 GMT -5
Bert do you even know what William Irv. taught and why he thought the way he did? research his "Alpha Revelation" And then He went bonkers in that he thought he was one of the two prophets in the book of Revelation. They (His new Converts) kicked him out and rejected him. Then the new converts hid WI final revelation and went back to the Alpha Message. Why? You know all of the basic beliefs of the F&W's come from WI first Revelation. If it turned out that WI was wrong the second time why do you believe he was right the first time? WI revelations and the F&W history to include the form of worship are in fact one in the same. Does it not say in the Bible that if a prophet will be found to be false when his projections do not come true. Well he was false in thinking he was a witness, He was false in thinking ... Some of what wi taught was true, other stuff was not true, so when others couldn't get him to straighten, they boot him. That is the way it goes for rebels in all generations.
|
|
|
Post by inatent on Jul 7, 2006 22:40:36 GMT -5
I'll post a page per day...here is page one of the history chapter concerning the 2x2s . . . . Many things written in news reports are false deception or misinterpretation, even if almost everyone who sees it believes it. What I know about the truth given to me by God as others lived and taught, will never be believed by most people, and someone, even those who claim to believe something written and believed by most others, will consider complete truth to be false. I have worked in places for which I have been sworn to never tell anyone where I was, what I saw, or what I had to do. If it was told and proven true, most people still would not believe what I told, and for that I could be killed. Jesus lived and taught what was 100% true and totally proven, yet most never believed it, and for that he was killed - same as today. inatent
|
|