|
Post by Happy Feet on Jul 1, 2012 21:26:19 GMT -5
The workers preached many times in my years in meetings that like Jesus they have no where to lay their head, now you are saying that the workers sometimes rent. The concept of renting is not the workers ministry. They claim to be homeless now you are saying that they rent. Contrary to what I heard preached and to contrary to their ministry. I don't see where Jesus said, go rent. Happy Feet, I don't see a problem with the workers renting a batch. In fact I believe it would be good for all workers to rent a temporary home and stay there for the course of their ministry in any one area. It makes more sense to me than staying in the homes of the friends. When they state that they are homeless they mean that do not own a home. Of course we know, that even if they stay with the friends they are not homeless in the truest sense of the word. That would only be true if they were living on the street with no place to stay or sleep. I don't see a problem either but what i have the problem with is that they claim that they don't do such thing as renting places to live. Is renting going out by faith and like Jesus having no where to pay their head. They claim to have no organisation so they must be getting their money for rent from somewhere. Can only presume it is from their organisation. Many ministers do not own a house. Many people in this world do not own a house but rent, do you call them homeless? I don't.
|
|
|
Post by dlb5674 on Jul 1, 2012 21:39:03 GMT -5
Happy Feet, I don't see a problem with the workers renting a batch. In fact I believe it would be good for all workers to rent a temporary home and stay there for the course of their ministry in any one area. It makes more sense to me than staying in the homes of the friends. When they state that they are homeless they mean that do not own a home. Of course we know, that even if they stay with the friends they are not homeless in the truest sense of the word. That would only be true if they were living on the street with no place to stay or sleep. I don't see a problem either but what i have the problem with is that they claim that they don't do such thing as renting places to live. Is renting going out by faith and like Jesus having no where to pay their head. They claim to have no organisation so they must be getting their money for rent from somewhere. Can only presume it is from their organisation. Many ministers do not own a house. Many people in this world do not own a house but rent, do you call them homeless? I don't. Since the workers are not actually apostles we cannot expect them to live like the apostles. I'm not sure what role they actually fill based on scripture. I'm not sure THEY know what role they fill. I believe overseers and head workers become a bit lofty and the "underlings" have to buckle under their rule. I've observed very obvious friction between worker pairs and it "ain't pretty".
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 2, 2012 13:33:16 GMT -5
Yes, in that way they aren't any different from any other organization imo. Not much different from a lot of organizations but they are a lot different from most other mainline churches who are open and accountable to the people about how the money is spent and whether they own, rent or stay in people's houses. No, they (the 'workers') are open about the fact that they rent houses sometimes.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 2, 2012 13:43:54 GMT -5
The only ones that know about how much money there is is the elders that hae the money in their accounts and it is reported to the government and the elders claim it as his and pays taxes on it. Completely fraudant. Because, whenever the overseer ask for money, the elders send it to him. Of course the elder only knows how much money there is in his account. I think you mean 'fraudulent'. Do you know what that word means? There's nothing fraudulent about what you just described. It's just a way of managing money. Really? The power of the position of elder is great? What power does an elder have?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on Jul 2, 2012 13:44:11 GMT -5
It would fold if they allowed marriage. So when you say you want the workers to be able to marry, you intend that to cause the collapse of the ministry? You don't think it would help their ministry but rather hurt it if they were open to marriage? Then Taylor Wood declared the law in a workers' convention. There were MANY overseers there from all over the country and some from overseas. I know that Evan Jones was there. Sam McCracken was there, Arnold Brown...The list is long. There were 176 workers there altogether. And that same year there were several workers conventions all over the country. If anyone wanted to protest, that was the time to do it. All were in agreement, apparently. It is a meeting law that workers may not marry. You know full well that such is not an indication that all 176 workers were in agreement. You have stated yourself that most workers, even if they disagreed, would not protest what they were told.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Jul 2, 2012 15:31:34 GMT -5
Thinking about the comment of how much power an elder might have. If it is true that the elders keep the money in their bank accounts for the workers and send them money as needed, and claim it on their tax returns, I would say that financially they do have leverage. What would stop a disgruntled elder from walking away with money that has been given to him to hold for the workers. There would be no paperwork saying it wasn't his and he did claim it on his taxes. I really wonder if this is how it is managed. Seems like the power, financially, would be with the elders that have been entrusted with the ministries money.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Jul 2, 2012 16:50:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 2, 2012 16:58:50 GMT -5
It would fold if they allowed marriage. So when you say you want the workers to be able to marry, you intend that to cause the collapse of the ministry? You don't think it would help their ministry but rather hurt it if they were open to marriage? Then Taylor Wood declared the law in a workers' convention. There were MANY overseers there from all over the country and some from overseas. I know that Evan Jones was there. Sam McCracken was there, Arnold Brown...The list is long. There were 176 workers there altogether. And that same year there were several workers conventions all over the country. If anyone wanted to protest, that was the time to do it. All were in agreement, apparently. It is a meeting law that workers may not marry. You know full well that such is not an indication that all 176 workers were in agreement. You have stated yourself that most workers, even if they disagreed, would not protest what they were told. I intend the collapse of the ministry AS WE KNOW IT. Another way to put it is to throw out the old garment and get a new one instead of patching up the old garment with new patches. Forbidding the workers to marry and remain in the ministry is VERY unscriptural and contrary to what Jesus taught. Most if not all of Jesus' disciples were married. Marriage was not an issue. Paul did not at all forbid marriage. I see what you mean about the workers not necessarily disagreeing with what Taylor said about workers not being married and staying in the work. I know that I accepted what he had to say about it. In fact, that was about the only thing I remembered from the whole workers' meeting. The only other thing I remembered was Taylor saying to be careful in people's homes because a woman walked in on him while he was in a stage of undress and that was embarrassing. However, the fact that 176 workers were there and NONE protested at this ungodly rule shows that either all agreed(like I did) or that there are NONE who are like Daniel they read about and preach about in meeting. NONE are bold enough to go against the powers that be. If there are/were those who disagreed with this doctrine, they are not trusting God but fearing man. Not just in this doctrine but in other ungodly doctrines of the meetings. The workers and friends are in fear. They deny the power of God. They are not willing for the persecution that will come if they stand up for righteousness. Fortunately NOT ALL the friends are like that. Some of the friends do speak up and take the persecution. Some of the workers are willing to leave the work system and preach the true gospel of deliverance to the workers and take the persecution.
|
|
|
Post by ts on Jul 2, 2012 21:02:57 GMT -5
after watching different denominations do all kinds of work in Jesus' name and getting along in unity, I wonder now what the workers were talking about when they said at convention, "This sort of unity cannot happen 'in the world'".
The workers really do not know or understand what is going on around them in God's kingdom.
Were the workers to drop just their man made rules, they would start finding themselves in fellowship and learning from their brothers in Christ who are presently considered to be "outside". Without the rules, suddenly there would be more "insiders" than they presently allow themselves to believe.
|
|