|
Post by sacerdotal on Aug 7, 2012 17:16:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 7, 2012 19:02:26 GMT -5
Really interesting article. "Many of Terrell's followers have long since recanted their belief in him, but only one person I know has recanted his spiritual experience."
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 8, 2012 9:03:53 GMT -5
On thinking about that article, I believe that it's very profound. Donna Johnson states roughly that something greater than ourselves, something 'spiritual' exists in certain commonly shared experiences, like the tent revivals she attended. Whatever it is, it's the same thing whether we're considering tent evangelism or convention meetings. I believe this is true. This is why I don't get too worked up about whether David Terrell is a fraud or not, or whether workers are perfect human beings. They are only instruments of the divine. We only have to consider the kinds of people found in the Bible that were God's instruments, beginning with the sordid deeds of David or Abraham. Another tent evangelism story along this line, now that I think of it, is the movie Leap of Faith.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Aug 8, 2012 14:53:41 GMT -5
On thinking about that article, I believe that it's very profound. Donna Johnson states roughly that something greater than ourselves, something 'spiritual' exists in certain commonly shared experiences, like the tent revivals she attended. Whatever it is, it's the same thing whether we're considering tent evangelism or convention meetings. I believe this is true. This is why I don't get too worked up about whether David Terrell is a fraud or not, or whether workers are perfect human beings. They are only instruments of the divine. We only have to consider the kinds of people found in the Bible that were God's instruments, beginning with the sordid deeds of David or Abraham. Another tent evangelism story along this line, now that I think of it, is the movie Leap of Faith. I agree. The more I read Donna Johnson’s works (including the link provided by sacerdotal), the more I find that her analysis of experiences resonates with my own understanding of similar experiences. She seems to start from a point of view that no person and no experience is just one thing but rather they are the composite of many complex and interacting factors. But then she proceeds to slowly and very carefully dissect out those aspects of a person or experience that have held real meaning for her and separate those aspects away from the less meaningful, less pleasant and less endearing aspects of the person or experience. And she seems to do this much as surgeons might perform a dissection with great technical skill but tightly controlled emotional involvement. I look at personal spiritual experience as a sub-set of the religious experience. But I look at the religious experience as a very, very noisy channel filled with irrelevancies, redundancies, contradictions and misinformation. All of this noise renders the entire enterprise ripe for misuse and manipulation and rife with charlatans ready to mislead and misguide. But it is my belief that buried within all of that noise there is “a still small voice”, which if one can parse it out, represents the beginning of a personal experience that transcends rational understanding. Donna Johnson’s article in Psychology Today suggests that perhaps different individuals require different means to access the spiritual awareness buried within the noise of the religious experience: meditation, prayer, chanting, sacred texts, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Dubious Disciple (xdc) on Aug 8, 2012 18:05:48 GMT -5
Yes, excellent article by Donna Johnson, and precisely the way I felt upon concluding her book. Here is what I wrote in my original review:
"While it’s true the story is told through the wide eyes of a child, you may turn the final page still wondering if this wayward, charismatic holy man was the real thing. Perhaps God has a sense of humor."
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 10, 2012 12:24:28 GMT -5
How does the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience compare with the friends experience? Is it more or less valid as a mode of spiritual experience? More or less valid as a Christian denomination? I think it's interesting "how" people compare denominations or religions. I have much more to say on this, but I'll just leave it as a question for now.
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Aug 10, 2012 19:27:37 GMT -5
How does the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience compare with the friends experience? Is it more or less valid as a mode of spiritual experience? More or less valid as a Christian denomination? I think it's interesting "how" people compare denominations or religions. I have much more to say on this, but I'll just leave it as a question for now. These are very tricky questions for me on a number of fronts: 1) I have very limited experience/exposure to the various religious denominations. I have no personal experience with the Pentecostal denominations except for one or two TV specials I watched several years ago. 2) I am loath to characterize spiritual experiences as valid or non-valid. I view spiritual experiences as intensely personal individual experiences so I would have no basis for assessing the validity of a spiritual experience for anyone other than myself. 3) The comparative analysis of different denominations and religions by an individual is indeed an interesting but highly complex and nuanced area of inquiry. (I’ll hold on addressing this question until the conversation develops a little further) With those disclaimers, I will return to the first question; “How does the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience compare with the friends experience?” This question could be addressed from an intellectual perspective, an emotional perspective and/or a spiritual perspective. Of these three, I believe the intellectual perspective is the least relevant. In my opinion, neither experience is designed or intended to resonate with the intellectual aspect of a being (in contrast, a Unitarian experience might be expected to specifically appeal to the intellectual interests of a person). Since I believe the spiritual experience to be so uniquely personal, I shall not address that perspective either. Rather, I will offer my perspective from an emotional perspective. I believe this remains relevant to the first question since I view the emotional experience as a precursor of the spiritual experience. My knowledge/experience of the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience is very limited so I prefer to give my impressions by using an analogy of musical concerts. I liken the F&W convention experience to attending a string quartet ensemble concert in a concert hall. The experience is shaded toward individual enjoyment with definite but limited audience (communal) participation and interaction. I think of the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience as attending an open air heavy metal rock concert with overt and directed calls for audience involvement and essentially complete abandonment of personal boundaries in favor of mass participation. In the case of the string quartet, the experience is characterized by compelling passion leading to a gentle and reflective embrace of the music which would tend to individualize the experience for each participant. Whereas the heavy metal rock concert with its pounding bass, driving riffs and auditory overload would tend to lead toward self-abandonment and absorption into the sound and pulsating humanity of the entire audience. In my worldview, these are very different but equally legitimate forms of self-expression each appealing to different personal histories, cultural backgrounds and emotional compositions. It is highly unlikely that there is a large population that would be equally comfortable in both venues. It is much more likely that individuals would tend to segregate into distinctive groups favoring one form of entertainment or the other. I personally prefer a third alternative: classic rock. This was the music of my adolescence and early adulthood. It is the music that is most evocative for me. I feel comfortable listening to classic rock, I feel like I understand it and most importantly I “feel” it. If I attend a classic rock concert, even to this day, I will become absorbed by the music, I will leave my chair and move and dance with the music. This behavior is different than I would exhibit at a string quartet concert where I would remain seated and contemplative.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Aug 10, 2012 21:28:58 GMT -5
How does the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience compare with the friends experience? Is it more or less valid as a mode of spiritual experience? More or less valid as a Christian denomination? I think it's interesting "how" people compare denominations or religions. I have much more to say on this, but I'll just leave it as a question for now. Like, yknot, I don't have personal experience with Pentacostalism. I do know many Pentacostals, however, and know them to generally be deeply spiritual folks that follow the Bible as best they can. I have also noticed, as well, that they as a group seem to be more prone to "weirdness" (by modern standards) due to fundamentalist beliefs- such as speaking in tongues, faith healing, and snake handling. A great book regarding snake handling is Salvation on Sand Mountain by Dennis Convington. ( www.amazon.com/Salvation-Sand-Mountain-Redemption-Appalachia/dp/0306818361/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1344651782&sr=8-1&keywords=salvation+on+sand+mountain) Based on the author's description of folks being saved, I do believe that it is very akin to someone being saved in the 2x2 gospel meetings- which can be very emotional experiences for all involved. I would be cautious to attribute the experience in either camp as just being "emotions" and not give attribution to the Holy Spirit. One thing that has always turned me off about Pentacostalism is the preaching that if one gives to God, God will return the blessing 100 fold. Any such preaching causes me to run for the exits.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Aug 10, 2012 21:32:20 GMT -5
How does the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience compare with the friends experience? Is it more or less valid as a mode of spiritual experience? More or less valid as a Christian denomination? I think it's interesting "how" people compare denominations or religions. I have much more to say on this, but I'll just leave it as a question for now. These are very tricky questions for me on a number of fronts: 1) I have very limited experience/exposure to the various religious denominations. I have no personal experience with the Pentecostal denominations except for one or two TV specials I watched several years ago. 2) I am loath to characterize spiritual experiences as valid or non-valid. I view spiritual experiences as intensely personal individual experiences so I would have no basis for assessing the validity of a spiritual experience for anyone other than myself. 3) The comparative analysis of different denominations and religions by an individual is indeed an interesting but highly complex and nuanced area of inquiry. (I’ll hold on addressing this question until the conversation develops a little further) With those disclaimers, I will return to the first question; “How does the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience compare with the friends experience?” This question could be addressed from an intellectual perspective, an emotional perspective and/or a spiritual perspective. Of these three, I believe the intellectual perspective is the least relevant. In my opinion, neither experience is designed or intended to resonate with the intellectual aspect of a being (in contrast, a Unitarian experience might be expected to specifically appeal to the intellectual interests of a person). Since I believe the spiritual experience to be so uniquely personal, I shall not address that perspective either. Rather, I will offer my perspective from an emotional perspective. I believe this remains relevant to the first question since I view the emotional experience as a precursor of the spiritual experience. My knowledge/experience of the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience is very limited so I prefer to give my impressions by using an analogy of musical concerts. I liken the F&W convention experience to attending a string quartet ensemble concert in a concert hall. The experience is shaded toward individual enjoyment with definite but limited audience (communal) participation and interaction. I think of the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience as attending an open air heavy metal rock concert with overt and directed calls for audience involvement and essentially complete abandonment of personal boundaries in favor of mass participation. In the case of the string quartet, the experience is characterized by compelling passion leading to a gentle and reflective embrace of the music which would tend to individualize the experience for each participant. Whereas the heavy metal rock concert with its pounding bass, driving riffs and auditory overload would tend to lead toward self-abandonment and absorption into the sound and pulsating humanity of the entire audience. In my worldview, these are very different but equally legitimate forms of self-expression each appealing to different personal histories, cultural backgrounds and emotional compositions. It is highly unlikely that there is a large population that would be equally comfortable in both venues. It is much more likely that individuals would tend to segregate into distinctive groups favoring one form of entertainment or the other. I personally prefer a third alternative: classic rock. This was the music of my adolescence and early adulthood. It is the music that is most evocative for me. I feel comfortable listening to classic rock, I feel like I understand it and most importantly I “feel” it. If I attend a classic rock concert, even to this day, I will become absorbed by the music, I will leave my chair and move and dance with the music. This behavior is different than I would exhibit at a string quartet concert where I would remain seated and contemplative. Enjoyed your post and like the emotional analogy. This is probably a tangent, but I wonder what denomination might fit into the classic rock type?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Aug 11, 2012 10:39:31 GMT -5
I am right in the middle of reading the book and so far I feel horrified at the abuses to the children in this story. It is further confirmation for me that people who are so wrapped up in a certain mindset, do not make good judgement calls. That doesn't just involve the religious mindset of course. That just happens to be the subject of this particular book. Mass hysteria comes to mind when I read the antics of those who attend these things. Illusions of grandeur and paranoia for those who are the masterminds, though it isn't clear he was aware of this. Those who followed the tent didn't seem to have much in the way of education or world sense. They are a very good example of why it's not a good thing to have just a 'little' knowledge with no desire to learn more. They run with what they think they know and the results are often less than desireable. The belief in whippings brings back some pretty bad memories. Sitting for hours and having the expectation that we sit still and be quiet also are not good memories. We'll see how the rest of the book goes.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Aug 11, 2012 10:48:36 GMT -5
How does the Pentecostal tent evangelism experience compare with the friends experience? Is it more or less valid as a mode of spiritual experience? More or less valid as a Christian denomination? I think it's interesting "how" people compare denominations or religions. I have much more to say on this, but I'll just leave it as a question for now. I don't see a lot of similarities between the convention tent and Pentecostal tent other than it being a tent and we sat for hours. After that the experience seems to be worlds apart. There was no noise allowed in the convention tent, nor movement. As far as being more or less valid as a mode of spiritual experience, I don't think any way of connecting with God is 'less' valid. It wouldn't be my choice, but I'm sure it works for some folks. I don't think God cares how we try to connect, just that we do. I don't see it as less valid as a Christian denomination. They are still believing some very limited aspects of what God needs or wants. On the other hand they are probably ahead of the other demoninations in their belief that God can do healings etc. While I don't think it's God directly, at least it's a step towards understanding it can be done. Otherwise they seem to have the same beliefs as traditional Christians. All religions are just that, 'religions'. They signify to me man's quest to understand his world. How accurate any of them are remains to be seen. For me, looking at the different religions and what they believe is more based on what I see works in the world to make it a more loving, kinder and compassionate place and what doesn't work. All religions have a bit of both in them. Taking what works from the various relgions and getting rid of what does not work, seems to be a wise thing imo.
|
|
lauri
Senior Member
Posts: 324
|
Post by lauri on Aug 11, 2012 11:51:07 GMT -5
loved the book. I lived the boredom as a young child as well... and the point where she decides to sell her soul to the devil @ 13 I think? (I too thought if heaven was a big convention, I'd choose to go the other way)
Certainly, there are differences between the "2x2's" and pentecost's... but enough similarities to be able to relate to it.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Aug 11, 2012 16:11:58 GMT -5
loved the book. I lived the boredom as a young child as well... and the point where she decides to sell her soul to the devil @ 13 I think? (I too thought if heaven was a big convention, I'd choose to go the other way) You too? that was my thoughts at 12. If the God of the 2x2's was the God I had to worship, I was willing to risk going the other direction. Pretty hard choice to make though when you were raised to believe in hell. I haven't got that far in the book yet, but can see why she did it.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 11, 2012 20:56:16 GMT -5
I find yknot's breakdown into three kinds of comparison useful, and I might just borrow that in order to focus some of my thoughts. As far as a spiritual comparison, the tent meetings as recounted by the author seem to have had deep spiritual meaning for her. I have no reason to believe that her experience as a Christian would be any less meaningful than mine, or anyone else's. Yet it would be difficult for me to share in the experience. I have attended some mainstream Pentecostal meetings and do enjoy them, but there were a couple of turnoffs for me. One is the frequent mention of tithing and needing money in some churches, as sacerdotal mentioned. Another is the very public outpouring of emotion or spiritual transcendence, take your pick, but I prefer not to let that show. But ... different strokes for different folks. Intellectually, comparisons are often made by comparing how "scriptural" or faithful to God's Word, each denomination is. yknot did not mention this, but I find it equally fruitless to other forms of intellectual comparison. The most useful analysis, I believe, is that suggested by snow, to measure the efficacy of a religion in the lives of its members, and also in the world around us. This is not unBiblical, because didn't Jesus say that "ye shall know them by their fruits". Well, the analysis on Terrell's group is rather mixed. Certainly Donna's mother's life was straightened out by her exposure to the group. But later things went off the rails. It strikes me that a lot of religions get into trouble when loyalty to the group, often in the guise of the "love of God" outweighs one's duty and moral responsibility to one's fellow man, and even to one's own family or children. This was the crucial mistake Donna's mother made, placing overseas missions ahead of caring for her children, and Donna suffered greatly as a result. But to her credit, she seemed to realize her mistake after a few years, because she returned to her children, and never left again. Of course, by that time she was effectively a concubine in Terrell's tent, but at least Donna had her mother back.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Aug 13, 2012 12:19:12 GMT -5
I read an interesting article this morning from this month's National Geographic. It was about the yartsa gunbu (translated to mean- 'summer grass, winter worm') larvae, that is also a host for a parasitic fungus. The fungus grows out of the worm and up to about 1/4" above the ground. It only grows in the Tibetian region at altitudes above 16,500 feet. The fungus/larvae is highly sought after for the Chinese markets for its supposed medical properties- including the belief among many Chinese that it helps to cure cancer.
The fungus has also been prescribed by herbalists for "back pain, impotence, jaundice, fatigue, reduce cholesterol, increase stamina, improve eyesight, treat tuberculosis, asthma, bronchitis, hepatitis, anemia, emphysema, anti-tumor,anti-viral, a treatment for AIDS/HIV, and they may even help with hair loss."
With the Chinese economy soaring, a pound of the fungi now retails for $50,000.
As I read the article, I was struck by the similarities between faith healers and traditional folk healers (those not aided by science). In the past, some of these folks (not all) would have been known as "snake oil salesmen". Folks desperate for answers for health issues seem prone to turning to "faith healers" and/or those offering alternative answers. And who can blame them? If the medical establishment can't cure them of their ailment, it seems only natural to seek out those that offer answers. And that is why I am so repulsed by most faith healers and some homeopathic/folk medicine remedies- especially the higher priced ones that are offered as cure alls- because they are preying on the vulnerable folks and taking advantage of them in their moments of need and weakness.
The author of the article interviewed a lady with cancer that was taking yartsa gunbu. "Yu Jian claims she can feel the worm's effect- both physically and psychologically. She says it improves her spirits and revitalizes her "life energy"- what's known in China as qi (chi)" "On her most recent medical visit, she recalls, her doctor was shocked by the swiftness of her improvement. 'He didn't even remember I was a cancer patient,' she says." Unfortunately the author added an epilogue to the article. In small print at the end of the article, this was written: "EPILOGUE Since the reporting for this article was completed, Yu Jian's cancer turned virulent and ended up taking her life."
I am not sure why Christian's feel the need for a "middle man", such as preachers/prophets/apostles/faith healers, etc. Jesus taught that His disciples simply needed to ask. And to ask believing. I wouldn't be as upset about the account of David Terrell (and others like him), if it weren't for the fact that they are taking advantage of people, for money, in those folk's greatest moment of weakness.
|
|
|
Post by IllinoisGal on Aug 13, 2012 18:51:23 GMT -5
I havent read the book " Holy Ghost Girl" but I would just like to interject a couple thoughts. Oneness Pentecostals dont view AOG's or Charasmatics as Pentecostals at all. Just because someone speaks in tongues isnt the message that was preached on the day of pentecost by Peter. It was only 1/3 of the message. Thats why we dont view them as such unless they follow it all.
I have attended both 2x2 convention and also a Pentecostal tent mtg.
We dont in the least bit view televangelists such as Benny Hinn and Jimmy Swaggart, and those people on TBN Paul and Jan Crouch as Pentecostals. Quite the opposite actually, in fact, we view them as false prophets..Carry on with the discussion.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 14, 2012 11:06:35 GMT -5
I read an interesting article this morning from this month's National Geographic. It was about the yartsa gunbu (translated to mean- 'summer grass, winter worm') larvae, that is also a host for a parasitic fungus. The fungus grows out of the worm and up to about 1/4" above the ground. It only grows in the Tibetian region at altitudes above 16,500 feet. The fungus/larvae is highly sought after for the Chinese markets for its supposed medical properties- including the belief among many Chinese that it helps to cure cancer. The fungus has also been prescribed by herbalists for "back pain, impotence, jaundice, fatigue, reduce cholesterol, increase stamina, improve eyesight, treat tuberculosis, asthma, bronchitis, hepatitis, anemia, emphysema, anti-tumor,anti-viral, a treatment for AIDS/HIV, and they may even help with hair loss." With the Chinese economy soaring, a pound of the fungi now retails for $50,000. As I read the article, I was struck by the similarities between faith healers and traditional folk healers (those not aided by science). In the past, some of these folks (not all) would have been known as "snake oil salesmen". Folks desperate for answers for health issues seem prone to turning to "faith healers" and/or those offering alternative answers. And who can blame them? If the medical establishment can't cure them of their ailment, it seems only natural to seek out those that offer answers. And that is why I am so repulsed by most faith healers and some homeopathic/folk medicine remedies- especially the higher priced ones that are offered as cure alls- because they are preying on the vulnerable folks and taking advantage of them in their moments of need and weakness. The author of the article interviewed a lady with cancer that was taking yartsa gunbu. "Yu Jian claims she can feel the worm's effect- both physically and psychologically. She says it improves her spirits and revitalizes her "life energy"- what's known in China as qi (chi)" "On her most recent medical visit, she recalls, her doctor was shocked by the swiftness of her improvement. 'He didn't even remember I was a cancer patient,' she says." Unfortunately the author added an epilogue to the article. In small print at the end of the article, this was written: "EPILOGUE Since the reporting for this article was completed, Yu Jian's cancer turned virulent and ended up taking her life." I am not sure why Christian's feel the need for a "middle man", such as preachers/prophets/apostles/faith healers, etc. Jesus taught that His disciples simply needed to ask. And to ask believing. I wouldn't be as upset about the account of David Terrell (and others like him), if it weren't for the fact that they are taking advantage of people, for money, in those folk's greatest moment of weakness. Where do you draw the line on this though? For years the medical community tried to discredit chiropractic care. Today chiropractic is a legitimate form of health care. Naturopathy has elements that are sound, and others that are pure quackery. The fact is, that no matter what endeavour we look at, sound deductive thinking only gets us so far. Intuition, guesswork, received wisdom, inspirational insight, tradition and other forms of knowledge can't be discounted entirely. At least Terrell believed in what he was doing, so I don't put him in league with the "snake oil" salesman. And almost nothing in the entire realm of religion can be proven or verified in a scientific sense. Where do you draw the line? Is Terrell wrong, while the Catholic or mainline Protestant churches are okay in you view? Some of them solicit and spend far greater amounts of money than Terrell did. I don't see a great deal of difference to tell you the truth.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 14, 2012 11:11:07 GMT -5
I havent read the book " Holy Ghost Girl" but I would just like to interject a couple thoughts. Oneness Pentecostals dont view AOG's or Charasmatics as Pentecostals at all. Just because someone speaks in tongues isnt the message that was preached on the day of pentecost by Peter. It was only 1/3 of the message. Thats why we dont view them as such unless they follow it all. I have attended both 2x2 convention and also a Pentecostal tent mtg. We dont in the least bit view televangelists such as Benny Hinn and Jimmy Swaggart, and those people on TBN Paul and Jan Crouch as Pentecostals. Quite the opposite actually, in fact, we view them as false prophets..Carry on with the discussion. Not long ago I attended a large Pentecostal church in one of our Canadian cities. I believe they have two services on Sunday morning, with 1-2000 people attending each service. The church had just built a $5 million addition. I really liked the latte bar, and had a nice latte during the service for only $2. But there was much talk of tithing and pitching in money; it seemed to be all about building an organization, and having a nice religious community that everyone could participate in. And that's a good thing as far as that goes. But I don't see how this would be any different from what Terrell was doing. If you say he doesn't interpret the Bible the way you do, what difference does that make?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Aug 14, 2012 14:48:04 GMT -5
I can't get over how exclusive Christian denominations are with each other. It's definitely not just the 2x2's that are exclusive. Mind you, I guess the definition of Christianity is pretty much exclusive when it comes to any other religion, so I guess it would happen within the religion too.
|
|
|
Post by IllinoisGal on Aug 14, 2012 15:31:43 GMT -5
You asked what does it matter if he doesnt interpret the bible the same as you do. It doesnt matter in the least bit unless of course we are talking about salvational issues then we all better interpret it the way God said it.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 14, 2012 18:06:33 GMT -5
You asked what does it matter if he doesnt interpret the bible the same as you do. It doesnt matter in the least bit unless of course we are talking about salvational issues then we all better interpret it the way God said it. Not really. I don't think God cares as much about our interpretation as He cares about our actions. But that's just me.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Aug 14, 2012 20:22:30 GMT -5
You asked what does it matter if he doesnt interpret the bible the same as you do. It doesnt matter in the least bit unless of course we are talking about salvational issues then we all better interpret it the way God said it. Not really. I don't think God cares as much about our interpretation as He cares about our actions. But that's just me. I'm with you on this one!! Every tom dick and harry has an interpretation. Sure is a good thing God doesn't care about interpretations!
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Aug 15, 2012 3:06:05 GMT -5
I havent read the book " Holy Ghost Girl" but I would just like to interject a couple thoughts. Oneness Pentecostals dont view AOG's or Charasmatics as Pentecostals at all. Just because someone speaks in tongues isnt the message that was preached on the day of pentecost by Peter. It was only 1/3 of the message. Thats why we dont view them as such unless they follow it all. I have attended both 2x2 convention and also a Pentecostal tent mtg. We dont in the least bit view televangelists such as Benny Hinn and Jimmy Swaggart, and those people on TBN Paul and Jan Crouch as Pentecostals. Quite the opposite actually, in fact, we view them as false prophets..Carry on with the discussion. and other Pentecostals view the Oneness Pentecostals as a c..... (theres that c word again). They are as legalistic as the 2x2s with their dress and rules. People can be ex communicated for breaking the rules. Not alot different than a legalistic controlling church. The AOGs come under the Pentecostal group of churches with other Pentecostal churches. Oneness is on its own. They believe that Baptism in water and speaking in tongues are necessary for salvation. They believe that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one being not 3 separate beings as Trinitarians believe. I say beware!!
|
|
|
Post by placid-void on Aug 15, 2012 8:12:17 GMT -5
Based on the descriptions given in Donna Johnson’s book, do you think David Terrell’s ministry was a “cult”.
If so, why? If not, why not?
If possible, try to base your reasoning on information provided in the book.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Aug 15, 2012 11:57:14 GMT -5
Where do you draw the line on this though? For years the medical community tried to discredit chiropractic care. Today chiropractic is a legitimate form of health care. Naturopathy has elements that are sound, and others that are pure quackery. The fact is, that no matter what endeavour we look at, sound deductive thinking only gets us so far. Intuition, guesswork, received wisdom, inspirational insight, tradition and other forms of knowledge can't be discounted entirely. I draw the line at "truth". If a chiropractor or doctor claims to be able to heal everything (and some charlatans do) then count me as a skeptic. I cannot understand why a faith healer should receive a free pass on such claims (especially when they are taking advantage of the poor and desperate) when we wouldn't give a doctor (or chiropractor) the same consideration. Unbiased, empirical data needs to be provided and peer reviewed over a period of time to establish the truth. As I have written time and time again, truth can withstand questioning and scrutiny. Notice how faith healers tend to blame the one that needs healing when the healing doesn't work? "They just didn't have enough faith." Ugh. The argument regarding the medical community seeking to discredit chiropractors is a complex topic with validity on both sides for and against chiropractors. I submit, however, that it boils down to monetary interests. The dairy industry once had margarine subject to many onerous laws and taxes- including a law against the adding of color (yellow) so as not to be visually appetizing (margarine is naturally white). The sugar industry has long been against the natural sweetener stevia, and in 1991, after receiving an anonymous complaint, the FDA in the United States labelled stevia to be an "unsafe food additive" and restricted its import. However, once the artificial sweetener company Splenda raised their prices to Coca-Cola, Coca-Cola began growing Stevia plants in China. Magically, the FDA in 2008 approved the sweetener Truvia (derived from the Stevia plant) for use and sale in the United States. Truvia is jointly owned by Coca-Cola and Cargill.) ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevia) Jesus said that those worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth. I do not believe that committing fraud, evading income taxes, taking advantage of the poor, helpless, and frightened, being a polygamist, separating families, denying healthcare for his children, etc. is an example of one that is worshiping in Spirit and in Truth. I do not think that David Terrell, or any of those of his ilk, are in any way in line with the Chief Cornerstone.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Aug 15, 2012 15:03:38 GMT -5
Based on the descriptions given in Donna Johnson’s book, do you thing David Terrell’s ministry was a “cult”. If so, why? If not, why not? If possible, try to base your reasoning on information provided in the book. I think it could be a qualifier for the label of cult. A charasmatic figure that had a great deal of control over his inner circle. Also the abuse of children for the sake of the 'mission'. They were so wrapped up in the works of David Terrell that they didn't even realize what they were doing to their children for the most part. There are probably other things, I'm just not seeing them right now.
|
|
|
Post by IllinoisGal on Aug 15, 2012 15:16:29 GMT -5
Just so everyone knows I was a member of the AOG for 16 yrs and alot of my family still attend including my mother who holds ministerial license with them. I have attended the Apostolic church for 22 yrs.
Enuf. Curious as to whether you have attended either for yourself or are you going on heresay.
Reason for modify: Bad spelling
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 15, 2012 15:59:04 GMT -5
Where do you draw the line on this though? For years the medical community tried to discredit chiropractic care. Today chiropractic is a legitimate form of health care. Naturopathy has elements that are sound, and others that are pure quackery. The fact is, that no matter what endeavour we look at, sound deductive thinking only gets us so far. Intuition, guesswork, received wisdom, inspirational insight, tradition and other forms of knowledge can't be discounted entirely. I draw the line at "truth". If a chiropractor or doctor claims to be able to heal everything (and some charlatans do) then count me as a skeptic. I cannot understand why a faith healer should receive a free pass on such claims (especially when they are taking advantage of the poor and desperate) when we wouldn't give a doctor (or chiropractor) the same consideration. Unbiased, empirical data needs to be provided and peer reviewed over a period of time to establish the truth. As I have written time and time again, truth can withstand questioning and scrutiny. Notice how faith healers tend to blame the one that needs healing when the healing doesn't work? "They just didn't have enough faith." Ugh. That's a good point. Chiropractors, for example, may claim that they can cure the common cold. Faith healers may make other forms of dubious claims. Those kinds of claims are wrong. But that doesn't mean that either chiropractic or faith healing has no merit. I don't know, didn't God send his message through the wicked man, Balaam? And Jesus had Judas among his own disciples. How could you conclude that Terrell was not delivering a God-sanctioned message? Also, I can't think of any religious organization that has entirely avoided criminal behaviour on the part of some of its leaders and progenitors.
|
|