zing
Junior Member
Posts: 121
|
Post by zing on Jul 14, 2006 1:12:47 GMT -5
what would happen if a professing person refused to leave the meetings and conventions when they were told they were no longer welcome? if they kept showing up now and then, here and there? just to listen, and take notes? would they be physically escorted out? blocked? I mean if they were 'REALLY NOT WANTED' ... if they ignored the snubbing, gossip, isolation, cold shoulders, dirty looks, (hmmm?) I always wondered that, as workers state that everyone is welcome, for a lifetime, even if they don't profess (paint a beautiful picture)... then all of a sudden, if you don't profess, you can figure you are not welcome at all... (kind of funny)
|
|
zing
Junior Member
Posts: 121
|
Post by zing on Jul 14, 2006 1:13:49 GMT -5
what would happen, if ....you sent the workers a bill for all the inconveniences they caused in your life?
|
|
|
Post by newleaf on Jul 14, 2006 1:34:45 GMT -5
Maybe they would tar and feather them and throw them out in the road like some communities used to do to the early workers.
|
|
|
Post by lilwolfmisty on Jul 14, 2006 1:56:27 GMT -5
Well I actually wrote the workers and asked if I could attend Ronan convention in 1986. I was told that I was living in sin so I was told something like " We feel with the situation at this time you should not attend, because you would be a poor example to the young people" and I forget who it was signed by but it was a older sister worker. I did not push, but I should have. Now I would have never asked permission and I would have showed up. I would not have drawn attention to myself, but I would not have been bullied into not attending. Who knows had that comment not been made about me living in sin maybe I would not have married my loser of an ex husband, but then again that was my own stupidity can't blame that on the workers
|
|
|
Post by A legal response on Jul 14, 2006 6:26:38 GMT -5
If the Convention is held on private property, and you are told to leave the property by the owner of the property, and you refuse to leave, you can be removed by law enforcement and charged with criminal trespass.
The Workers have no legal authority to tell you to leave, as they themselves are guests on the private property. Only the owner of the property has the right to tell you to leave.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 14, 2006 6:39:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Fabrication or not on Jul 14, 2006 6:46:49 GMT -5
Maybe they would tar and feather them and throw them out in the road like some communities used to do to the early workers. In reality, did this ever happen?
|
|
|
Post by Same thing on Jul 14, 2006 6:48:46 GMT -5
what would happen, if ....you sent the workers a bill for all the inconveniences they caused in your life? They would probably do the same thing I would if you sent me a bill - throw it away. I don't believe the workers ever forced you to do anything.
|
|
|
Post by Kind of like on Jul 14, 2006 6:54:42 GMT -5
what would happen if a professing person refused to leave the meetings and conventions when they were told they were no longer welcome? if they kept showing up now and then, here and there? just to listen, and take notes? would they be physically escorted out? blocked? I mean if they were 'REALLY NOT WANTED' ... if they ignored the snubbing, gossip, isolation, cold shoulders, dirty looks, (hmmm?) I always wondered that, as workers state that everyone is welcome, for a lifetime, even if they don't profess (paint a beautiful picture)... then all of a sudden, if you don't profess, you can figure you are not welcome at all... (kind of funny) It is like dropping your membership in a golf club but still wanting to have the benefit of using the course and the clubhouse.
|
|
|
Post by Suppose on Jul 14, 2006 6:56:20 GMT -5
The Workers have no legal authority to tell you to leave, as they themselves are guests on the private property. Only the owner of the property has the right to tell you to leave. Suppose the owner had granted the workers power of attorney?
|
|
|
Post by Wot on Jul 14, 2006 7:03:24 GMT -5
Cherie and Zing - what if I decided I had right to enter your house, and forced my way in. What would you do?
|
|
|
Post by Suppose this on Jul 14, 2006 7:05:14 GMT -5
The Workers have no legal authority to tell you to leave, as they themselves are guests on the private property. Only the owner of the property has the right to tell you to leave. Suppose the owner had granted the workers power of attorney? Suppose the Queen had been granted balls; she'd be King!
|
|
|
Post by What if on Jul 14, 2006 7:10:31 GMT -5
Cherie and Zing - what if I decided I had right to enter your house, and forced my way in. What would you do? What would happen if pigs decided they could fly?
|
|
|
Post by Wot on Jul 14, 2006 8:59:09 GMT -5
What if - you mean you wouldn't accept me into your house? Wot if I came to worship with you, and insisted we do this even though you disagreed with, and hated me? What if I FORCED my way into your house, and claimed I had a right because your religion was mine, too? And then, wot if I set up a web site to show what exclusive "saved by gracers" did to me by kicking me out. Yes, wot a nasty person I would be, and I would soon have many nasty, like minded friends.
|
|
|
Post by studylearning on Jul 14, 2006 9:05:03 GMT -5
I thought that the fellowship is the Only right way? If this be true then why would any in that fellowship limit access for any others? I would think it would be such that even the worst sinner should have access. Now I could understand if one was creating a scene, but just because one says things which others do not like, is not reason to expel them or limit access.
A study of love according to "Jesus Way" John 13, verse 35, "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."
Now so then certain one's claim the true way of fellowship in harmony with Jesus teachings but yet reject others, even their own who they feel are failing. What about that love? I thought Jesus said to extent it even unto your enemies? Now let me just add a little here so that the "one shot posting artists" might get a better understanding.
FROM GAL. NIV
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
23 gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires.
25 Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit.
26 Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.
Now then, where is that love extended which is detailed here in Galatians? You reject or exclude, even your own, because you have judged them unrighteously. Even if your judgment is correct, should you not have an open heart and door? Do you fear for your life from them? If it is your soul you fear for, then are you weak in that you have so little faith?
I thought Jesus said the door is open if one knocks. If a brother wants to have fellowship with you then how is it that you still close the door? If your house is the place of true worship, are you not denying one who needs help from coming to Christ with true believers?
Now let me continue in this understanding of what it really is to have Jesus love toward your brothers and sisters.
Doing Good to All
Gal. NIV
1 Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted.
2 Carry each other's burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ.
3 If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself.
4 Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else,
5 for each one should carry his own load.
Are you helping your brother's in rejection and shunning or are you putting stumbling blocks in there way? If the Home is a church and your brother who has wronged you is content to enter in for fellowship then why should you go against the Law of Christ? You cannot have it both ways. Either you are living in Christs will or you are not. In truth if you test your actions against your brother do you find any guilt or reasonable doubt in your actions? If you do then you should repent. If you don't well then ------ Many reject because they do not like what others have to say. Why then do you not have a one to one discussion first. Without gossip, backbiting and ultimate judgment. Inquiring first of the brothers heart without rejecting? Is rejection, restoration in Gentleness? In rejection, are you helping your brother in their burdens? In rejection, are you helping them with their burdens? In rejection, are you not deceiving yourself thinking you are something when you are nothing?
So much error in selective following of the 2nd greatest Commandment of God.
36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?"
37 Jesus replied: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.
' 38 This is the first and greatest commandment.
39 And the second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.
'[c] 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."
In closing, Why on earth would one still want to have fellowship with people who claim to be Christians but yet, tell you that you are not welcome anymore; or tell you that what you say is not edifying; or tell you to deny the works of the Holy Spirit? (The latter being blasphemy) If they were true Christians this would and should not happen.
As I survey the goings and comings of those who have posted here, it seems that most who have left really have had only limited discussions with their brothers, sisters and workers before they were rejected. This appears to be the hallmark of actions toward those who bring up issues of doctrine and history. The hallmark of response is reject and shun. Make them feel unwanted. Well you do win in that area. You make your brothers and sisters feel unwanted. You are going against the very platform of Jesus teachings.
Did you ever considered that perhaps one of those who you might have rejected could have been sent to you by God?
Just my thoughts
|
|
|
Post by Castle Doctrine on Jul 14, 2006 9:08:58 GMT -5
What if - you mean you wouldn't accept me into your house? Wot if I came to worship with you, and insisted we do this even though you disagreed with, and hated me? What if I FORCED my way into your house, and claimed I had a right because your religion was mine, too? And then, wot if I set up a web site to show what exclusive "saved by gracers" did to me by kicking me out. Yes, wot a nasty person I would be, and I would soon have many nasty, like minded friends. It is strongly suggested that you "Google" Castle Doctrine before making a decission to force your way into someone else's house. You may discover that your "and then set up a web site" question is moot! In other words, you may not have a "and then" to worry about.
|
|
|
Post by studylearning on Jul 14, 2006 9:20:19 GMT -5
What if - you mean you wouldn't accept me into your house? Wot if I came to worship with you, and insisted we do this even though you disagreed with, and hated me? What if I FORCED my way into your house, and claimed I had a right because your religion was mine, too? And then, wot if I set up a web site to show what exclusive "saved by gracers" did to me by kicking me out. Yes, wot a nasty person I would be, and I would soon have many nasty, like minded friends. It is strongly suggested that you "Google" Castle Doctrine before making a decision to force your way into someone else's house. You may discover that your "and then set up a web site" question is moot! In other words, you may not have a "and then" to worry about. Castle Doctrine deals with the potential of prying and violent attack I don't see where it is stated that one who wants to continue in fellowship was threating harm. I suppose that one could consider (unwanted words which pri against ones belief) as harm by the home owner, but I doubt that this was the issue. From what I read there is no physical threat referenced. With that said I feel if unwanted don't go. One does not have a right to impose themselves in a private Home where they are not wanted. Further, one does not have a right to try and force there way in; That is physical and meets the Castle criteria>
|
|
|
Post by Castle Doctrine on Jul 14, 2006 9:49:09 GMT -5
"Wot" used the word FORCE, and put it in capital letters. I guess different folks have different ideas what the word FORCE means. I wouldn't recoment that he use what the law defines as FORCE.
|
|
|
Post by studylearning on Jul 14, 2006 10:09:58 GMT -5
Oh Yes. I stand corrected. I was thinking in terms of the original post to the thread. I do agree with your response now to "WOT"
Think you for redirecting me.
|
|
|
Post by mrleo on Jul 14, 2006 11:02:15 GMT -5
I seem to recall hearing an older worker telling about such an incident, or something similar like "being run out of town on a rail" (I'm not sure what that entails) because they were attracting too many townsfolk away from the established mainstream churches.
|
|
IQ
Senior Member
Posts: 942
|
Post by IQ on Jul 14, 2006 22:43:33 GMT -5
what would happen if a professing person refused to leave the meetings and conventions when they were told they were no longer welcome? if they kept showing up now and then, here and there? just to listen, and take notes? would they be physically escorted out? blocked? I mean if they were 'REALLY NOT WANTED' ... if they ignored the snubbing, gossip, isolation, cold shoulders, dirty looks, (hmmm?) I always wondered that, as workers state that everyone is welcome, for a lifetime, even if they don't profess (paint a beautiful picture)... then all of a sudden, if you don't profess, you can figure you are not welcome at all... (kind of funny) Why would you want keep coming back if you arent wanted?
|
|
zing
Junior Member
Posts: 121
|
Post by zing on Jul 14, 2006 22:53:41 GMT -5
'the legal answer' is the only one that truely holds water... regardless of the reason, if a person is unwanted on someone elses property, or rented space.. then they must leave
however, that being said.. would it hold up in a court?
because, a person is lured in with false 'advertising'... such as 'open homes', always welcome, friends, no money required, fellowship.. so they 'enter'... then they are kicked out because they took this at face value??
to 'same thing' ... undoubtedly that is what they would do, and the same with you, myself, however, if someone sent me a bill reflecting harms I had supposedly done to them, I can guarantee I would be doing some deep and personal reflecting of my behavior, in person resolution of some type, ... a consciencious person will first look at the merit, before dismissing... it would be an interesting experiement though.. anyone willing to give it a try? ... by the way, workers and friends with thier well aimed slander, can indeed have a huge and negetive impact on your life... not because they physically force you, but because they can create such a havoc around you, and because the majority of people believe gossip and do not check the facts, also the deeds are done in such a way that you do not know who is responsible therefore cannot halt the wrongdoings... trust me, I know..
to 'kind of like' .. it is not like dropping the membership, it is like signing the membership, showing up at the club, and being kicked out for doing what you thought was required... like signing a contract and having them change the wording before upholding thier end of the bargain.... like a bait and switch...
to 'wot'... no one is talking about force, I am talking about attending, there is a difference.... these gatherings are attendance based, supposedly the owners of the home are 'privileged' to have a meeting... the perception given is that the house owners have the privilege of hosting the open home, the homes are open to all that want to get to heaven, that includes a huge percentage of the population... the perception is that if the owner refused access, then the 'privilege' would be removed.. and that the behaviour of the owner is monitored by the worker, the worker is the all fair one which accepts everyone and encourages spiritual learning equally for all... any disagreements are said to be of the individual not the system if a person, truely responds as they have been instructed or invited, then they will be very confused... (once you tell people that they cannnot get to heaven unless you attend (profess), and it would be assumed that 'all' or the 'majority' of people want to get to heaven, how can it be anything but laughable, if you refuse any persons the right to enter, ... by doing this, technically a simple house or property owner, has the right to decide who gets to heaven, and who is even allowed to try to get to heaven .... it is not very nice to persuade people they must go to hell or go to meetings, and then not let them go to meetings.... it is bizarre to think that one actually believes that they have to ask permission, to get to a meeting, so that they can get to heaven... but that is brainwashing I suppose....)
|
|
zing
Junior Member
Posts: 121
|
Post by zing on Jul 15, 2006 21:18:07 GMT -5
to 'lilwolfmisty'... isn't it bizarre that you could not go to a fellowship because you were 'living in sin'? who isn't, and aren't those 'sinners' the very ones who Jesus drew close to him, (did they explain to you what sin is, or what your sin was, or how that compared to other sins)... should you suppose that being an example is the purpose of attending? should it not be the fellowship? ... and would it be assumed that young people cannot distinguish?
also, I am wondering how many people today, are faced with reletives being approached to 'commit' them to a mental institution of sorts, just because their presence or actions displease the workers in power? does anyone have experiences with this? or know of someone who has?
|
|
|
Post by dropping in on Jul 15, 2006 23:54:37 GMT -5
lilwolfmisty, Your post is funny. Not haha funny, but so odd. You were asked to not come because you were living in sin..........but what about the workers that have molested people? What about the elder that molested women for years, what about the pedophile molester (that did prison time), all of the above continue to come to convention. Isn't it odd? You living in sin, poor example? Very odd.
|
|