|
Post by Pragmatic on May 6, 2020 22:51:18 GMT -5
Matthew 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved. Acts 7:38 This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us: Romans 16:16 Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you. 1 Corinthians 1:2 Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's: Ephesians 1:22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. There are so many verses to say that Jesus is the church, in the church the head of the church, so if He being the way and is the church the church must be the way. Ah, see this is where you guys fail again, not having a common understanding of what the church is. Jesus indeed is the church, and the head of the church. As the Heidelberg Catechism puts it so well, in answer to the question, what is the church: I believe that the Son of God, out of the whole human race, from the beginning of the world to its end, gathers, defends, and preserves for himself, by his Spirit and Word, in the unity of the true faith, a church chosen to everlasting life. I love these words. Through all of time, from the whole human race, in the unity of the true faith. It is Jesus' church, not ours. Yup, and this is why is I spelled it without a capital C.
A Church is a man-made organisation, and it is not the way. Similarly, the way, as the friends call it, is not God's only church. Instead the church, as referenced in the Heidelberg Catechism is in fact a body of people across all churches and ways (so called) that God can call his own, and say "I knew you"
As a Christian this is something you can feel, even before you are told. It is why I am happy having fellowship with a good friend who was brought up in, and still is a Catholic. And another friend who attends a different church in the South Island, and so on and so forth.
I have experience with working with a Catholic Priest in Nepal who is bringing "humanities" to the Budhists in the mountains, and talking about a work that is bigger than what Man can do, is something quite special to me.
No doubt if Review was reading this, he would be mocking me, just like he did when I gave an example of my experience in learning biblical matters from Rev Greer who was an Anglican when I was very young, or Rabbi John Nunes-Vaz. Eclectic experiences hurt no-one.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on May 7, 2020 2:01:39 GMT -5
Which is exactly what William Irvine and the first workers did. They weren't happy with the existing churches so they set up their own. Within a few years they declared it to be exclusive, like many other sects have done and so it goes on. They then adopted their own belief system which is quite at odds with the Bible in key areas. Whilst their doctrine was relatively Biblical at the outset, they don't believe in the fall, sin originating in Adam, the Son in His incarnation being completely divine and so on and so forth. Their primary doctrines today after the "ministry without a home" and the "meeting in a home". They still believe in redemption through what Christ did on Calvary but believe that it is only possible for Christ's redemption to be effective if you profess through a worker, are baptised by them and attend their meetings. As a result, it's conditional atonement - based on conditions they apply. The body of believers today (the "church" or ekklesia in the original Greek, of which Christ is the Head) are those whom God has chosen throughout the world. They exist in many different types of Christian organisations - whether they are denominational or non-denominational. They may not even be part of a Christian group. For the workers to say that (a) Christ's death is conditional based on what they decide and (b) that it's not effective outside of their ministry is an insult to God. Where man tries to set the boundaries of God's grace, it doesn't end well. Well, that is your opinion.... Here is a good picture early days of the 2x2 workers.... ~~ Edward Cooney (1867-1960) 2x2 early days worker in (1901) wrote To Impartial Reporter 10/7/1909
1) Edward Cooney wrote, " We (2x2 workers) did NOT start this Jesus Way. It was started and planned by God before we were thought of, and we are earnestly contending for the faith once delivered to the Saints and trying to separate it from the tradition of men. There was in the day, William Irvine, upon whose heart God's Spirit worked to raise him up like the judges of old, to lead back those in Christendom to the TRUTH as it is in Jesus." ( By Patricia Roberts book page 43-45) Edward Cooney wrote, "Undoubtedly God has called us and separated us to be His people in the beginning, and most prominent and most used in this calling out a people, William Irvine who at the time of being sent forth to be a prophet, saw more clearly than any of us that the revelation of the Father to each individual child of His is Christ would build His Church, and that the gates of HELL shall NOT prevail against it." (By Patricia Roberts Page 43-45) ~~ August, 1954: Testimony of an ex-2x2 Ida West from North Ireland
An interested person has asked me to tell my story with regard to my faith and the fellowship I have kept. My parents were John and Sarah West brought up in the Church of Ireland (Anglican). My father, for a time previous to his marriage, moved and worked among the Methodists. Soon after his marriage in 1901, he, Edward Cooney, Tom Betty and others, all of whom used to evangelize together, moved out of the sects to which they belonged, Church of Ireland, Methodist, Presbyterian and so on, into fellowship with William Irvine, a Scottish Presbyterian evangelist in the Faith Mission, who was with others moving out of Faith Mission toward clearer light on New Testament teaching and practices. They took the view that Christendom was confusion of which God was not the author. So they decided to go to Christendom and the world the way Jesus sent his apostles to Israel (Matthew 10) and to the world (Matthew 28). This is what the preachers did. My father, who did not go to preach, opened his heart and home to these preachers who sold their possessions, scattered their money to the poor and went out to preach by faith. Their message was repent, believe the gospel, follow the teaching and example of New Testament founders--Christ and the apostles. This move raised the opposition of clergy and leaders among the denominations, e.g. Church of Ireland, Methodists, Presbyterians, Salvation Army, Plymouth Brethren and others. The young movement held the course to take was 'Come out of Babylon' which is confusion. By this they meant to refuse fellowship with the world, false teachers and systems because they contradicted the teaching and example of Christ and his apostles. Their opponents held that it was better to stay in and clean up inside; but they ignored the fact that principalities and powers need exposure and triumphing over (Col. 2:15). This could only be done by a fuller manifestation of Christ through willing witnesses which this people proved by bearing their cross representing Christ as He in bearing his cross represented or declared the Father. The movement grew and spread rapidly.
|
|
|
Post by nathan on May 7, 2020 2:03:01 GMT -5
George Walker, 2x2 worker (1899) wrote: To the American Selective service in 1942We take this opportunity to state that during the closing years of people in British Isles and in America were exercised in heart and mind, through their study of the Scriptures, in regard to the methods of preaching and worship in the several churches of which they were members. They were deeply concerned about the spiritual things, and became fully convinced that there should be a Return! to the methods and purpose taught and carried out by Christ and His first disciples.This conviction led to frequent earnest conversations and studies on the subject, which in turn led to religious meetings, and in due times a number of these people went forth to devote their lives to the preaching of the gospel according to the teaching and example of Christ as given in the New Testament... i.e. "Two by Two" and without salary or making appeal for financial assistance, putting implicit trust in God and His promise that as they "sought first the kingdom of God" their natural needs of food and raiment's "would be added unto them."As a result of this step, many people expressed their desire to be in fellowship with such preachers and this led to regular gathering together of small assemblies in homes for worship and study of God's word. The reason for meeting in homes was primary because it is Scriptures, the Christians during the first centuries of the Christian were met regularly for worship in the homes, which fact is also borne out and supported by church history.Thus after serious consideration, the leaders were confident that in their efforts to follow the early Christians they should form church gatherings in homes; therefore NO church property or real estate has been acquired by purchased or otherwise, and for this reason incorporation and registration under denominational name has NOT been necessary.... George Walker
|
|
|
Post by mountain on May 7, 2020 2:22:19 GMT -5
mountain, I can see you're still clearly under the salvation by works and following Jesus as the perfect example gospel. We'll have to respectfully disagree about the fundamental nature of the gospel. Thank you for taking the time to respond and explain your viewpoint and position. I wish you well in your spiritual search. Liz, many thanks. However if you have been following my posts in recent times you will have seen that I believe we are saved by: 1) Works 2) Grace 3) Faith 4) The atoning blood of Jesus 5) Mercy of God 6) etc Each of the above contextually saves us. However, we need them all. They have to be taken as a whole. None of them should be viewed as stand alone salvation. They have to be reconciled one with the others. You cannot take one or two, build a case for salvation out of them whilst ignoring the others. We are saved by them all working together, fitly joined together. The gospel is simply not for carving up or being selective with. I really struggle to understand why some people who claim to be Christians condemn the idea of following the perfect example of Jesus. If we follow him in his way, truth and life we qualify for the cleansing of our sins by the shed blood of Jesus, which presents us perfect before God. It's a very simple gospel. Perhaps too simple for some? To believe in Jesus simply means to follow him in his way, truth and life. That is the narrow way and few there be that find it. The broad gate is for those that want Christ but don't want to put their hand on the plough! Just ask Virgs!
|
|
|
Post by mountain on May 7, 2020 2:29:41 GMT -5
The indwelling spirit....... that people can possess regardless of colour, creed or culture, not exclusive to ‘one’ group of people. Exclusive to one group in regards to the indwelling spirit, they are one regardless of colour, creed or culture. Jesus spoke of bringing his sheep into 'one' fold! He spoke of many other folds that did not belong to him. (Virgs)
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 7, 2020 2:41:03 GMT -5
The result of ideas out of Men's minds 121 years ago. maybe not even relevant at the time, certainly no relevance now. That was purely based on their assessment and they saw it for a reason to start a new 2x2 Church. Happens all the time , some smart arse thinks there is a better way of doing things, so they start a different brand of the same thing. Just adds to the confusion. Don't forget they also threw in a few extra rules as well. That was simply to have power and control over people. Are you sure? Long after he parted ways with the ministry and fellowship, Alfred Magowan spoke fondly of the early days and had no regrets for his part in it. **************************************************************************************************************************** My own experience goes back to 1902, and my most real recollection of fellowship was that gathering in Portadown 28 or 29 years ago. [Portadown Co. Armagh, Ireland Convention] There were no regulations and no asserting of authority. The Lord had mercifully set us free in spirit to worship and serve him under the guidance of the Holy Spirit through a good conscience; and there was neither machinery nor any of those things that religious people think necessary and which are necessary in sects under human control. There was nothing in the vision we had of 'the way in Jesus' that would have led us towards another kind of sectarianism, nor did we ever anticipate a time when we would become a strong people in an evil world. We had only one commission and that was to make disciples as we had been made; and we had only one authority, viz., if the Lord was with us we would so live and speak that He would use us in getting people saved. And as they listened to us they would recognize the voice of Him because of the anointing. That was the simple outline in the days of our beginning.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2020 4:35:50 GMT -5
That utopian situation never lasted. A few smarter Workers came along, they could see it was not a practical way to live. So that early idea got thrown out along with the inventors of it. So how in true honesty could they say "There were no regulations and no asserting of authority." The 2x2 Church became just another Christian Church with the same structure, just pretending to be different. They just forgot to change the sales pitch.
|
|
|
Post by speak on May 7, 2020 4:53:22 GMT -5
Exclusive to one group in regards to the indwelling spirit, they are one regardless of colour, creed or culture. Jesus spoke of bringing his sheep into 'one' fold! He spoke of many other folds that did not belong to him. (Virgs) This so true, John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
|
|
|
Post by speak on May 7, 2020 5:01:44 GMT -5
That utopian situation never lasted. A few smarter Workers came along, they could see it was not a practical way to live. So that early idea got thrown out along with the inventors of it. So how in true honesty could they say "There were no regulations and no asserting of authority." The 2x2 Church became just another Christian Church with the same structure, just pretending to be different. They just forgot to change the sales pitch. There is a huge amount of difference even with the ministry, it is vastly different from the run of the mill church. To have regulation one would have to have a written book of regulations and laws, there is no such thing. Romans 13:1-7 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: ... 2 Corinthians 10:8 For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2020 5:03:16 GMT -5
That is happening in the real World. Many have organised combined Church services all denominations welcome. Lets hope this trend continues, there should be only one Christian Church.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2020 5:15:15 GMT -5
That utopian situation never lasted. A few smarter Workers came along, they could see it was not a practical way to live. So that early idea got thrown out along with the inventors of it. So how in true honesty could they say "There were no regulations and no asserting of authority." The 2x2 Church became just another Christian Church with the same structure, just pretending to be different. They just forgot to change the sales pitch. There is a huge amount of difference even with the ministry, it is vastly different from the run of the mill church. To have regulation one would have to have a written book of regulations and laws, there is no such thing. Romans 13:1-7 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: ... 2 Corinthians 10:8 For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed: Bit of a laugh, they just forgot to write the book. The Workers would have thrown away any book, they were well briefed and knew how to enforce the rules. Mind you there was a fair amount of inconsistency, depending on your standing in the Church. They reserved the right to judge your worthiness as a 2x2, a decision made by any individual Worker, no consultation. Sort of the way dictatorships operate.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on May 7, 2020 5:53:47 GMT -5
mountain , I can see you're still clearly under the salvation by works and following Jesus as the perfect example gospel. We'll have to respectfully disagree about the fundamental nature of the gospel. Thank you for taking the time to respond and explain your viewpoint and position. I wish you well in your spiritual search. Liz, many thanks. However if you have been following my posts in recent times you will have seen that I believe we are saved by: 1) Works 2) Grace 3) Faith 4) The atoning blood of Jesus 5) Mercy of God 6) etc Each of the above contextually saves us. However, we need them all. They have to be taken as a whole. None of them should be viewed as stand alone salvation. They have to be reconciled one with the others. You cannot take one or two, build a case for salvation out of them whilst ignoring the others. We are saved by them all working together, fitly joined together. The gospel is simply not for carving up or being selective with. I really struggle to understand why some people who claim to be Christians condemn the idea of following the perfect example of Jesus. If we follow him in his way, truth and life we qualify for the cleansing of our sins by the shed blood of Jesus, which presents us perfect before God. It's a very simple gospel. Perhaps too simple for some? To believe in Jesus simply means to follow him in his way, truth and life. That is the narrow way and few there be that find it. The broad gate is for those that want Christ but don't want to put their hand on the plough! Just ask Virgs! I have nothing against following Jesus' example, just not in the way endorsed by the workers who try to imitate methods rather than having understanding from the heart. Following Jesus is about learning to have the fruit of the spirit, rather than boasting about being poor and homeless. (By the way, what is there to indicate Jesus was poor and homeless? He worked as a carpenter many years before his three years of ministry, and was known to live in Capernaum). The way I would see it - works can never qualify us for salvation. However, our salvation will be proved true by our works. We follow Christ and seek to imitate him BECAUSE he has saved us - a life of obedience flows out of our thankfulness to him. But it doesn't make us any more worthy. Do you know how many times the word "gift" appears in the Bible in regards to salvation? A gift cannot be earned, cannot be paid for after it is given. To do so is highly offensive to the giver. Please do not think I despise works. I don't. I just see them as an outworking of faith rather than a qualifier. The only qualification for salvation is true repentance and true belief. Obedience to God will naturally follow on from that.
The broad gate is all those who think they can please their gods with their efforts and sacrifices. This is the best known and broadest way of religion the world over.
(Who is Virgs?!)
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on May 7, 2020 6:00:06 GMT -5
Jesus spoke of bringing his sheep into 'one' fold! He spoke of many other folds that did not belong to him. (Virgs) This so true, John 10:16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. The chapter starts with: Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber.One fold is the one true faith in him. Jesus is the only shepherd. Singular. Those who try to come in some other way are thieves and robbers. Here he specifically speaks to the Pharisees - who believed they could gain heaven by their good works and obedience to the law.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on May 7, 2020 6:25:57 GMT -5
The result of ideas out of Men's minds 121 years ago. maybe not even relevant at the time, certainly no relevance now. That was purely based on their assessment and they saw it for a reason to start a new 2x2 Church. Happens all the time , some smart arse thinks there is a better way of doing things, so they start a different brand of the same thing. Just adds to the confusion. Don't forget they also threw in a few extra rules as well. That was simply to have power and control over people. Are you sure? Long after he parted ways with the ministry and fellowship, Alfred Magowan spoke fondly of the early days and had no regrets for his part in it. **************************************************************************************************************************** My own experience goes back to 1902, and my most real recollection of fellowship was that gathering in Portadown 28 or 29 years ago. [Portadown Co. Armagh, Ireland Convention] There were no regulations and no asserting of authority. The Lord had mercifully set us free in spirit to worship and serve him under the guidance of the Holy Spirit through a good conscience; and there was neither machinery nor any of those things that religious people think necessary and which are necessary in sects under human control. There was nothing in the vision we had of 'the way in Jesus' that would have led us towards another kind of sectarianism, nor did we ever anticipate a time when we would become a strong people in an evil world. We had only one commission and that was to make disciples as we had been made; and we had only one authority, viz., if the Lord was with us we would so live and speak that He would use us in getting people saved. And as they listened to us they would recognize the voice of Him because of the anointing. That was the simple outline in the days of our beginning. Thanks Fixit, I think there was certainly good intent and true zeal on the part of many in those early days. Things took a bad turn somewhere along the line. Alfred did appear to have good memories of those early days, but not of the days after he was frozen out of fellowship - - We have not known persecution in its time-glorified forms; and what we have suffered would hardly be worth mentioning in the light of the greater sufferings of others; but for myself I must confess that there were times when I could have borne very little more. What with slurs and insults, hints and insinuations, misunderstandings and prejudices, dark looks and averted faces where formerly there had been smiles and friendly greetings; and what I considered my good hatefully evil spoken of... (Alfred Magowan)I know what he means. I tried to ask honest questions in my teens about the history and was met with coldness and downright lies. Then slurs. What went so wrong from those early days of passion from the gospel? Deceit set in, and there has never been a proper acknowledgement of that. Workers lied to me, and then told others I spoke lies when I spoke truth. (No, I'm not bitter, just still amazed they can't face up to this reality, and make me the bad guy). I know there are workers who do have integrity, and who have refused to continue in this charade. I know that many of them have suffered great hurt of the sort expressed by Alfred. One day I would really love to have one or two of those workers come to my door and say "We apologise. We know we lied to you and about you." I'd say "I forgive you, come in, I'll put the kettle on."
|
|
|
Post by mountain on May 7, 2020 6:58:01 GMT -5
Liz, many thanks. However if you have been following my posts in recent times you will have seen that I believe we are saved by: 1) Works 2) Grace 3) Faith 4) The atoning blood of Jesus 5) Mercy of God 6) etc Each of the above contextually saves us. However, we need them all. They have to be taken as a whole. None of them should be viewed as stand alone salvation. They have to be reconciled one with the others. You cannot take one or two, build a case for salvation out of them whilst ignoring the others. We are saved by them all working together, fitly joined together. The gospel is simply not for carving up or being selective with. I really struggle to understand why some people who claim to be Christians condemn the idea of following the perfect example of Jesus. If we follow him in his way, truth and life we qualify for the cleansing of our sins by the shed blood of Jesus, which presents us perfect before God. It's a very simple gospel. Perhaps too simple for some? To believe in Jesus simply means to follow him in his way, truth and life. That is the narrow way and few there be that find it. The broad gate is for those that want Christ but don't want to put their hand on the plough! Just ask Virgs! I have nothing against following Jesus' example, just not in the way endorsed by the workers who try to imitate methods rather than having understanding from the heart. Following Jesus is about learning to have the fruit of the spirit, rather than boasting about being poor and homeless. (By the way, what is there to indicate Jesus was poor and homeless? He worked as a carpenter many years before his three years of ministry, and was known to live in Capernaum). This is assumed by many, yet there is no scripture to substantiate it. At 12 years of age he told his mother that he must be about his Father's business, i.e. God's business. He was debating with the scribes and rulers about the things of God. At 12 years of age a Jewish boy was deemed to have reached manhood and went into his father's trade. If anything Jesus entered the trade of his Heavenly Father not the trade of his natural step father. The way I would see it - works can never qualify us for salvation. However, our salvation will be proved true by our works. We follow Christ and seek to imitate him BECAUSE he has saved us - a life of obedience flows out of our thankfulness to him. But it doesn't make us any more worthy. The way I see it is that grace is an essential part of salvation. However it must be seen alongside and reconciled with the other essentials of salvation eg works, faith, mercy, blood atonement, etc. Grace is that which God gives us which enables us to do his will. We cannot do God's will but that he first gives us the grace to do it. This is why grace is so important and what grace is one of the essential elements of salvation. A life of obedience certainly makes us more worthy. One example is Matthew 10.37 'He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.' Clearly obeying the commands of Jesus makes us more worthy of him.
Do you know how many times the word "gift" appears in the Bible in regards to salvation? A gift cannot be earned, cannot be paid for after it is given. To do so is highly offensive to the giver. That's your human understanding of a gift in order to justify an understanding of scripture. I have often given and received gifts as a token of gratitude for things done for others. No offence given or taken. Gifts are often given as tokens of gratitude for work done, etc.
Please do not think I despise works. I don't. I just see them as an outworking of faith rather than a qualifier. The only qualification for salvation is true repentance and true belief. Obedience to God will naturally follow on from that.
I go along with this, but belief is far more than an acknowledgement. It is following in the footsteps of Jesus in his way, truth and life, which leads to the Father. This is true belief, acting on commands or words spoken. Obedience is true belief.
The broad gate is all those who think they can please their gods with their efforts and sacrifices. This is the best known and broadest way of religion the world over.
The broad gate is all those whose belief is not supported by obedience to the word of God, in following Jesus in his way, truth and life. Jesus explained this at the time he said 'I am the way, the truth and the life, etc.'
(Who is Virgs?!) Virgs is a fine fellow. A font of wisdom and knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by mountain on May 7, 2020 7:01:28 GMT -5
Are you sure? Long after he parted ways with the ministry and fellowship, Alfred Magowan spoke fondly of the early days and had no regrets for his part in it. **************************************************************************************************************************** My own experience goes back to 1902, and my most real recollection of fellowship was that gathering in Portadown 28 or 29 years ago. [Portadown Co. Armagh, Ireland Convention] There were no regulations and no asserting of authority. The Lord had mercifully set us free in spirit to worship and serve him under the guidance of the Holy Spirit through a good conscience; and there was neither machinery nor any of those things that religious people think necessary and which are necessary in sects under human control. There was nothing in the vision we had of 'the way in Jesus' that would have led us towards another kind of sectarianism, nor did we ever anticipate a time when we would become a strong people in an evil world. We had only one commission and that was to make disciples as we had been made; and we had only one authority, viz., if the Lord was with us we would so live and speak that He would use us in getting people saved. And as they listened to us they would recognize the voice of Him because of the anointing. That was the simple outline in the days of our beginning. Thanks Fixit, I think there was certainly good intent and true zeal on the part of many in those early days. Things took a bad turn somewhere along the line. Alfred did appear to have good memories of those early days, but not of the days after he was frozen out of fellowship - - We have not known persecution in its time-glorified forms; and what we have suffered would hardly be worth mentioning in the light of the greater sufferings of others; but for myself I must confess that there were times when I could have borne very little more. What with slurs and insults, hints and insinuations, misunderstandings and prejudices, dark looks and averted faces where formerly there had been smiles and friendly greetings; and what I considered my good hatefully evil spoken of... (Alfred Magowan)I know what he means. I tried to ask honest questions in my teens about the history and was met with coldness and downright lies. Then slurs. What went so wrong from those early days of passion from the gospel? Deceit set in, and there has never been a proper acknowledgement of that. Workers lied to me, and then told others I spoke lies when I spoke truth. (No, I'm not bitter, just still amazed they can't face up to this reality, and make me the bad guy). I know there are workers who do have integrity, and who have refused to continue in this charade. I know that many of them have suffered great hurt of the sort expressed by Alfred. One day I would really love to have one or two of those workers come to my door and say "We apologise. We know we lied to you and about you."
I'd say "I forgive you, come in, I'll put the kettle on." I can identify with this and great to read it.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 7, 2020 15:30:32 GMT -5
I can identify with this and great to read it. Thank you, my fine Scotsman and thank you to Elizabeth. The "I forgive you, come in, I'll put the kettle on" attitude would be a good start towards healing the wounds. Tribalism is a big problem. A "them and us" mindset. It served humanity well through the ages when tribal loyalty was essential for survival. I think the independent stand-alone genes were long ago lost to the saber-toothed tiger and the marauding neighboring tribes and the harshness of nature. It's a problem in organisations of all kinds, causing them to turns inwards on themselves and fail.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 7, 2020 17:40:38 GMT -5
Ah, see this is where you guys fail again, not having a common understanding of what the church is. Jesus indeed is the church, and the head of the church. As the Heidelberg Catechism puts it so well, in answer to the question, what is the church: I believe that the Son of God, out of the whole human race, from the beginning of the world to its end, gathers, defends, and preserves for himself, by his Spirit and Word, in the unity of the true faith, a church chosen to everlasting life. I love these words. Through all of time, from the whole human race, in the unity of the true faith. It is Jesus' church, not ours. Yup, and this is why is I spelled it without a capital C.
A Church is a man-made organisation, and it is not the way. Similarly, the way, as the friends call it, is not God's only church. Instead the church, as referenced in the Heidelberg Catechism is in fact a body of people across all churches and ways (so called) that God can call his own, and say "I knew you"
As a Christian this is something you can feel, even before you are told. It is why I am happy having fellowship with a good friend who was brought up in, and still is a Catholic. And another friend who attends a different church in the South Island, and so on and so forth.
I have experience with working with a Catholic Priest in Nepal who is bringing "humanities" to the Budhists in the mountains, and talking about a work that is bigger than what Man can do, is something quite special to me.
No doubt if Review was reading this, he would be mocking me, just like he did when I gave an example of my experience in learning biblical matters from Rev Greer who was an Anglican when I was very young, or Rabbi John Nunes-Vaz. Eclectic experiences hurt no-one.
Enjoyed reading your experiences. Sometimes I think it calls for a little humbleness when communicating with Christians not in the 2x2 church. Opposed to the ‘We are the right way and they are not’ cluttering ones thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 7, 2020 18:03:44 GMT -5
Yup, and this is why is I spelled it without a capital C.
A Church is a man-made organisation, and it is not the way. Similarly, the way, as the friends call it, is not God's only church. Instead the church, as referenced in the Heidelberg Catechism is in fact a body of people across all churches and ways (so called) that God can call his own, and say "I knew you" As a Christian this is something you can feel, even before you are told. It is why I am happy having fellowship with a good friend who was brought up in, and still is a Catholic. And another friend who attends a different church in the South Island, and so on and so forth. I have experience with working with a Catholic Priest in Nepal who is bringing "humanities" to the Budhists in the mountains, and talking about a work that is bigger than what Man can do, is something quite special to me.
No doubt if Review was reading this, he would be mocking me, just like he did when I gave an example of my experience in learning biblical matters from Rev Greer who was an Anglican when I was very young, or Rabbi John Nunes-Vaz. Eclectic experiences hurt no-one.
Enjoyed reading your experiences. Sometimes I think it calls for a little humbleness when communicating with Christians not in the 2x2 church. Opposed to the ‘We are the right way and they are not’ cluttering ones thoughts. True, more humility would be helpful. Are any of the following attitudes better? There is no God Christians believe _________ _______ are fundamentals of Christianity The Athanasian creed would have to be exhibit A for religious arrogance: Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence...
|
|
|
Post by elizabethcoleman on May 7, 2020 18:50:12 GMT -5
Do you know how many times the word "gift" appears in the Bible in regards to salvation? A gift cannot be earned, cannot be paid for after it is given. To do so is highly offensive to the giver. That's your human understanding of a gift in order to justify an understanding of scripture. I have often given and received gifts as a token of gratitude for things done for others. No offence given or taken. Gifts are often given as tokens of gratitude for work done, etc.
The offence I refer to would occur if you gave someone a gift and they then insisted on paying for that gift. Imagine that scenario with a birthday gift. Wouldn't you absolutely refuse to accept payment for it? My understanding of "gift" is based on true definition of the word, not my own private interpretation. That is the exact purpose of words - having distinct meaning. The Greek often used for this word in the NT it is dōreá (a feminine noun, derived from dídōmi) – a gift, freely given and hence not acquired by merit or "entitlement." Also expresses a brand of giving that highlights the beneficent desire of the giver.Your interpretation of a gift as a token of gratitude for work done is not valid in the Biblical references - that is a clear example of your own interpretation of the word "gift". (Romans 4) Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. .
Is trusting in God a "work?" Certainly it is the only "work" required - John 6:28-29 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."
(Romans 3:21-24) But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely [Greek: freely, for naught, gratis, gratuitously] by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
True belief/faith is what saves. True belief leads to true works and obedience, but deeds can never lead to true faith. This is where James 2:18 comes into its own:
But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.
Perhaps we are saying the same thing, Mountain, but it is a question of the cart and the horse, and not putting the cart before the horse.
I would say that the horse has to be faith, carrying along the cart filled with works of obedience. You can even have a horse without a cart (1 Cor 3:13-15), but not a cart without a horse. And never a cart in front of a horse.
|
|
|
Post by speak on May 7, 2020 21:48:12 GMT -5
There is a huge amount of difference even with the ministry, it is vastly different from the run of the mill church. To have regulation one would have to have a written book of regulations and laws, there is no such thing. Romans 13:1-7 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: ... 2 Corinthians 10:8 For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority, which the Lord hath given us for edification, and not for your destruction, I should not be ashamed: Bit of a laugh, they just forgot to write the book. The Workers would have thrown away any book, they were well briefed and knew how to enforce the rules. Mind you there was a fair amount of inconsistency, depending on your standing in the Church. They reserved the right to judge your worthiness as a 2x2, a decision made by any individual Worker, no consultation. Sort of the way dictatorships operate. Well for me that is not true, I have not experienced any of that in my 40+ years in the fellowship. I think it is all a conspiracy theory of those who were dissatisfied because things weren't like they wanted them to be. So I suppose you could class God as a dictator, do His will and get the reward of such, don't do His will and you'er out on your ear.
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on May 7, 2020 23:31:54 GMT -5
Enjoyed reading your experiences. Sometimes I think it calls for a little humbleness when communicating with Christians not in the 2x2 church. Opposed to the ‘We are the right way and they are not’ cluttering ones thoughts. True, more humility would be helpful. Are any of the following attitudes better? There is no God Christians believe _________ _______ are fundamentals of Christianity The Athanasian creed would have to be exhibit A for religious arrogance: Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence... Yes - a friend of mine was best man at a Catholic wedding....he refused to repeat it. Religious arrogance exhibit A alright
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 8, 2020 0:26:57 GMT -5
Enjoyed reading your experiences. Sometimes I think it calls for a little humbleness when communicating with Christians not in the 2x2 church. Opposed to the ‘We are the right way and they are not’ cluttering ones thoughts. True, more humility would be helpful. Are any of the following attitudes better? There is no God Christians believe _________ _______ are fundamentals of Christianity The Athanasian creed would have to be exhibit A for religious arrogance: Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith unless every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: that we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Essence... Yes, I’ll pass, on the Athanasian creed ! Sounds as if you need a degree in something to understand it let alone live it! But I guess there are those that think it is a wonderful spirituality. Each to their own!
|
|
|
Post by mountain on May 8, 2020 5:01:35 GMT -5
The offence I refer to would occur if you gave someone a gift and they then insisted on paying for that gift. Imagine that scenario with a birthday gift. Wouldn't you absolutely refuse to accept payment for it? My understanding of "gift" is based on true definition of the word, not my own private interpretation. That is the exact purpose of words - having distinct meaning. The Greek often used for this word in the NT it is dōreá (a feminine noun, derived from dídōmi) – a gift, freely given and hence not acquired by merit or "entitlement." Also expresses a brand of giving that highlights the beneficent desire of the giver.Your interpretation of a gift as a token of gratitude for work done is not valid in the Biblical references - that is a clear example of your own interpretation of the word "gift". (Romans 4) Now to the one who works, wages are not credited as a gift but as an obligation. However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. .
Is trusting in God a "work?" Certainly it is the only "work" required - John 6:28-29 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."
Clearly we differ on what it means to truly BELIEVE in the one whom God has sent. My understanding is that this is nothing short of following Jesus in his way, truth and life which leads to the Father. Is this understanding wrong? If so, please explain (fully).
(Romans 3:21-24) But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and all are justified freely [Greek: freely, for naught, gratis, gratuitously] by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
True faith is as in my explanation for 'believing.' John tells us that Jesus was full of grace and truth, yet there is no record of Jesus ever having mentioned the word (Protestants take note). However, Jesus was full of power which came from above which enabled him to do God's will. This is how we should understand grace. We are saved by God's keeping power (contextually along with other things I've mentioned elsewhere).
True belief/faith is what saves. True belief leads to true works and obedience, but deeds can never lead to true faith. This is where James 2:18 comes into its own:
But someone will say, "You have faith; I have deeds." Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.
Belief and faith are actions not acknowledgements. We begin showing the work of God in our lives by responding to the gospel message. This is belief and faith in action. Doing what we are commanded to do. Deeds are part of true faith and belief. Don't separate them. Everything is part of the whole. Reconcile things one with another rather than separating them. James shows us this with faith and works. You cannot have a true or living faith without works. We need God's grace to enable us to do his works. This is all belief and faith in action.
Perhaps we are saying the same thing, Mountain, but it is a question of the cart and the horse, and not putting the cart before the horse.
The cart and the horse are two separate things which do not work until they are brought together. That's how to see this analogy. Don't separate them because it does not work. Reconcile matters by viewing them together. I'm sure on many things we have the same understanding.
I would say that the horse has to be faith, carrying along the cart filled with works of obedience. You can even have a horse without a cart (1 Cor 3:13-15), but not a cart without a horse. And never a cart in front of a horse. Always remember what Virgs has told us about denominations. Denominations are satan's way of doing to true Chistianity what God did to mankind at the Tower of Babel. The true Church is God's temple. The Tower of Babel was satan's temple. Each had the purpose of uniting followers angainst the other. God saw that man was of one mind, one nationhood and one language, uniting against him, so he divided man into nations with different languages and scattered them abroad. Satan saw God's church as one nation, one spirit (Heaven's language) united against him so he has been entering into it, dividing it and scattering it abroad. This is the true purpose behind denominationalism. We defend it at our peril.
|
|