|
Post by spiderman on Jul 19, 2006 16:03:12 GMT -5
no spiderman i think you are wrong - we are not exclusive - our faith is open to everyone Jesus was open to everyone but he ALSO said that not everyone who called him lord lord would enter the kingdom - a lot was asked of those who wanted to enter as the way is narrow - and one of the signs was that those who followed Jesus loved one another - i dont see love but long story of hate between timbers catholics and baptists and lutherans kind regards I'm sorry, Pruebert. I thought you were a member of the 2x2 Go Preacher, worker type fellowship. You must be talking about some other fellowship. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jul 19, 2006 16:24:09 GMT -5
I don't think it's that simple, and I dislike the use of the word "spirit" when what we really mean is circumstance or attitude. The results are certainly the same (no longer having fellowship), but the circumstances and the attitude of exiting vs. being excommunicated may be vastly different from each other. Thanks for yours mrleo. My purpose in bringing up similarities, is to find common ground. I don't know if there's any heart for that, but it's worth a shot. Perhaps some might see that the justification of one can be the justification of the other, with likewise the condemnation of one the condemnation of the other. Here's a couple of thoughts. Is anyone willing to add to this list? The circumstances for both versions seem to stem from personal effrontery and/or doctrinal intolerance. I see a lot of similarity there. How you look at it depends on who does it to who first. And that's about what it amounts to, who does it to who first. Both parties seem to be aggrieved that they've been ex'd. Both can be sad that it’s happened. Both can be glad. Misunderstandings abound Misrepresentations abound Both parties do a lot of self justification after the act, - and condemnation of the other. After some time, both parties, usually (?), may be willing to admit that they probably weren't very perfect during the lead up to nor the divorcement proceedings. C'mon guys, anybody willing to do a mea culpa? There’s a lot of talent here. Which is another similarity, mea culpa often helps the healing. You've got to be kidding! With all these Christians here? I make a motion that we table the aformentioned motion for lack of a second. Besides, who would be willing to sit on such a commitee?
|
|
|
Post by excuses on Jul 19, 2006 17:57:37 GMT -5
jxk - I asked the workers was it true about the 19th century origin of current line of workers and was told "yes." Only the Catholics hold to the notion of a church in an unbroken line of leaders to the first Apostles. I have never heard any worker preach about William Irvine. I have never heard them preach about any other worker, either. Any ideas how Irvine and his generation kept their secret from people back then? if irvine message was for people to follow him, then he was in error. The way I understand that his ''original'' message must have been to follow the way that was from the 'beginning' as he did not claim to be starting a new way, but was making an effort to follow the original way. So it would be correct that this way ariginated when it was first preached, and the revelations following have continued to reveal the way as it has always been. It is a way that continues today. Excuse me for cutting into this conversation........ You say, and I quote, "It is a way that continues today." How do you explain the illegitimate son? Did Jesus do that from the beginning too?
|
|
|
Post by Guest on Jul 19, 2006 18:13:25 GMT -5
It's like any sales job. As soon as you deride the competition, you've pretty much lost the sale, unless the customer is weak and caves in under high pressure sales tactics.
|
|
|
Post by Greg Lee unplugged on Jul 19, 2006 18:13:31 GMT -5
yes timber we continue to answer your point, all the time - only people like to keep banging away at it as if we had never spoken - paul the elder was in the work with timothy the younger at one stage and he used the word workers - we are sure that if they called themselves disciples or apostles in the same way as the first 12 people would call them liars and make an issue out of them instead of their doctrine - just like they do today The above: - indicates that the poster thinks a reply equates to an answer. - missuse of the word worker, Paul was described (meaphor or analogy?) as a worker, soldier, servant, laborer, but the workers of the friends and workers are "the workers". - an assumption to make others seem negative or wrong and their own selves to be persecuted by those same others. - a false argument since almost all the argument againt the workers' church behavior and teachings is based on errant doctrine.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Jul 19, 2006 20:10:21 GMT -5
Is 5:20 Woe unto them that CALL EVIL GOOD, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! vs 21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
|
|
|
Post by fear on Jul 19, 2006 20:19:13 GMT -5
I feel those in meetings fear man (workers) more than they do God.
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 20, 2006 7:43:25 GMT -5
dear mister or missus excuses - you asked this
How do you explain the illegitimate son? Did Jesus do that from the beginning too?
i am not sure what your question refers to but i do know that Jesus himself was considered and called illegitimate. love prue
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 20, 2006 7:45:54 GMT -5
hi greg you mentioned that we call our preachers workers - we sometimes call them preachers or servants - please dont make an issue out of names
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jul 20, 2006 8:32:14 GMT -5
... I would be willing to agree with you, at least personally I agree, but I believe we'd agree that deriding the competition is a time tested and effective tool in gaining converts. It's generally the first step in getting someone's attention. Thus it's justified, and always will be I'm sure. I would challenge you on your premise that deriding competition is a time-tested and effective tool for gaining converts. If you call the F&W family offspring converts then you maybe correct. However, I think these are not converts, rather innocent bystanders who are, by default, inducted into a social culture. Please consider how effective this strategy is in the western world. Consider what is the main source of converts? Are there many converts who are not F&W offspring or else are already disillusioned with mainstream religion (i.e. already convinced against other religion). For these individuals, such tactics are really just preaching to the converted. Additionally, it is certainly not a tactic I would expect from a group with a self-imposed monopoly on extolling the virtues of salvation through Jesus. Sure, Jesus had a bit to say about some jewish sects, but he focussed on the problem attitudes, rather than liturgical differences. The F&W seem to merely focus on liturgical issues when deriding other religons.
|
|
|
Post by liturgy not really on Jul 20, 2006 8:36:34 GMT -5
you said - The F&W seem to merely focus on liturgical issues when deriding other religons - if some do this then they are wrong - the argument is the opposite - we don't care for liturgy but rather the manifestation of Christ in people's lives.
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jul 20, 2006 8:43:49 GMT -5
hi greg you mentioned that we call our preachers workers - we sometimes call them preachers or servants - please dont make an issue out of names So Prue/Bert, what do you make of this? [/i] [28] And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, also those having gifts of healing, those able to help others, those with gifts of administration, and those speaking in different kinds of tongues. [29] Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? [30] Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues[d]? Do all interpret? [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by He he on Jul 20, 2006 8:47:24 GMT -5
Is 5:20 Woe unto them that CALL EVIL GOOD, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! vs 21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! Is 5:20 Woe unto them that CALL EVIL GOOD, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! vs 21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and pruebert in their own sight! ;D
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jul 20, 2006 10:24:54 GMT -5
you said - The F&W seem to merely focus on liturgical issues when deriding other religons - if some do this then they are wrong - the argument is the opposite - we don't care for liturgy but rather the manifestation of Christ in people's lives. Oh yes. That's right. Liturgy and other religious structures are unimportant. But just don't you forget to turn up to the fellowship meeting on Sunday mornings., or the mid-week bible study, or the gospel mission meeting on Sunday evenings, or the mid-week gospel meeting. You see, these have nothing to do with liturgy, which is why the are such important activities.
|
|
Nichole M
Senior Member
I John 1:5 ..... God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.
Posts: 486
|
Post by Nichole M on Jul 22, 2006 23:02:25 GMT -5
nichole m - why did you leave the work? i was shocked to read your post Prue I left the work after 2 years because I had a complete nervous breakdown. What was shocking in my post? Nichole
|
|
|
Post by grandma on Jul 22, 2006 23:54:02 GMT -5
Shortly before I left the meetings, I asked an elderly worker if he had ever heard of William Irvine. (This was after I had just read that WI had started the "truth.") His answer was something like, "I never knew any William Irvine." Which wasn't actually a lie, I guess! Later in the day, however, HE brought up the subject again and said that actually he knew someone who is a Cooneyite today! I think that he was feeling guilty for not having told me the truth about WI so now indirectly told it.
|
|
|
Post by a believer on Jul 23, 2006 1:49:33 GMT -5
hi greg you mentioned that we call our preachers workers - we sometimes call them preachers or servants - please dont make an issue out of names Interest sing that Prue said don't make an issue out of names. Now who makes an issue out of names? The workers make an issue out of names. Interesting grandma, that the workers associated William Irvine's name with Cooney. Seems that he knew that Irvine was around the time of Conney. Seems to me that was an admission that he actually knew the names Irvine and Cooney.
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 23, 2006 3:05:22 GMT -5
nichole - i was simply shocked to think that just a few months ago you were a worker i too believed that the workers went forth in every generation - but seeing how people can go forth preaching in our day tells me that people could do it in any other time if all the catholics in the world died out and all records were destroyed you would not make a new catholic church out of the bible story because so much of it is the traditions of men so too for anglicans and mormons and jehovah witnesses but the bible gives every generation simple instructions on how to send out labourers in the field these instructions and this gospel is from the beginning love prue
|
|
|
Post by huh on Jul 23, 2006 4:38:57 GMT -5
... you would not make a new catholic church out of the bible story because so much of it is the traditions of men And nothing of the 2x2 church is traditions of men???
|
|
to Prue long overdue
Guest
|
Post by to Prue long overdue on Jul 23, 2006 4:41:13 GMT -5
no spiderman i think you are wrong - we are not exclusive - our faith is open to everyone Jesus was open to everyone but he ALSO said that not everyone who called him lord lord would enter the kingdom - a lot was asked of those who wanted to enter as the way is narrow - and one of the signs was that those who followed Jesus loved one another - i dont see love but long story of hate between timbers catholics and baptists and lutherans Dear Prue:
It is people like you that make me want to leave Truth.
The post highlighted above makes me sick.
You said of Truth "we are not exclusive" which is an out and out lie. My 15 year old daughter was praying in meeting that God would grant his spirit to "other Christians gathering in worship" and I was told to "set her straight" three different times: once by an elder, once by (both) the workers in our part, and once by a visiting worker. (And all of this has been within the last year.)
Also you said "our faith is open to everyone" which is also a lie. If it were true, the word excommunicated wouldn't show up in these forums.
Backing up a little you said "we are not exclusive - our faith is open to everyone". This statement has two parts and the way you've worded this it makes it sound like you are trying to redefine "exlusive" to mean something other than what it usually means when applied to a discussion about Truth. When you say "exclusive" do you define it to mean "our religion is the only way to heaven" or "our religion welcomes visitors in our gatherings"? If it is the latter, you are playing word games which again makes you a liar and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Also I must say that your claim that Truth is not exclusive made me sick enough but then you turned around and contradicted yourself with this narrow (minded) way garbage. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps narrow way could mean something else? Like Christianity in general, or love, or Grace, or non-faith-in-a-manmade-religion?
Furthermore, when you say you don't see love elsewhere, maybe you aren't looking hard enough. Instead of looking for the hate in other religions to justify your own, open your mind and your heart to others and look for the good in others, just as JESUS does.
Your behavior on these forums frustrates me to my end and back. Your lies and deceit make me want to pull what little hair I have left out by the roots. You make me want to vomit.
And yes I really am a Truth 2x2 member but being associated with you is making me seriously examine my place.
I swear to God that if I ever leave Truth and write an exit letter, I have no sure idea what it will contain, but I do know that somewhere in the text will be the name "Prue".
|
|
to Prue long overdue
Guest
|
Post by to Prue long overdue on Jul 23, 2006 4:42:23 GMT -5
no spiderman i think you are wrong - we are not exclusive - our faith is open to everyone Jesus was open to everyone but he ALSO said that not everyone who called him lord lord would enter the kingdom - a lot was asked of those who wanted to enter as the way is narrow - and one of the signs was that those who followed Jesus loved one another - i dont see love but long story of hate between timbers catholics and baptists and lutherans Dear Prue: It is people like you that make me want to leave Truth. The post highlighted above makes me sick. You said of Truth "we are not exclusive" which is an out and out lie. My 15 year old daughter was praying in meeting that God would grant his spirit to "other Christians gathering in worship" and I was told to "set her straight" three different times: once by an elder, once by (both) the workers in our part, and once by a visiting worker. (And all of this has been within the last year.) Also you said "our faith is open to everyone" which is also a lie. If it were true, the word excommunicated wouldn't show up in these forums. Backing up a little you said "we are not exclusive - our faith is open to everyone". This statement has two parts and the way you've worded this it makes it sound like you are trying to redefine "exlusive" to mean something other than what it usually means when applied to a discussion about Truth. When you say "exclusive" do you define it to mean "our religion is the only way to heaven" or "our religion welcomes visitors in our gatherings"? If it is the latter, you are playing word games which again makes you a liar and you should be ashamed of yourself. Also I must say that your claim that Truth is not exclusive made me sick enough but then you turned around and contradicted yourself with this narrow (minded) way garbage. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps narrow way could mean something else? Like Christianity in general, or love, or Grace, or non-faith-in-a-manmade-religion? Furthermore, when you say you don't see love elsewhere, maybe you aren't looking hard enough. Instead of looking for the hate in other religions to justify your own, open your mind and your heart to others and look for the good in others, just as JESUS does. Your behavior on these forums frustrates me to my end and back. Your lies and deceit make me want to pull what little hair I have left out by the roots. You make me want to vomit. And yes I really am a Truth 2x2 member but being associated with you is making me seriously examine my place. I swear to God that if I ever leave Truth and write an exit letter, I have no sure idea what it will contain, but I do know that somewhere in the text will be the name "Prue".
|
|
|
Post by Just as I am on Jul 23, 2006 6:41:41 GMT -5
Anyone can come to the Lord just as they are. There are no prerequisites for coming to Jesus. But once you accept Jesus you will accept the teachings and tradiitons of the workers, his ministers, as taught by them and the spirit, if you are true of heart.
So, there is no exclusivity on the part of the freinds and workers than there is on the part of Jesus. They welcome all to their church, God's church. But they know that Jesus will change the true believer. And at that point people decide if they want Jesus or not to be their Lord and Savior. Of course everyone likes the salvation part, the Lord part is another matter.
Thus comes the contention of exclusivity from the unwilling and the unknowing (those that simply accept the testimonies of exes).
==============================================
This would be the response if one believed the workers' church to be the true church.
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 23, 2006 7:07:09 GMT -5
hi to huh from prue - when Jesus talked about the traditions of men he meant things not commanded by God - you will have to explain to me what parts of our service or ministry was not given by the bible - kind regards
|
|
|
Post by prue on Jul 23, 2006 7:26:06 GMT -5
hi to prue long overdue !!!!!!! the word excommunicate shows up here doesnt mean it is true - words like illegitimate and devil were used to describe Jesus but that wasnt true our workers will ask someone to leave if they are a problem to the church - just as Paul instructed all are welcome to return if they accept the teaching of our church we pray that people from other religions may join us because our faith is open to all through the gospel if we accept that all religions have the spirit of God - when they obviously disagree with us in belief and standards - then there is no point in our faith - we do not believe that Jesus way is a broad way - we fully understand the principle when other churches also say they are the true way - this is an article of faith we see churches around us tearing themselves apart - we see churches closing everywhere - we see homosexual and lesbian priests - we see church leaders disputing the bible these churches dont hate each other anymore - they openly hate the scriptures i am shocked that you could write these things and tell me you are in my church - i speak for most of us - why do you stay?
|
|
Nichole M
Senior Member
I John 1:5 ..... God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.
Posts: 486
|
Post by Nichole M on Jul 23, 2006 8:19:50 GMT -5
nichole - i was simply shocked to think that just a few months ago you were a worker i too believed that the workers went forth in every generation - but seeing how people can go forth preaching in our day tells me that people could do it in any other time if all the catholics in the world died out and all records were destroyed you would not make a new catholic church out of the bible story because so much of it is the traditions of men so too for anglicans and mormons and jehovah witnesses but the bible gives every generation simple instructions on how to send out labourers in the field these instructions and this gospel is from the beginning love prue Prue, Sorry that you got the impression that I left the work a few month ago. I was in the work from 92-94. I left the work at that time and only a few months ago I left meetings altogether. Have you read on TTT about John Long and his journal. It is rather long but very revealing about the true start of the 2x2's. When I posted 1st on this thread I had not read this journal but since then I have - Know I would say the workers really don't know how it got started. They are going on what others have said, but this journal is from someone who was there are the beginning. It answers how the 2x2 ministry came up and it also answers how the exclusism started. (exclusism meaning that anyone not "professing" under the workers are not "christians" and are going to hell.) The exclusism was not abort of the 2x2 at it's very beginning. Nichole
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jul 23, 2006 8:20:15 GMT -5
nichole - i was simply shocked to think that just a few months ago you were a worker i too believed that the workers went forth in every generation - but seeing how people can go forth preaching in our day tells me that people could do it in any other time if all the catholics in the world died out and all records were destroyed you would not make a new catholic church out of the bible story because so much of it is the traditions of men so too for anglicans and mormons and jehovah witnesses but the bible gives every generation simple instructions on how to send out labourers in the field these instructions and this gospel is from the beginning love prue Prue, I find it amazing that you believe that the Bible on its own could be used to reconstruct an appropriate christian liturgy. Do you think every spritual document is encapsulated by The Bible? I think you need to get yourself educated about the history of The Bible as you know it. I don't mean the history of it's contents, rather the history of its compilation. You accept the authority of all of Pauls letters, yet deny every subsequent written theological work or development since. And this is just because they have not been accepted into the Anglican canon ( The Bible - AV). Perhaps you might like to read up on the history of the KJV/AV. Here is a good start: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_BibleYou also seem to deny that any doctrinal development occours, yet there is much evidence that the F&W doctrine was subject to significant evolution even within the last century (think living witness doctrine as an example). You also make no attempt to reconcile the origin of much ot the F&W liturgy. Do you think that this detail is written in The Bible? Why is it so similar to mainstream Christianity? Where do you think WI and his co-horts got their inspiration from?
|
|
|
Post by Bert on Jul 23, 2006 8:43:45 GMT -5
jxr - you wrote "Do you think every spritual document is encapsulated by The Bible?"
Yes, I do. Let me put it this way - jxr, would Jesus accept every subsequent written theological work or development of what He fullfilled and Finished?
The scripture was sealed with the book of Revelation. I don't accept any Aquinas, Augustine or Luther interpretation of Christ. I am sure that throughout the ages there would have been many who did not bow the knee to such doctines.
I am wary of history written by the enemies of my faith. I could not comment comprehensively without understanding both sides of the story. There were doctines to this Irvine fellow which I do not recognise as belonging to the truth - but to himself.
I am aware of the history of the bible to some extent. It is quite complex, multi-layered and designed to perform varied, and even unsuspected, tasks. But, we have faith that God would not allow His fundamental message to be distorted.
There are many books not accepted into the cannon. Some of them are cause for great hilarity - ie gospel of Mary, gospel of Judas etc.. I believe that God ensured the true gospel was accepted as being the sole scripture, just as marvelously as the way He brought it to us in the first place.
Bert
|
|
|
Post by jxr on Jul 23, 2006 8:49:00 GMT -5
jxr - you wrote "Do you think every spritual document is encapsulated by The Bible?"Yes, I do. Let me put it this way - jxr, would Jesus accept every subsequent written theological work or development of what He fullfilled and Finished? So are you discounting all of Paul's writings then? The scripture was sealed with the book of Revelation. I don't accept any Aquinas, Augustine or Luther interpretation of Christ. I am sure that throughout the ages there would have been many who did not bow the knee to such doctines. ... Bert How is it that the book of Revelation sealed the scripture? Would you care to reference some verses which would indicate this?
|
|