Archie
Junior Member
Non,je ne regrette rein!!!!
Posts: 64
|
Post by Archie on Aug 30, 2014 17:20:44 GMT -5
@wally [/quote]because although i believe other people in other churches can be saved i also believe the further you get from the "truth" the harder it is.... [/quote] Harder for what Now I'm an ex ,I am much closer now to the higher power than I've ever been. Much more content in what I believe. Much more content in knowing a connection with God.
|
|
csievers20
New Member
i would like to meet with some of your workers, any help you can give me would be helpfull
Posts: 14
|
Post by csievers20 on Aug 30, 2014 20:34:21 GMT -5
Oh Wally, Wally, Wally..... That's one of your best. Self righteous much? i believe the word your looking for is confident... how do you feel about witch craft, wiccan, voodoo?
|
|
csievers20
New Member
i would like to meet with some of your workers, any help you can give me would be helpfull
Posts: 14
|
Post by csievers20 on Aug 30, 2014 20:43:08 GMT -5
what about witch craft, wiccan, voodoo? ect.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Aug 30, 2014 21:38:25 GMT -5
"No idea?" Of course not, for you have just said so and I am expected to believe you. Dennis, you can believe or not as you wish. The post was in response to Archie. I could be that dumb. There is no parsing match to get into. It was a short phrase with a single pronoun that I did not think was well defined. Add that to the fact that @wally had posted that he thought people in other churches could be saved and Mary had questioned: Where is your salvation wally ? In your church or in Jesus? which, as you know, is really asking the same question I asked - denomination or religion. Nice to know there is someone who does not dislike me and you are welcome for any kindness.I guess that is what the ignore feature is for. Personally, I have never felt the necessity to place anyone on the ignore list and can not see changing that tact in the future. As far as the post to which you responded so vehemently, it was a question (complete with a question mark) and it was addressing the same issue as Mary's question - " Where is your salvation wally ? In your church or in Jesus?" As to why you decided my question was somehow a comment on your beliefs is, as I said, a mystery to me since at the point in the thread when I asked the question there was no post from you.
|
|
|
Post by bubbles on Aug 30, 2014 21:45:50 GMT -5
Looks there has been a bit of a mix up Dennis. I was surprised at your reaction and couldnt figure out what upset you either.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Aug 30, 2014 22:00:46 GMT -5
Looks there has been a bit of a mix up Dennis. I was surprised at your reaction and couldnt figure out what upset you either. Dennis ~ The same here ~ I agree with Bubbles. I believe you misunderstood Rational's response to another's poster and took it the wrong way? Rational was directing a one word question to Archie ~ not you (see below). I could personally see no wrongful intention in his response and even agreed with his statement, after I pondered it myself.
Honestly, Christianity itself is an exclusive religion and the 2x2's are just another exclusive group within an exclusive religion, from what I can see? The only difference is that most of the outside churches in Christendom don't call themselves the only way to salvation as do the 2x2's and others like them. Instead, they embrace all Christians who share Christian beliefs and don't erect walls over different denominations who may have a few different views from their own. At least my Baptist church is very much that way and it engage in reaching out to others regardless of their particular beliefs. Actually, isn't that what Jesus originally taught anyway until all the church dogma got added to religious beliefs down through the centuries?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 22:53:17 GMT -5
Ladies, if Rat is willing to unconditionally publicly state he does not believe all Christians have been brain washed into such belief as we hold, then i am willing to admit my inference to have been in error, that I was wrong and apologize to everyone for having been so.
Over and over I have read in this forum those who claim to not believe in God, discredit those who do believe in their God. As one who does believe in my God, I am perfectly content to let those who do not believe there even is a God wait with us all to find out whether He exists or not, and what form that being might be as a Spirit. Do I accept the exclusiveness found in the words "unless" and "except" which my Lord is reported to have uttered? Most certainly. Do I understand those concepts well enough to explain them to others? Most certainly not. I can point them out to others to study and conclude for themselves.
What I do believe is that "Grace" came into this world through my Lord, named by parents and known then by His peers as "Yahu'shuah" (ha Meshiach, God-savior, the Anointed.") He is the one by whose name and no other I am " saved." Further -- this awareness did not come through brain washing, rather through deep study, involving several languages, lengthy meditation and many researching ancient records myself, not listening to any professor nor preacher, nor reading others modern beliefs regarding the same.
It was that which I believed implied such study resulting in the beliefs I hold were to be questioned in this forum as nothing more than "brain washing" to which I take took so extreme exception! Well, rat, are you as willing to accept the possibility that what I believe as expressed in this post may (not also) be as true as what you believe? If so, then please accept my apology for misunderstanding what you were intending to express.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 22:59:30 GMT -5
as i've said before i believe others in other churches can be saved i believe it just a little bit harder with all the worldly influences... not everyone believes the william irvine story just because the paper trail goes cold with irvine doesn't mean it ends there... my salvation rests with Jesus and his first century church... What worldly influences are you talking about wally? Do you mean worldly influences such as obeying the rules made by the workers? It is the Holy Spirit that convicts and does the work within us. Man made rules are just that, man made rules which quench the work of the Holy Spirit. I fail to see what worldly influences you mean. My salvation rests with Jesus and him alone. The church is for fellowship not salvation. If you believe that your salvation rests with the first century church how come you choose a church that is only 110 years old. Too bad the only way some can believe in their church is to live in denial. Denial does not wipe out history. The paper trail stops at Irvine because there is nothing before. the list of things would be endless but here are a couple of things that are influencing churches around the world, co-habitation, divorce and remarriage(yes the eastern usa friends are wrong on this one), and gay marriage...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 23:02:44 GMT -5
i believe the word your looking for is confident... how do you feel about witch craft, wiccan, voodoo? all bad
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 30, 2014 23:10:02 GMT -5
divorce and remarriage(yes the eastern usa friends are wrong on this one) Actually its the workers who make and enforce D&R policy - not the friends. And there are valid scriptural reasons for the eastern D&R policy.
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Aug 30, 2014 23:17:45 GMT -5
What worldly influences are you talking about wally? Do you mean worldly influences such as obeying the rules made by the workers? It is the Holy Spirit that convicts and does the work within us. Man made rules are just that, man made rules which quench the work of the Holy Spirit. I fail to see what worldly influences you mean. My salvation rests with Jesus and him alone. The church is for fellowship not salvation. If you believe that your salvation rests with the first century church how come you choose a church that is only 110 years old. Too bad the only way some can believe in their church is to live in denial. Denial does not wipe out history. The paper trail stops at Irvine because there is nothing before. the list of things would be endless but here are a couple of things that are influencing churches around the world, co-habitation, divorce and remarriage(yes the eastern usa friends are wrong on this one), and gay marriage... Plenty of professing people have sex before marriage but to you it is only co-habitation that is wrong. You lump all churches but yours in the same box. Most churches would not agree with the things you named either. Many churches do not accept gay marriage, co habituation, remarriage etc. I see churches protesting against gay marriage but I did not see those in meetings protesting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 23:18:59 GMT -5
divorce and remarriage(yes the eastern usa friends are wrong on this one) Actually its the workers who make and enforce D&R policy - not the friends. And there are valid scriptural reasons for the eastern D&R policy. is that the tares and the wheat story?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 30, 2014 23:24:09 GMT -5
the list of things would be endless but here are a couple of things that are influencing churches around the world, co-habitation, divorce and remarriage(yes the eastern usa friends are wrong on this one), and gay marriage... Plenty of professing people have sex before marriage but to you it is only co-habitation that is wrong. You lump all churches but yours in the same box. Most churches would not agree with the things you named either. Many churches do not accept gay marriage, co habituation, remarriage etc. I see churches protesting against gay marriage but I did not see those in meetings protesting. i didn't say that only co-habitation is wrong...i told you (if you read all my post) that the list of things would be endless and that here are a couple things...i didn't list murder do you think i think murder is okay?
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Aug 31, 2014 0:30:41 GMT -5
Plenty of professing people have sex before marriage but to you it is only co-habitation that is wrong. You lump all churches but yours in the same box. Most churches would not agree with the things you named either. Many churches do not accept gay marriage, co habituation, remarriage etc. I see churches protesting against gay marriage but I did not see those in meetings protesting. i didn't say that only co-habitation is wrong...i told you (if you read all my post) that the list of things would be endless and that here are a couple things...i didn't list murder do you think i think murder is okay? How about we add CSA to the list.... but wait .... that is happening "In Truth" too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2014 1:03:08 GMT -5
Wally, may I ask two questions for you to ponder, if you chose not to answer them, that is okay with me. 1.) What does "legalism" mean to you in a religious context? and, 2.) Is it a favorable condition in your religious mindset, or otherwise?
|
|
|
Post by bubbles on Aug 31, 2014 6:06:42 GMT -5
Actually its the workers who make and enforce D&R policy - not the friends. And there are valid scriptural reasons for the eastern D&R policy. is that the tares and the wheat story? IMO it would wrong for any christian to assume to judge who is a wheat or a tare.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2014 7:08:43 GMT -5
Good point, bubbles. However, surely it is only a starting one in The Lord's doctrine. He then commands "righteous judgment" which is necessary in discerning the fruit by which one will be known, yes?
The difference, if my learning is correct, in that tare and the wheat is in how they propagate. The wheat by seed, and the tare by root. Thus in the harvest the tares remain upright, aloof, alone, while the wheat bends lower with the weight of the fruit it bears. I remember the very day and place I was taught that lesson. However, I'm not wanting to be contentious about it. is that the tares and the wheat story? IMO it would wrong for any christian to assume to judge who is a wheat or a tare.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Aug 31, 2014 10:09:23 GMT -5
Ladies, if Rat is willing to unconditionally publicly state he does not believe all Christians have been brain washed into such belief as we hold, then i am willing to admit my inference to have been in error, that I was wrong and apologize to everyone for having been so. Since I have never made a statement regarding the fact that christians are or are not brainwashed I fail to see why the demand is being made at this time to make any kind of statement. I can say unconditionally that I do not know if any or all christians have been brainwashed. OK. I believe that possibility exists but that its probability is very low. The fact of the matter is that you made a mistake. You inferred, from a single word question that I posted, a meaning that was not stated or implied. Your apology for misunderstanding what I expressed and your follow-up post should in no way be based on whether I decide to jump, or not jump, through some arbitrary hoops that you have decided to set up. You explained your situation which I take at face value. Should you choose to apologize I will accept it without question or conditions. I did not ask for an apology and certainly do not expect nor demand one. This is a message board and when I post I assume there are adults reading and responding and will treat them as such. When someone gets upset by a post I make I will apologize if I was in error or I will do my best to explain why I posted as I did.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2014 12:39:08 GMT -5
Wally, may I ask two questions for you to ponder, if you chose not to answer them, that is okay with me. 1.) What does "legalism" mean to you in a religious context? and, 2.) Is it a favorable condition in your religious mindset, or otherwise? 1. getting caught up in law rather than in Jesus Christ 2. depends somethings need to be spoken out against. everyone has thier limit to which they will tolerate things, some more some less...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2014 12:42:52 GMT -5
is that the tares and the wheat story? IMO it would wrong for any christian to assume to judge who is a wheat or a tare. that story of the wheat and the tare doesn't say we can't judge whats a tare or wheat it says we are not to remove it for fear of trampling down the good wheat...there are other verses though where it says we are to not have anything to do with brethern that wont toe the line....so we IMO have to have balance
|
|
|
Post by bubbles on Aug 31, 2014 14:31:23 GMT -5
IMO it would wrong for any christian to assume to judge who is a wheat or a tare. that story of the wheat and the tare doesn't say we can't judge whats a tare or wheat it says we are not to remove it for fear of trampling down the good wheat...there are other verses though where it says we are to not have anything to do with brethern that wont toe the line....so we IMO have to have balance Wally im going to do a dmmichgood and rational Show me scriptures please.
|
|
|
Post by faune on Aug 31, 2014 14:51:35 GMT -5
IMO it would wrong for any christian to assume to judge who is a wheat or a tare. that story of the wheat and the tare doesn't say we can't judge what is a tare or wheat it says we are not to remove it for fear of trampling down the good wheat...there are other verses though where it says we are to not have anything to do with brethern that wont toe the line....so we IMO have to have balance Wally ~ I agree. From the description given below, I believe it would be easy to determine the tares from the wheat just by observation of the fruit they produce? This article makes that point pretty clear.
ladylashonda.hubpages.com/hub/Wheat--Tare--and-Weeds
|
|
|
Post by bubbles on Aug 31, 2014 15:04:18 GMT -5
I know the parable but where does it say to judge them We are to judge certain things and clearly can discern good from evil works. If we speak out judgement on this topic we judge the unfinished work in someones life. That is cruelty. Ie being told you never had it in the first place. How does another understand your walk? Esp from a distance? eg being told you have a demon. that would frighten some christians esp baby christians.
It is better to show love to a person.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 31, 2014 15:07:44 GMT -5
IMO it would wrong for any christian to assume to judge who is a wheat or a tare. that story of the wheat and the tare doesn't say we can't judge whats a tare or wheat it says we are not to remove it for fear of trampling down the good wheat...there are other verses though where it says we are to not have anything to do with brethern that wont toe the line....so we IMO have to have balance Careful Wally! That would be a sloppy and dangerous interpretation of scripture, which doesn't give a subjective term like "won't toe the line". Example: You could shun a brother or sister for refusing orders from a fornicating worker. You could shun sexually abused children for rebelling against their abusers. It would mean this scripture is being applied in the opposite way to what was intended.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Aug 31, 2014 16:54:21 GMT -5
Careful Wally! That would be a sloppy and dangerous interpretation of scripture, which doesn't give a subjective term like "won't toe the line". Example: You could shun a brother or sister for refusing orders from a fornicating worker. You could shun sexually abused children for rebelling against their abusers. It would mean this scripture is being applied in the opposite way to what was intended. Or in the opposite way that you have interpreted it. The point that the speaker was trying to make by using analogies and metaphors could have very different meanings to individuals. Given the vast differences in time frames, the accuracy of the translations, and even the attitude of the involved societies, the original lesson being taught may not be at all apparent and new meanings are being created by modern readers.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 31, 2014 17:10:17 GMT -5
Careful Wally! That would be a sloppy and dangerous interpretation of scripture, which doesn't give a subjective term like "won't toe the line". Example: You could shun a brother or sister for refusing orders from a fornicating worker. You could shun sexually abused children for rebelling against their abusers. It would mean this scripture is being applied in the opposite way to what was intended. Or in the opposite way that you have interpreted it. The point that the speaker was trying to make by using analogies and metaphors could have very different meanings to individuals. Given the vast differences in time frames, the accuracy of the translations, and even the attitude of the involved societies, the original lesson being taught may not be at all apparent and new meanings are being created by modern readers. We can get a pretty good idea of what was intended by: sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2014 18:44:52 GMT -5
that story of the wheat and the tare doesn't say we can't judge whats a tare or wheat it says we are not to remove it for fear of trampling down the good wheat...there are other verses though where it says we are to not have anything to do with brethern that wont toe the line....so we IMO have to have balance Wally im going to do a dmmichgood and rational Show me scriptures please. Mat 18:15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. Mat 18:16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. Mat 18:17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 31, 2014 18:50:28 GMT -5
that story of the wheat and the tare doesn't say we can't judge whats a tare or wheat it says we are not to remove it for fear of trampling down the good wheat...there are other verses though where it says we are to not have anything to do with brethern that wont toe the line....so we IMO have to have balance Careful Wally! That would be a sloppy and dangerous interpretation of scripture, which doesn't give a subjective term like "won't toe the line". Example: You could shun a brother or sister for refusing orders from a fornicating worker. You could shun sexually abused children for rebelling against their abusers. It would mean this scripture is being applied in the opposite way to what was intended. that would be the most extreme interpretation fixit
|
|