ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 14, 2007 12:01:51 GMT -5
Who are the 2x2's, that set the example, that WI followed? I read this by "BERT" in another thread. That "WI did not start the 2x2's but he only followed their example"? I think I read something about 12 disciples? I don't recall reading 2x2 disciples. And MANY disciples, before the 12, left because something was said about "the Body and Blood" of Christ. Many followed Jesus until he spoke about the "Eating his flesh and drinking his blood". Some probably left when he gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom. Maybe they left when Christ gave authority for sins to be forgiven here on earth. Maybe some left because Jesus reached out to women when the world was totally ruled by men. You see...............Jesus didn't just feed 5,000. He probably feed more like 20,000. Because women and children were not "recorded" those days. Maybe some left because, while Jesus did say that wives should be submissive to their husbands, HE ALSO SAID that the husbands should LAY DOWN THEIR LIVES for the wives as Jesus DIED for the Church. They just couldn't wrap their brains around His teachings or muster the Faith it took to believe them. So they left. They might have just started their OWN religion, that fit into their own "HUMAN" beliefs and fears. So that they could feel good about continuing to act a certain way and call it CHURCH! Maybe they liked "throwing stones" BUT Jesus said, "Let those without sin cast the first stone". Maybe they left Jesus RIGHT THEN. Hum...............Christ calls us to CHANGE from the inside. NOT LEAVE AND GRAB SCRIPTURE AND A PARTNER AND GO DO OUR OWN THING. NOT change our OUTWARD APPEARENCES so that we can attend. Why do you suppose we have SO MANY denominations in the world today....................someone got mad, left the Church, and started their own. Just like WI and GW. I'm not "knocking" ANY religious organizations or belief systems. JUST BE HONEST AND REAL ABOUT WHERE YOU CAME FROM, WHAT YOUR HISTORY IS( good and bad ) , AND WHY YOUR RELIGION STARTED, AND WHO STARTED IT. And if you are OK with your history, then go to your Church. If you don't know your history, there has been MORE THAN ENOUGH History written for ALL OF US to figure out where the Religion we Profess STARTED AND CAME FROM! I challenge you to go figure it out. Start thinking for YOURSELF!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2007 12:11:51 GMT -5
quote - "Who are the 2x2's, that set the example, that WI followed? I read this by "BERT" in another thread. That "WI did not start the 2x2's but he only followed their example"? Yes, that's true. Irvine did not "start" preachers going out in pairs. That was the pattern of Jesus' ministry. For Irvine to "start" something it would have to be original.quote - "I think I read something about 12 disciples? I don't recall reading 2x2 disciples. My understanding is that those people went out in pairs. Paul went out with Silas, then Barnabas and then Timothy if I recall. Paul gives us the best example of an itinerate, 2x2 preacher in the bible.quote - "And MANY disciples, before the 12, left because something was said about "the Body and Blood" of Christ. Many followed Jesus until he spoke about the "Eating his flesh and drinking his blood". You sometimes think those men and women had advantages in being with Jesus that we would never have - but Jesus put stumbling blocks before them.quote - "Some probably left when he gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom. Maybe they left when Christ gave authority for sins to be forgiven here on earth. Maybe some left because Jesus reached out to women when the world was totally ruled by men. That latter remark is rather fashionable and ideological.quote - "You see...............Jesus didn't just feed 5,000. He probably feed more like 20,000. Because women and children were not "recorded" those days. Maybe some left because, while Jesus did say that wives should be submissive to their husbands, HE ALSO SAID that the husbands should LAY DOWN THEIR LIVES for the wives as Jesus DIED for the Church. All these things could be valid. Many left because Jesus said what he brought was from the beginning, when the fact finders and historians pointed out to the people this was all a big lie.They just couldn't wrap their brains around His teachings or muster the Faith it took to believe them. So they left. They might have just started their OWN religion, that fit into their own "HUMAN" beliefs and fears. So that they could feel good about continuing to act a certain way and call it CHURCH! Maybe they liked "throwing stones" BUT Jesus said, "Let those without sin cast the first stone". Maybe they left Jesus RIGHT THEN. Hum...............Christ calls us to CHANGE from the inside. NOT LEAVE AND GRAB SCRIPTURE AND A PARTNER AND GO DO OUR OWN THING. NOT change our OUTWARD APPEARENCES so that we can attend. Why do you suppose we have SO MANY denominations in the world today....................someone got mad, left the Church, and started their own. Just like WI and GW. I'm not "knocking" ANY religious organizations or belief systems. JUST BE HONEST AND REAL ABOUT WHERE YOU CAME FROM, WHAT YOUR HISTORY IS( good and bad ) , AND WHY YOUR RELIGION STARTED, AND WHO STARTED IT. And if you are OK with your history, then go to your Church. If you don't know your history, there has been MORE THAN ENOUGH History written for ALL OF US to figure out where the Religion we Profess STARTED AND CAME FROM! I challenge you to go figure it out. Start thinking for YOURSELF! Perhaps YOU need to think for yourself. We have done websites to cover these points home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/ home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/TheFirstChurch.htm
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 14, 2007 12:36:17 GMT -5
Thanks for the website reminders. I've read them before. I like Paul too. He is a "Saint" in my Religious History. But on most points we will just have to agree to disagree and I'm cool with that. I'm mainly on the board to reach out to "sexually/emotionally/spiritually/physically abused people at the hands of leaders in Churches. ALL Churches. It's in YOURS as is in MINE. We do have that in common and it needs to be taken a look at. Have a Blessed Sunday! Enjoyed the banter!
|
|
|
Post by in other words on Oct 14, 2007 13:09:53 GMT -5
What bert is desperately wanting you to believe is that because the 2x2 workers attempt to copy the original apostles they therefore are the one true church and all other churches are false.
However, bertie boy isn't man enough to come out and just say it that way. He has to rely on vague rhetoric and hope that you "get the revelation."
Good to see so many are able to see through his smoke and mirrors.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2007 13:53:51 GMT -5
Even if the Workers matched the early NT Disciples/Preachers in every aspect of their format (if there ever was a permanently established one ?), mirrored every word they spoke, Jesus made it very clear that these are not the things by which you determine a true preacher.
Jesus warned about wolves in sheep's clothing. They can go about the same as they claim 1st century preachers did and they can preach exactly the same things, but these things can be used to deceive, for like sheep's clothing they could well be a mere "form" or a disguise !" They might not even realise it themselves ?
The real test is by their fruits ! By their fruits ye shall know them, that's what Jesus said. Why don't we listen to this ? We can all get hung up and side-tracked by how they go about, or went about preaching, and what they preach, but all that means absolutely nothing, zilch, "IF" the fruits are not there to see.
The fruit of the spirit is LOVE, followed by such things as long-suffering, patience and so on. This takes us right back to the two main commandments of Jesus, to Love God, and to love our neighbour as ourselves. Our neighbour could well be the man in the street, just as in the example of the Samaritan.
We can only truly discern who is a true preacher by their love for their neighbour. Jesus told us that this is how we show our love for God, i.e. by loving our neighbour.
We must ask ourselves, "Do the Workers, individually or collectively show love for their neighbours," and do they preach this and encourage the friends to do so ? This should be the primary question we ask of any preacher, not just the workers. This is something that should be well burned upon the hearts of the workers.
Showing love to our neighbour is the most crucial aspect of Christianity, which is way above scriptural debate over doctrine, form of worship or preaching the gospel.
Even if we follow the right "form," if there is one, yet we are not loving our neighbour (in the example given by Jesus) then our worship is in vain. Quite simply, we do not love God. End of story. Ah but, we go out two and two, eh, well, we meet in homes, em our only doctrine is ...the Bible.
Let us not debate Preacher FORM, worship FORMAT, nor DOCTRINE, until we get the two main commandments firmly established FIRST and FOREMOST into our service, for these are the two crucial elements which prove our service to God. Jesus said all the law and the prophets (no NT at the time but certainly falls within the same category) hang on these two things.
If there is any validity at all in PREACHER FORM, WORSHIP FORMAT, or PRECISE DOCTRINE, they are at best mere draping upon the two main commandments of Loving God and Loving our neighbour as ourselves.
Over the centuries, Form, Format and Doctrine have been responsible for supposed Christians hating and fighting each other. Even in this day and age it can cause quiet, benign fellowship groups to detest their brothers and sisters in Christ, due to them making these things more important than embracing them in Christian love.
We must look for the real Christ (love) in people, not something that fits in with our own vision of righteousness.
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 14, 2007 14:37:01 GMT -5
YAHOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! Someone makes sense to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL LOL Thanks! I agree with the fruits! Fruits of the Spirit! I've found, in my experiences, that people struggle with the greatest commandment............."Love God with your whole heart and love your neighbor as yourself" because SOOOOOOOOOOO MANY people can't love themselves. ( to much shame and anger ) Got to have it within, to give it away to others! Let's keep reaching out!!!!!!!!! Peace!
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Oct 14, 2007 15:01:57 GMT -5
Ram and ecarg Right on. I go to an active and alive church and one our main concerns in manifesting the Love of God .How do we demonstrate it. These have been some of the questions we have tried to answer for our direction. When someone asks for help do you turn them away? When someone is seeking fellowship do you ask what qualifies them? When someone feels moved to start a mission do you have them pass that through a committee for approval? When someone wants to partake in communion do you welcome them? When another congregation of believers ask to worship with you do refuse them? Is the church encouraging each other to enter into a closer relationship with Jesus? Does the church still show loving care for those unable to attend
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2007 15:18:32 GMT -5
I think a fair reading of the ministry of Christ will reveal that his disciples went mostly 12X12, not 2x2. There was a mission to send out advance parties to tell people he was coming with the good news, but mostly the 12 were together, learning from Him.
NT evangelists went out in various configurations in number, 2x2 was not a distinctive pattern nor a rule to determine the validity of their message. People got help from the message of the evangelists, and that's what determines the validity of a mission.
For our workers today, the real question is this: are people getting eternal help as a result of their mission? That is what will indicate the rightness of workers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2007 16:57:29 GMT -5
Clearday, re-
"For our workers today, the real question is this: are people getting eternal help as a result of their mission? That is what will indicate the rightness of workers."
This is a good point which most here will understand. However, I doubt very much if most workers and friends would even consider asking themselves this. They blame the "falling away," "no one is interested in the Truth nowadays," and "if there is a NEEDY SOUL they will be drawn to the Workers" and so on.
The onus is always on the "lost," not on those who are commanded to go and seek.
|
|
|
Post by exworkbuteyesoen on Oct 14, 2007 19:38:21 GMT -5
quote - "Who are the 2x2's, that set the example, that WI followed? I read this by "BERT" in another thread. That "WI did not start the 2x2's but he only followed their example"? Yes, that's true. Irvine did not "start" preachers going out in pairs. That was the pattern of Jesus' ministry. For Irvine to "start" something it would have to be original.quote - "I think I read something about 12 disciples? I don't recall reading 2x2 disciples. My understanding is that those people went out in pairs. Paul went out with Silas, then Barnabas and then Timothy if I recall. Paul gives us the best example of an itinerate, 2x2 preacher in the bible.quote - "And MANY disciples, before the 12, left because something was said about "the Body and Blood" of Christ. Many followed Jesus until he spoke about the "Eating his flesh and drinking his blood". You sometimes think those men and women had advantages in being with Jesus that we would never have - but Jesus put stumbling blocks before them.quote - "Some probably left when he gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom. Maybe they left when Christ gave authority for sins to be forgiven here on earth. Maybe some left because Jesus reached out to women when the world was totally ruled by men. That latter remark is rather fashionable and ideological.quote - "You see...............Jesus didn't just feed 5,000. He probably feed more like 20,000. Because women and children were not "recorded" those days. Maybe some left because, while Jesus did say that wives should be submissive to their husbands, HE ALSO SAID that the husbands should LAY DOWN THEIR LIVES for the wives as Jesus DIED for the Church. All these things could be valid. Many left because Jesus said what he brought was from the beginning, when the fact finders and historians pointed out to the people this was all a big lie.They just couldn't wrap their brains around His teachings or muster the Faith it took to believe them. So they left. They might have just started their OWN religion, that fit into their own "HUMAN" beliefs and fears. So that they could feel good about continuing to act a certain way and call it CHURCH! Maybe they liked "throwing stones" BUT Jesus said, "Let those without sin cast the first stone". Maybe they left Jesus RIGHT THEN. Hum...............Christ calls us to CHANGE from the inside. NOT LEAVE AND GRAB SCRIPTURE AND A PARTNER AND GO DO OUR OWN THING. NOT change our OUTWARD APPEARENCES so that we can attend. Why do you suppose we have SO MANY denominations in the world today....................someone got mad, left the Church, and started their own. Just like WI and GW. I'm not "knocking" ANY religious organizations or belief systems. JUST BE HONEST AND REAL ABOUT WHERE YOU CAME FROM, WHAT YOUR HISTORY IS( good and bad ) , AND WHY YOUR RELIGION STARTED, AND WHO STARTED IT. And if you are OK with your history, then go to your Church. If you don't know your history, there has been MORE THAN ENOUGH History written for ALL OF US to figure out where the Religion we Profess STARTED AND CAME FROM! I challenge you to go figure it out. Start thinking for YOURSELF! Perhaps YOU need to think for yourself. We have done websites to cover these points home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/ home.iprimus.com.au/pruephillip/TheFirstChurch.htm
Bert, take the blinders off your eyes and see the truth that is in Jesus. Read the scriptures for yourself, not for the workers. Learn the meaning of Jesus and what He stands for. Remove the workers and place with Jesus, don't add up. Jesus was never that cruel. The workers have nothing in common with the scriptures.
|
|
|
Post by las logged out on Oct 14, 2007 19:58:05 GMT -5
Who are the 2x2's, that set the example, that WI followed? I read this by "BERT" in another thread. That "WI did not start the 2x2's but he only followed their example"? I think I read something about 12 disciples? I don't recall reading 2x2 disciples. And MANY disciples, before the 12, left because something was said about "the Body and Blood" of Christ. Many followed Jesus until he spoke about the "Eating his flesh and drinking his blood". Some probably left when he gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom. Maybe they left when Christ gave authority for sins to be forgiven here on earth. Maybe some left because Jesus reached out to women when the world was totally ruled by men. You see...............Jesus didn't just feed 5,000. He probably feed more like 20,000. Because women and children were not "recorded" those days. Maybe some left because, while Jesus did say that wives should be submissive to their husbands, HE ALSO SAID that the husbands should LAY DOWN THEIR LIVES for the wives as Jesus DIED for the Church. They just couldn't wrap their brains around His teachings or muster the Faith it took to believe them. So they left. They might have just started their OWN religion, that fit into their own "HUMAN" beliefs and fears. So that they could feel good about continuing to act a certain way and call it CHURCH! Maybe they liked "throwing stones" BUT Jesus said, "Let those without sin cast the first stone". Maybe they left Jesus RIGHT THEN. Hum...............Christ calls us to CHANGE from the inside. NOT LEAVE AND GRAB SCRIPTURE AND A PARTNER AND GO DO OUR OWN THING. NOT change our OUTWARD APPEARENCES so that we can attend. Why do you suppose we have SO MANY denominations in the world today....................someone got mad, left the Church, and started their own. Just like WI and GW. I'm not "knocking" ANY religious organizations or belief systems. JUST BE HONEST AND REAL ABOUT WHERE YOU CAME FROM, WHAT YOUR HISTORY IS( good and bad ) , AND WHY YOUR RELIGION STARTED, AND WHO STARTED IT. And if you are OK with your history, then go to your Church. If you don't know your history, there has been MORE THAN ENOUGH History written for ALL OF US to figure out where the Religion we Profess STARTED AND CAME FROM! I challenge you to go figure it out. Start thinking for YOURSELF! William Irvine dechristianized all other christians what does that tell you...2x2s are a cult
|
|
|
Post by there were on Oct 14, 2007 22:05:53 GMT -5
Every single person who thinks William Irvine did not start the 2x2 church is unable to provide the name of the 2x2 worker under whom William Irvine professed.
Think, people. This isn't rocket science. Bert and GIT are lying to you.
|
|
|
Post by wingsofaneagle on Oct 14, 2007 23:12:21 GMT -5
Any church that states that in order to be saved you have to go through their "workers", preachers, ministers or whatever you prefer to call them, is FALSE DOCTRINE. Christ said that NO one could go to the Father BUT through HIM. HIM HIM HIM! ONLY HIM. Period.
|
|
|
Post by oh yeah on Oct 15, 2007 1:07:06 GMT -5
oh yeah. Nathan is also lying. He can't provide the name of the "elder" where this supposed meeting took place.
|
|
|
Post by no surprise on Oct 15, 2007 1:41:24 GMT -5
Just as I thought. You can't provide a name or location.
|
|
matia
Senior Member
Posts: 242
|
Post by matia on Oct 15, 2007 4:01:09 GMT -5
Nathan9 / all I can say is GET REAL/ Jesus said NO MAN COMETH TO THE FATHER EXCEPT THROUGH ME/ NOt the 2x2s or the Coonites, or the Tramp preachers,etc , etc ,etc or the Black stocking brigade
Wings off an eagle/ You are so right / Im behind you '
|
|
|
Post by las logged out on Oct 15, 2007 8:31:07 GMT -5
Any church that states that in order to be saved you have to go through their "workers", preachers, ministers or whatever you prefer to call them, is FALSE DOCTRINE. Christ said that NO one could go to the Father BUT through HIM. HIM HIM HIM! ONLY HIM. Period. Right
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Oct 15, 2007 8:53:09 GMT -5
NB says it happened in Scotland on Post #13; in Post #15 he says it happened in Ireland. Go figure--
And now he says he's going to post some letter telling about it--which he has been saying for over 2 years now, but hasn't done so.
Wonder if the letter will be by an anonymous writer?
We'll see!
CK
|
|
ecarg
New Member
Posts: 9
|
Post by ecarg on Oct 15, 2007 10:23:02 GMT -5
Hi everyone! Hope you all are having a Blessed Day. I've enjoyed the "posts". I see things a little different and would like to throw my "stuff" into the mix. 1. The Bible is not as OLD as Humanity. Any Religion that is "Solo Scriptura" meaning bible alone, will always have missing pieces of the puzzle. Especially if their "bible" is a revised one. Alot of bibles have been revised because, AGAIN, someone got mad, left, and made their own Churches. ( getting mad is not the issue.........alot of anger was legit. ) Don't get me wrong, I believe the Bible is SACRED SCRIPTURE and it is the word of God. But it's NOT ALL THE WORDS OF GOD! It is SOME of the story. Does MY LIFE here on earth, NOT COUNT because I'm not in the Bible? MANY MANY lives didn't make it to the bible story.............but I can't see that their lives didn't have meaning. Some of the original 12 don't have writings in "scripture". I LOVE Paul's writings...........but he was not one of the 12. He was a murderer in the beginning. Stephen has some great words of wisdom...........that are not in the bible. Solo Scriptura cannot give a complete picture. 2. 2x2's...........where are "your" stories in History? I always hear about these "letters' of proof that are out there. But when I ask for them, I'm told that the catholic church ( small c meaning universal church ) got rid of them all? HUH? Surely someone wrote SOMETHING down. If not, let this be a lesson to us all.................start a journal! LOL LOL LOL LOL But seriously................thousands of years of NOTHING? I try REALLY hard to understand everyone.........to meet people where they are at in life..............but these things are not even on the edges of reality. As kids, it was fun to belong to a "secret" club. But I had to grow up. 2. Someone wrote something about "Jesus" is the only way. Please be careful with this type of theology. I understand that it is in Scripture. But MANY MANY disciplined, outstanding, ethical, moral people have lived here on Earth and they might not have heard about JESUS while here on Earth. Salvation and God are MUCH BIGGER than ANY of us, here on Earth, can wrap our brains around. God is bigger than us all. WE DON'T KNOW who is saved and who is not. Let's concentrate on our own behaviors and actions and the rest will take care of itself. Peace!
|
|
|
Post by diet coke on Oct 15, 2007 10:25:36 GMT -5
Nathan9 / all I can say is GET REAL This is such a funny expression to use on a religious board, where everyone lives by faith and believes in things which cannot be proven. You can't GET REAL and be a traditional Christian.
|
|
|
Post by WI conversion on Oct 15, 2007 20:43:08 GMT -5
Every single person who thinks William Irvine did not start the 2x2 church is unable to provide the name of the 2x2 worker under whom William Irvine professed. Think, people. This isn't rocket science. Bert and GIT are lying to you. Bert and GIT are NOT lying. William Irvine did not profess through a 2x2 Itinerant worker. He made his choice and was baptized through an apostlic faith elders who had meetings in their home in Scotland. I will post on my website a letter which one of the friends from Manitobia, Canada sent it to me two years ago.That is a new one on me. William Irvine came to Christ through a Presbyterian evangelist in Scotland, not any 2x2 itinerant worker.
|
|
|
Post by WI conversion on Oct 15, 2007 21:32:28 GMT -5
That is a new one on me. William Irvine came to Christ through a Presbyterian evangelist in Scotland, not any 2x2 itinerant worker. Yes, I agree that was one of his conversions through a Presbyterian in Scotland... His conversion doesn't END there because there's more to the story ... Departing the Faith Mission! group around 1900 proves there's something more to the picture.Yes Nathan. We know what happened. He became egocentric and starting preaching himself rather than Jesus. He began preaching that one must leave the churches he was preaching in and follow him (WI) in order to be saved. He started his own church.
|
|
|
Post by existing meetings on Oct 15, 2007 23:18:08 GMT -5
And another strike against this phonry story is that if it were true, it would be logical for irvine to hold house meetings as being very important concentrating on setting them up from the start.
Instead, at first irvine copied faith mission by requiring all concerts to be preachers. This went on until cooney convinced him of the need for open homes elders etc.
The fact that he did not see a great need for open homes and elders is a great blow against this theory of an existing system of such homes and elders. To the contrary none existed at all for several years.
I am related to a man named Mr rock of northern Ireland, he was extremely proud that his home was one of the FIRST open homes EVER. He is mentioned in several issues of the impartial reporter as a prominent early adherent. And Nathan you are at best a wishful thinker at worst a bald faced liar.
As you do not seem able to reason logically, I try to give you the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
|
Post by whats in a name on Oct 16, 2007 9:53:04 GMT -5
The name is raymond drabrandt.
Does that make any difference? Your name doesn't count for squat to me I only judge by what you say. Does it make sense? Or not? is it logical? Or not? Who the heck cares what your name is?
A little nuts.
|
|
|
Post by Considering on Oct 16, 2007 10:16:25 GMT -5
What in a name like William Irving and what is it important---- Well he was a false prophet. His foundations were false.
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Oct 16, 2007 10:19:58 GMT -5
His name was William IRVINE - not IrvinG.
And he had no middle name.
|
|
|
Post by GuestS on Oct 16, 2007 16:32:42 GMT -5
His name was William IRVINE - not IrvinG. And he had no middle name. Cherie, Can you please help me with the correct pronunciation of William's last name. Is it urrrrr-ven or urrrrr-vine? Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by CherieKropp on Oct 16, 2007 17:17:56 GMT -5
In Ireland I believe they say they say urrr' ven (er' vin)
When I first read his name, I started out saying Ir-vine with a long "i" and lots of folks in America say it like that.
Whatever works for yoU!!
|
|