|
Post by sacerdotal on Dec 31, 2013 8:57:53 GMT -5
I didn't take drugs. I will sue anyone that says I took drugs. I will sue anyone that writes that I took drugs. I will kick you off my team if you say that I took drugs. I will ruin your career if you say that I took drugs. I will bully all to keep the Lance Armstrong myth going. I am 7 time winner of the Tour de France. I am Lance Armstrong.
And those that wanted to believe in myths, believed, and adored Lance Armstrong. We want to believe in greatness. We want to believe in men being as gods. And that is OK. But, what about those whose lives or careers were destroyed by the need to cover for the lies to keep the myth going? Is the myth worth it?
As a fellowship, we need to ask ourselves, is the myth of the living witness doctrine worth the bullying, the lies, the cover ups to keep the myth going?
(The answer is simple.... lies are not of the Lord.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 9:28:42 GMT -5
I didn't take drugs. I will sue anyone that says I took drugs. I will sue anyone that writes that I took drugs. I will kick you off my team if you say that I took drugs. I will ruin your career if you say that I took drugs. I will bully all to keep the Lance Armstrong myth going. I am 7 time winner of the Tour de France. I am Lance Armstrong. And those that wanted to believe in myths, believed, and adored Lance Armstrong. We want to believe in greatness. We want to believe in men being as gods. And that is OK. But, what about those whose lives or careers were destroyed by the need to cover for the lies to keep the myth going? Is the myth worth it? As a fellowship, we need to ask ourselves, is the myth of the living witness doctrine worth the bullying, the lies, the cover ups to keep the myth going? (The answer is simple.... lies are not of the Lord.) The myth of the living witness doctrine is required to support the ministry's claim as being God's true ministry and all other ministries are false. Without that belief the system comes crashing down. Here is what was believed in the beginning (late 1890s-early 1900s)and which in essence still is believed. "Before a person receives authority from God to preach the Gospel, he or she must sell all their possessions and scatter the proceeds so that they cannot be picked up again, then make themselves homeless (like Jesus), and be prepared to go out with a companion, travelling from place to place. It is only when they have fulfilled these conditions (of God) that a person has authority to preach his Gospel." This is the foundation upon which falsehoods like living witness doctrine are built. It is the foundation that is the lie. It is the foundation that needs lanced and by a strong arm at that!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 9:32:25 GMT -5
The difference between the Lance Armstrong story and the workers' story is that LA knew the truth and told blatant lies. The workers, for the most part, think they are telling the truth. They are more like the people close to LA who sucked up his story and then went around telling everyone else that he was drug free.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Dec 31, 2013 9:44:04 GMT -5
The difference between the Lance Armstrong story and the workers' story is that LA knew the truth and told blatant lies. The workers, for the most part, think they are telling the truth. They are more like the people close to LA who sucked up his story and then went around telling everyone else that he was drug free. I think that you are on to something here.... but there were those that were close to Lance that knew the truth that also helped to prop up the myth because their livelihoods depended on it. And others were skeptical, but remained quiet, because they WANTED to believe and suspended their skepticism.... I know that I did. But, once I read Tyler Hamilton's book, and saw how Lance treated those who exposed him.... I no longer believed in the myth of Lance Armstrong. Once my eyes were opened to the strong armed tactics of the workers... the bullying and the excommunications... then I no longer believed in the myth of the living witness doctrine or that of the workers as modern day apostles.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 9:56:25 GMT -5
The difference between the Lance Armstrong story and the workers' story is that LA knew the truth and told blatant lies. The workers, for the most part, think they are telling the truth. They are more like the people close to LA who sucked up his story and then went around telling everyone else that he was drug free. I think that you are on to something here.... but there were those that were close to Lance that knew the truth that also helped to prop up the myth because their livelihoods depended on it. And others were skeptical, but remained quiet, because they WANTED to believe and suspended their skepticism.... I know that I did. But, once I read Tyler Hamilton's book, and saw how Lance treated those who exposed him.... I no longer believed in the myth of Lance Armstrong. Once my eyes were opened to the strong armed tactics of the workers... the bullying and the excommunications... then I no longer believed in the myth of the living witness doctrine or that of the workers as modern day apostles. Definitely. Just like there were those around LA who suspended their beliefs about his drug use and suppressed their suspicions, I suspect we have a large number of workers who are very edgy about the LWD. They may not even know why they are edgy about it, they just push it out of their minds and anyone who challenges it are not met with defense, but offense against them. In the LA story, as long as no one was able to prove LA drug use, his supporters happily kept up the lie because they didn't know any better. Similarly with the workers, since no one is proving any different (and they won't hear any evidence to the contrary), the lie continues on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 10:33:41 GMT -5
Usually it is at this stage where someone comes along to post that the LWD has not been preached. To the contrary, it was one of Willie Jamieson's favorite sermons, and I heard him preach it from earliest childhood and even after I went into the work in 1965. To my current shame, I copied what I had heard, and preached only life begets life both in and out of the work thereafter until I read "The Secret Sect" sent to me anonymously after my excommunication of 1986. At that time, nothing was sadder for me than to discover Willie Jamieson taught and believed that which was/is untrue.
Taught to love him greatly, I was raised believing him to be one of my heros, and I both wanted and sought to be like him, believing he was the closest on earth to the Christ I knew. Talk about disillusion! Also, was taught Jack Carrol was equal to "Christ on earth today." I spent years of being ridiculed and teased as a child for learning to play the violin, which I took without objection because "Uncle Willie" played the violin.
At one convention of my youth, both JC and WJ were in attendance. Willie preached this living witness dogma, and Jack C. endorsed it completely when he spoke after Willie. These two men were the "authorities" in my life until my excommunication and ultimate learning of what was really true about "the truth."
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Dec 31, 2013 10:44:32 GMT -5
It might be helpful to review how and when the workers came to believe the F&Ws were God's only right way in the first place. The early workers didnt believe or teach this. In their beginning, everyone went to the Protestant church of their choice. From TTT, Chapter 7: What Caused Their Outlook to Change?
How did Their Method Come to be Viewed as "GOD’s ONLY RIGHT WAY?
They began to view themselves exclusively, as "God's only right/true way," and "God's only true servants," and to view all other religious bodies, Christians and ministers as “false,” and unsaved. • Why did they believe God recognized ONLY their method and followers? • Did they have good reason? • Does the Bible support their reasoning? What did they have to gain? There is no doubt that making themselves indispensable in the salvation chain gave them a monopoly; and that claiming apostolic succession gave them TREMENDOUS religious power over those who believed they were a necessity. It is speculated that they adopted the “Only Way Concept” because they had come to believe and reason that: (1) God had a prerequisite to receiving salvation (2) The prerequisite was that one must first hear and accept Christ through a preacher following the pattern of Matthew 10 precisely; and (3) They believed they were the only preachers in the world who were truly following this pattern; THEREFORE ONLY those who heard and accepted Christ through Irvine or one of his workers could possibly have a chance of getting to Heaven. They also believed and reasoned the converse of these beliefs must be true: (1) Since they believed other churches and pastors did not attempt to follow the Matthew 10 pattern precisely, THEREFORE, all other churches and preachers were "false;" and THEREFORE, all other churches and ministers were incapable of bringing anyone to a saving knowledge of Christ; and THEREFORE, everyone who did not hear and accept Christ through Irvine or one of his workers would end up in a lost eternity. 1907: THE LIVING WITNESS DOCTRINE BECOMES MANDATORY. These very YOUNG volunteer workers, used their fallible, human reasoning and decided the ministry and method they invented through experimentation, was “God’s Only Right Way.” It is irrelevant whether or not their decision was due to the influence of Drummond’s analogy which had impressed the minds of these young men. The fact is that by the year 1907, ten years after it was started, BY MEN'S CHOICE, the Living Witness Doctrine became an integral and inseparable part of their doctrine, and remains so to this day. In 1907, it became mandatory for ALL the workers to believe, preach and teach this concept. Let us review the ages of the workers at the time they made this momentous decision. Except for Wm Irvine, Willie Gill, and Eddie Cooney, who were in their early forties, the rest were young men and women in their early twenties. The American Family Immigration History Center at Ellis Island passenger records show that William Irvine, George Walker and Irvine Weir arrived in the United States on September 14, 1903, with Irvine being 40 years of age; Geo. Walker, 26 years of age, and Weir was 25 years of age. Arriving on May 16, 1904, were John Carroll, age 25, Mary (May) Carroll, age 24 and Charles Glenn, age 27. These youth, from a variety of religious backgrounds, were full of zeal and zest, and lacking in life experience, training and education. They were NOT born and raised in "the truth," since it was not existing when they grew up. In the first 10 years of the groups' infancy, the conclusions arrived at by these youth evolved to the point that they believed the method they preached in was “God’s Only Right Way.” Seriously, think about this. How do you view the conclusions and reasoning of young people their ages today? And there you have it - the Living Witness Doctrine came about mostly from fallible YOUNG men's reasoning. Read all about the development of the Only Way belief on TTT here: www.tellingthetruth.info/founder_book/07wmibook.phpMany have found it shocking to learn how this believe came into being...without scriptural basis. That there is no scripture indicating God has only one right method on earth other than Jesus. The scripture usually used in defense of the LWD is the verse mentioning "one faith" which rightly interpreted means one collective body of believers who have faith in Jesus Christ. Eph 4:4-6: There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 11:47:24 GMT -5
The difference between the Lance Armstrong story and the workers' story is that LA knew the truth and told blatant lies. The workers, for the most part, think they are telling the truth. They are more like the people close to LA who sucked up his story and then went around telling everyone else that he was drug free. However we all do have a moral responsibility to verify when we chose to repeat someone elses 'truth' as our own. A second hand lie is just as much of a lie as the original lie. This responsibility is doctrinaly ingnored within the entire 2x2 organization and doctrine, and this ugly principle is used within the group to very sucessfully perpetuate the falsehood that reigns in 2x2ism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 12:18:56 GMT -5
The difference between the Lance Armstrong story and the workers' story is that LA knew the truth and told blatant lies. The workers, for the most part, think they are telling the truth. They are more like the people close to LA who sucked up his story and then went around telling everyone else that he was drug free. However we all do have a moral responsibility to verify when we chose to repeat someone elses 'truth' as our own. A second hand lie is just as much of a lie as the original lie. This responsibility is doctrinaly ingnored within the entire 2x2 organization and doctrine, and this ugly principle is used within the group to very sucessfully perpetuate the falsehood that reigns in 2x2ism. A person can be forgiven for believing and repeating a lie, if they have been led to believe the lie is true. However, once a lie becomes known to the believer, they have a moral responsibility to correct that lie and to ensure the falsehood is not repeated, at least at their own expense. I suspect the main reason that people are allowed to believe in falsehoods is because it is convenient for those who know better, to simply let matters lie (pun intended).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 12:22:32 GMT -5
The difference between the Lance Armstrong story and the workers' story is that LA knew the truth and told blatant lies. The workers, for the most part, think they are telling the truth. They are more like the people close to LA who sucked up his story and then went around telling everyone else that he was drug free. However we all do have a moral responsibility to verify when we chose to repeat someone elses 'truth' as our own. A second hand lie is just as much of a lie as the original lie. This responsibility is doctrinaly ingnored within the entire 2x2 organization and doctrine, and this ugly principle is used within the group to very sucessfully perpetuate the falsehood that reigns in 2x2ism. How did you deal with this during your 16 years in the work? I can understand how difficult it is for workers. As one of our (non-2x2) participants here stated, all Christians are expected to "believe the unbelievable" so once you cross that line, no verification is necessary. This "ugly principle" is not limited to 2x2ism.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on Dec 31, 2013 12:24:45 GMT -5
However we all do have a moral responsibility to verify when we chose to repeat someone elses 'truth' as our own. A second hand lie is just as much of a lie as the original lie. This responsibility is doctrinaly ingnored within the entire 2x2 organization and doctrine, and this ugly principle is used within the group to very sucessfully perpetuate the falsehood that reigns in 2x2ism. How did you deal with this during your 16 years in the work? I can understand how difficult it is for workers. As one of our (non-2x2) participants here stated, all Christians are expected to "believe the unbelievable" so once you cross that line, no verification is necessary. This "ugly principle" is not limited to 2x2ism. It is the bullying that I have a problem with.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 14:06:54 GMT -5
I think that you are on to something here.... but there were those that were close to Lance that knew the truth that also helped to prop up the myth because their livelihoods depended on it. And others were skeptical, but remained quiet, because they WANTED to believe and suspended their skepticism.... I know that I did. But, once I read Tyler Hamilton's book, and saw how Lance treated those who exposed him.... I no longer believed in the myth of Lance Armstrong. Once my eyes were opened to the strong armed tactics of the workers... the bullying and the excommunications... then I no longer believed in the myth of the living witness doctrine or that of the workers as modern day apostles. Definitely. Just like there were those around LA who suspended their beliefs about his drug use and suppressed their suspicions, I suspect we have a large number of workers who are very edgy about the LWD. They may not even know why they are edgy about it, they just push it out of their minds and anyone who challenges it are not met with defense, but offense against them. In the LA story, as long as no one was able to prove LA drug use, his supporters happily kept up the lie because they didn't know any better. Similarly with the workers, since no one is proving any different (and they won't hear any evidence to the contrary), the lie continues on. Exactly, when people in the truth don't tell the workers what they believe and are thinking en mass then you do nothing, is it fair to the other people in the organization? It seems that if enough people got together and told the workers how they felt that there would be safety in numbers. However, I think about what happened with the Alberta excommunications and I wonder if that's true. I know people don't want to rock the boat and have huge changes come to their world but it also seems so sad that many people do not agree with the doctrine of the workers yet don't feel brave enough to tell them. If enough workers knew that people just loved the fellowship the way it is and the doctrine of the only way to salvation was not needed to still remain in the truth, maybe the workers wouldn't cling to it so desperately in order to survive. If they dropped that doctrine and recognized that it wasn't required for people to be in the truth, maybe that would be a relief for them too. It seems obvious to me here that many people don't share the belief that the truth is the only way to salvation. Yet they do want to stay in the truth. If the workers knew that their livelihood wasn't threatened by people not believing the truth was the only way, maybe it would give them permission to drop that doctrine?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 14:14:12 GMT -5
Usually it is at this stage where someone comes along to post that the LWD has not been preached. To the contrary, it was one of Willie Jamieson's favorite sermons, and I heard him preach it from earliest childhood and even after I went into the work in 1965. To my current shame, I copied what I had heard, and preached only life begets life both in and out of the work thereafter until I read "The Secret Sect" sent to me anonymously after my excommunication of 1986. At that time, nothing was sadder for me than to discover Willie Jamieson taught and believed that which was/is untrue.
Taught to love him greatly, I was raised believing him to be one of my heros, and I both wanted and sought to be like him, believing he was the closest on earth to the Christ I knew. Talk about disillusion! Also, was taught Jack Carrol was equal to "Christ on earth today." I spent years of being ridiculed and teased as a child for learning to play the violin, which I took without objection because "Uncle Willie" played the violin.
At one convention of my youth, both JC and WJ were in attendance. Willie preached this living witness dogma, and Jack C. endorsed it completely when he spoke after Willie. These two men were the "authorities" in my life until my excommunication and ultimate learning of what was really true about "the truth."
Dennis you certainly were not alone with having them as your 'authorities' in life. My father did too. He loved Willie Jamieson. He could do no wrong. Jack Carrol was also a huge influence on his life. Still have the study agenda written by Jack Carrol that my grandmother had. I've never been sure if he knew about the excommunications or the CSA and if he did know what he thought of them or if he even believed they happened. He was a party line kind of elder. The workers all walked on water. We were raised to believe that so don't be too hard on yourself that you fell for it too. Most of us did until we woke up and realized they were infallible humans just like us.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 14:17:52 GMT -5
It might be helpful to review how and when the workers came to believe the F&Ws were God's only right way in the first place. The early workers didnt believe or teach this. In their beginning, everyone went to the Protestant church of their choice. From TTT, Chapter 7: What Caused Their Outlook to Change?
How did Their Method Come to be Viewed as "GOD’s ONLY RIGHT WAY?
They began to view themselves exclusively, as "God's only right/true way," and "God's only true servants," and to view all other religious bodies, Christians and ministers as “false,” and unsaved. • Why did they believe God recognized ONLY their method and followers? • Did they have good reason? • Does the Bible support their reasoning? What did they have to gain? There is no doubt that making themselves indispensable in the salvation chain gave them a monopoly; and that claiming apostolic succession gave them TREMENDOUS religious power over those who believed they were a necessity. It is speculated that they adopted the “Only Way Concept” because they had come to believe and reason that: (1) God had a prerequisite to receiving salvation (2) The prerequisite was that one must first hear and accept Christ through a preacher following the pattern of Matthew 10 precisely; and (3) They believed they were the only preachers in the world who were truly following this pattern; THEREFORE ONLY those who heard and accepted Christ through Irvine or one of his workers could possibly have a chance of getting to Heaven. They also believed and reasoned the converse of these beliefs must be true: (1) Since they believed other churches and pastors did not attempt to follow the Matthew 10 pattern precisely, THEREFORE, all other churches and preachers were "false;" and THEREFORE, all other churches and ministers were incapable of bringing anyone to a saving knowledge of Christ; and THEREFORE, everyone who did not hear and accept Christ through Irvine or one of his workers would end up in a lost eternity. 1907: THE LIVING WITNESS DOCTRINE BECOMES MANDATORY. These very YOUNG volunteer workers, used their fallible, human reasoning and decided the ministry and method they invented through experimentation, was “God’s Only Right Way.” It is irrelevant whether or not their decision was due to the influence of Drummond’s analogy which had impressed the minds of these young men. The fact is that by the year 1907, ten years after it was started, BY MEN'S CHOICE, the Living Witness Doctrine became an integral and inseparable part of their doctrine, and remains so to this day. In 1907, it became mandatory for ALL the workers to believe, preach and teach this concept. Let us review the ages of the workers at the time they made this momentous decision. Except for Wm Irvine, Willie Gill, and Eddie Cooney, who were in their early forties, the rest were young men and women in their early twenties. The American Family Immigration History Center at Ellis Island passenger records show that William Irvine, George Walker and Irvine Weir arrived in the United States on September 14, 1903, with Irvine being 40 years of age; Geo. Walker, 26 years of age, and Weir was 25 years of age. Arriving on May 16, 1904, were John Carroll, age 25, Mary (May) Carroll, age 24 and Charles Glenn, age 27. These youth, from a variety of religious backgrounds, were full of zeal and zest, and lacking in life experience, training and education. They were NOT born and raised in "the truth," since it was not existing when they grew up. In the first 10 years of the groups' infancy, the conclusions arrived at by these youth evolved to the point that they believed the method they preached in was “God’s Only Right Way.” Seriously, think about this. How do you view the conclusions and reasoning of young people their ages today? And there you have it - the Living Witness Doctrine came about mostly from fallible YOUNG men's reasoning. Read all about the development of the Only Way belief on TTT here: www.tellingthetruth.info/founder_book/07wmibook.phpMany have found it shocking to learn how this believe came into being...without scriptural basis. That there is no scripture indicating God has only one right method on earth other than Jesus. The scripture usually used in defense of the LWD is the verse mentioning "one faith" which rightly interpreted means one collective body of believers who have faith in Jesus Christ. Eph 4:4-6: There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. This isn't just a Truth doctrine though. The RCC believe the same thing. As far as the Pope and priests being needed they make themselves indispensable too. I think that most religious leaders recognize the value of making their followers think of them as indispensable. Otherwise they would be out of a job.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 14:23:10 GMT -5
How did you deal with this during your 16 years in the work? I can understand how difficult it is for workers. As one of our (non-2x2) participants here stated, all Christians are expected to "believe the unbelievable" so once you cross that line, no verification is necessary. This "ugly principle" is not limited to 2x2ism. It is the bullying that I have a problem with. What used to bother me was how they used guilt and shame as a bullying tactic. I see it also in those who are very indoctrinated followers of the workers. It is a learned behavior that they have picked up by watching the workers and listening to their sermons. They used that tactic on me a lot when I was questioning when I was 12. I have a huge aversion to it because of how traumatic it was to me back then. The workers and friends used it big time to try and get me to feel guilty enough to come back and reprofess. Using the line of how hard it was for my parents that I wasn't professing after all they had done for me, adopting me, giving me a good home etc. It worked too. I did feel guilty and still do sometimes to this day. But it never drew me closer to coming back to a belief in God or religion. It just drove me further away until I finally did some research and now my non belief is backed with knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by blandie on Dec 31, 2013 15:49:48 GMT -5
We've all heard about asking questions or examining as showing a lack of faith but I think that kind of knee-jerk answering is also bullying and also has the cart before the horse. The way I see it is that fear of asking questions and examining and finding answers is absolute evidence of a lack of faith.
Theres lots that is unbelievable or ungraspable that people don't question and not just about religion. Just because something is hard or impossible to believe or grasp or explain doesn't necessarily mean it isn't true and just because something seems to be tested and confirmed by observation or experience doesn't mean that it is true and that we get to sit back and point to those as indisputable. Todays solid facts and trusted empirical methods have a lousy record of becoming tomorrows funny oldtime unsupported beliefs. If the LWD is something that '2x2ism' got through new revelation then maybe that is OK to demand of those who buy into that sort of thing but it has been linked to a foundation in a bunch of verses in the bible and that is absolutely open to questioning by those within and without and the more so as there are some very serious problems that demand answers or else it begins to look less like faith and more like fanaticism and self interest and bullying.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 16:07:00 GMT -5
This isn't just a Truth doctrine though. The RCC believe the same thing. As far as the Pope and priests being needed they make themselves indispensable too. I think that most religious leaders recognize the value of making their followers think of them as indispensable. Otherwise they would be out of a job.
This is why I believe in the ministry in the home and the church without a home!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 16:27:30 GMT -5
Maybe we could get the Pope, in his 2014 New Year's address, to openly condemn this nameless church, its false doctrine and hypocritical ministry? It's About Time, don't you think? And maybe, for good effect, we could have an Ecumenical* conference, televised, saying much the same thing? Happy New Year to you all from Australia. * another word for "all ways lead to God"
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Dec 31, 2013 17:00:43 GMT -5
When you chase a lie upstream there seem always to be those who must know the story is a lie. For example, if you need to hear the Gospel from a certain kind of minister (life begets life), then where did William Irvine hear it from? One possible answer is that Irvine was a latter day prophet so he received a calling directly from God. Sorry, not sure anymore where I came across that idea but it was suggested by someone in the early days.
Another approach is, "don't ask too many questions, and I'll tell you no lies". That tends to be a feature in many religions. Ask too many questions, and you're sowing dissent and doubt. The LWD, or the "life begets life" concept, seems to be one of those ideas that is tucked away just in case someone asks. Most people don't ask, which is why it wasn't often preached in our experience.
Lately, I was discussing the issue of the Creation occurring as laid out in Genesis. This is a lie, as anyone should know by now; the world was not made in 6 days and not in the order presented in the Bible. One of the supporters of this lie, a minister, told me that dinosaur fossils and human skeletons had been found in the same deposits but that "science" refused to look at this kind of evidence. I chased this upstream, and it appears that there is a cottage industry of spinners who fabricate various alternative theories in order to support conservative Christians' creation theories. The conservative Christians, like this minister I met, think they're repeating something that is true and credible. But at the centre, the so-called scientists who spin this junk, must know it's not credible.
There seem to be similar cottage industries around the events of 9/11, and then there are those who are convinced global warming is a fraud, and can come up with all kinds of spin to support it. When you look at the consensus of findings in the scientific world, you have to realize that they're not very far wrong in most of their assertions. Only in science is there an apparatus and formal method of inquiry that evaluates and considers the evidence without significant preconceptions. Outside of science, there be dragons, mainly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 17:17:46 GMT -5
Maybe we could get the Pope, in his 2014 New Year's address, to openly condemn this nameless church, its false doctrine and hypocritical ministry? It's About Time, don't you think? And maybe, for good effect, we could have an Ecumenical* conference, televised, saying much the same thing? Happy New Year to you all from Australia. * another word for "all ways lead to God" No, bert, many believers do NOT believe all ways lead to God, and I am one of them. I believe only the BEING, my God/savior Yehu'shuaha is the way, the door, the truth, the life, who leads me to that which is Divine, and I have met many like myself who believe the same. You, on the other hand, as with many 2&2 worker loyalists, seem to point to a system above all others as doing so. That's fine with me, it is just that I don't believe that for an instant, and object to that being offered to any as a substitute for my Lord.
By the way, you never answered my question of what happened to Prue who you had once presented as your wife, yet now you post as if you have other interests. If she has died, I am very sorry you have had to endure that grief.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Dec 31, 2013 17:24:57 GMT -5
Dennis is right Bert. Jesus only is the way yet I heard so many times that the workers were the way.
Yes, what happened to Prue? She went and so did your website at the same time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 17:28:36 GMT -5
What Hat, I did the following essay for a theology student some years ago. It's a bit out of date, particularly with the formation of continents, but the basic thesis is fine - continents were formed from the action of oceans.
Reconciling Genesis To reconcile Genesis’ account of creation with science only two assumptions need making:
Assume: 1. The observer is standing upon the Earth (in reality most readers of Genesis had no concept of space, just as we have little idea of a “multi-verse” of whatever lies beyond this) 2. That the “days” are symbols of completeness or periods of creation.
… and that one event is repeated.
The order according to Genesis:
1. The separation of light from dark 2. Separation of the waters and “firmament” 3. Creation of dry land and the grasses 4. Creation of the sun, the moon and the stars 5. The waters bring forth life. 6. The land brings forth life.
Saturn’s moon Titan is considered a “pre-cursor Earth.” That is, a cloud shrouded, pre-biotic world which approximates the early Earth. I will use this as a basis for understanding the primordial Earth.
The order according to science:
The molten Earth – (not mentioned in Genesis) 4.7 billion years ago. The first oceans. Prior to 4.4 billion years ago. The emergence of the granite continents from the seas. 4.4 billion years ago. The clearing skies. ?? First life forms inhabiting the seas. 4.5 – 3.5 billion years ago. Life colonizes the land. 580 million years ago. Emergence of man. (Depends on what is “man.”) 2 million years ago.
KJ version: [1] In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. [2] And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. [3] And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. [4] And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. [5] And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.
The existence of an early ocean was not accepted until 2005 when Australian scientists were able to study the chemical composition of zirconian crystals dating from the pre-continent age. Assuming a Titan analog, the early Earth would have been dark until the cloud deck cleared, bringing light. This would have exposed the day and night cycle caused by the Earth’s rotation.
[6] And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. [7] And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. [8] And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
I do not understand what the “firmament” here means. I checked it in parallel translations. This might mean the air itself as it separates the waters below from the waters above.
[9] And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. [10] And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. [11] And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. [12] And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. [13] And the evening and the morning were the third day.
“Dry land” meant the granite blocks which rose above the submerged basalt crust. The continents required the existence of oceanic water to initiate the motion of plate tectonics (continental drift) and this in turn created the granite necessary for the lighter continents.
14] And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: [15] And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. [16] And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. [17] And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, [18] And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. [19] And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
This repeats day 1.
[20] And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. [21] And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. [22] And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. [23] And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
It is the waters which create life. Water is life’s “solvent.” God’s agency is to command, NOT TO DIRECTLY ACT UPON. Until Darwin’s Origin of Species it was not understood how a bird could come from the ocean. 1. Birds come from therapod dinosaurs 2. Dinosaurs evolved from reptiles 3. Reptiles evolved from amphibians 4. Amphibians evolved from fishes
This is one of the earliest references to life coming from the sea.
[24] And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. [25] And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. [26] And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. [27] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them…. [31] And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
God made man in the image of something which already existed. The “second” Genesis account suggests that Adam and Eve were not the only people on the Earth, for Cain went out and married into people not know to that family.
Genesis is roundly criticized in our secular society. It is remarkable that its account accords so closely to what is agreed upon in science.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 17:29:41 GMT -5
Dennis is right Bert. Jesus only is the way yet I heard so many times that the workers were the way. Yes, what happened to Prue? She went and so did your website at the same time. Never heard a Worker say they are the Way. Maybe we are talking about different religions. Prue is fine, thanks. Happy New Year to all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 31, 2013 17:45:48 GMT -5
Twisting twisting, twisting. Bert you imply the worker's way is the only right way, are you denying that, too?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 18:06:15 GMT -5
This isn't just a Truth doctrine though. The RCC believe the same thing. As far as the Pope and priests being needed they make themselves indispensable too. I think that most religious leaders recognize the value of making their followers think of them as indispensable. Otherwise they would be out of a job.This is why I believe in the ministry in the home and the church without a home! Lol, you're in a mood lately aren't you Ram...
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 18:10:18 GMT -5
When you chase a lie upstream there seem always to be those who must know the story is a lie. For example, if you need to hear the Gospel from a certain kind of minister (life begets life), then where did William Irvine hear it from? One possible answer is that Irvine was a latter day prophet so he received a calling directly from God. Sorry, not sure anymore where I came across that idea but it was suggested by someone in the early days. Another approach is, "don't ask too many questions, and I'll tell you no lies". That tends to be a feature in many religions. Ask too many questions, and you're sowing dissent and doubt. The LWD, or the "life begets life" concept, seems to be one of those ideas that is tucked away just in case someone asks. Most people don't ask, which is why it wasn't often preached in our experience. Lately, I was discussing the issue of the Creation occurring as laid out in Genesis. This is a lie, as anyone should know by now; the world was not made in 6 days and not in the order presented in the Bible. One of the supporters of this lie, a minister, told me that dinosaur fossils and human skeletons had been found in the same deposits but that "science" refused to look at this kind of evidence. I chased this upstream, and it appears that there is a cottage industry of spinners who fabricate various alternative theories in order to support conservative Christians' creation theories. The conservative Christians, like this minister I met, think they're repeating something that is true and credible. But at the centre, the so-called scientists who spin this junk, must know it's not credible. There seem to be similar cottage industries around the events of 9/11, and then there are those who are convinced global warming is a fraud, and can come up with all kinds of spin to support it. When you look at the consensus of findings in the scientific world, you have to realize that they're not very far wrong in most of their assertions. Only in science is there an apparatus and formal method of inquiry that evaluates and considers the evidence without significant preconceptions. Outside of science, there be dragons, mainly. Yes, I believe you're right and the people that are feeding these Christians young earth science don't believe it themselves. However, it's been a lucrative line of thought. Look at the museums and fun parks that are making money on this belief. It's what happens when people are so ready to just believe so that it supports what they've been told to believe. They are vulnerable to all kinds of scams.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Dec 31, 2013 18:14:08 GMT -5
Dennis is right Bert. Jesus only is the way yet I heard so many times that the workers were the way. Yes, what happened to Prue? She went and so did your website at the same time. Never heard a Worker say they are the Way. Maybe we are talking about different religions. Prue is fine, thanks. Happy New Year to all. Happy New Year Bert! May this coming year be a great one for you and your family!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Dec 31, 2013 18:33:34 GMT -5
What Hat, I did the following essay for a theology student some years ago. What you are saying, bert, is an essay of yours!
what is an essay? - essay- from Merriam-Webster dictionary Analytic, interpretative, or critical literary composition, usually dealing with its subject from a limited and often personal point of view.
Flexible and versatile, the essay was perfected by Michel de Montaigne, who chose the name essai to emphasize that his compositions were “attempts” to express his thoughts and experiences.
The essay has been the vehicle of literary and social criticism for some, while for others it could serve semipolitical, nationalistic, or polemical purposes and could have a detached, playful, earnest, or bitter tone.
Viewed from that definition, what you wrote is simply your personal opinion and be no means completely accurate!
So, your opinion in your essay can't be relied on to be completely true and believe me it isn't!
|
|