Suggestions suggest
Guest
|
Post by Suggestions suggest on Apr 17, 2008 18:49:57 GMT -5
Should workers hold a preconvention question time to resolve issues and to clarify confusion about rules and acceptable procedures?
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Apr 18, 2008 1:51:14 GMT -5
Are you implying with this that its not possible to ask workers questions?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2008 6:35:13 GMT -5
This is an excellent suggestion and one which is much practiced in the world. It could be held at any time during convention, not just at the commencement and would help greatly to clear up any ambiguity and confusion as well as laying out beliefs, standards and expectations. Workers as well as friends would greatly benefit from it.
Furthermore, many people have experienced problems asking workers questions privately or in limited company. Such a format as suggested would go a long way towards resolving this issue as well.
|
|
|
Post by AnneL on Apr 18, 2008 20:53:42 GMT -5
It would help workers to get a consistent view on what is right or wrong regarding non spiritual issues. People would then know the score. It would save so much anguish caused by not being allowed something in one county while it is freely permitted in another.
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Apr 20, 2008 7:20:38 GMT -5
Seems to me that our "rules" present more of a problem to those that have left our fellowship than those in it.
|
|
alana
Senior Member
Posts: 267
|
Post by alana on Apr 20, 2008 14:54:18 GMT -5
Obviously Aileen, you do not keep your rules. Therefore they cannot be a problem to you. Some people, including exes, were sincere in trying to keep the unwritten rules and found them a burden, an impediment to spiritual growth and ultimately untrue in as much as they often have no foundation in Scripture.
Still watching TV are you Aileen, with workers??
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Apr 20, 2008 15:46:21 GMT -5
Alana did you disagree with my post #4 or agree? It isn't clear from your post #5.
Yes, still watch TV, and yes, sometimes with workers.
|
|
|
Post by Alana on Apr 25, 2008 14:37:59 GMT -5
It was too mindlessly uncaring to warrant a reply. Typical of the smug, self-centred attitude that bypasses the reason for exes becomiong exes, it is absurd in its ignorance. The rules presented in past tense difficulties to some exes and it is the notorious uncaring, unsympathetic, ugly, unchristian attitude of some members and hypocritical upholding of their sacred, inflexible rules that have caused so many to miss out on the promise of eternal salvation, as we were led to believe. Does that not find a response in your hard, unfeeling heart so full of self-righteousness? The plight of the lost who are lost because of the rules that you claim you don't need to keep and the workers who go along with you, denying the existence of the very rules that excommunicated others. Can you not see the viciousness of that while it stares you in the face? Now, did I answer your question? Alana
|
|
|
Post by aileen on Apr 26, 2008 5:05:54 GMT -5
It was too mindlessly uncaring to warrant a reply. Typical of the smug, self-centred attitude that bypasses the reason for exes becomiong exes, it is absurd in its ignorance. The rules presented in past tense difficulties to some exes and it is the notorious uncaring, unsympathetic, ugly, unchristian attitude of some members and hypocritical upholding of their sacred, inflexible rules that have caused so many to miss out on the promise of eternal salvation, as we were led to believe. Does that not find a response in your hard, unfeeling heart so full of self-righteousness? The plight of the lost who are lost because of the rules that you claim you don't need to keep and the workers who go along with you, denying the existence of the very rules that excommunicated others. Can you not see the viciousness of that while it stares you in the face? Now, did I answer your question? Alana Mindlessly uncaring? That your opinion. Did you answer or clrify? Yes, you did. You have made it abundantly clear that you have been affected greatly by "rules", while others who did not leave have not been, so that makes my observation correct. Exes are more affected than those that didn't leave. You imply that I uphold some rules? But provided no examples, proof or other substantiation of that accusation.
|
|
|
Post by Encore on Apr 29, 2008 12:26:51 GMT -5
Ah poor wee Aileen!!
|
|
Questions for workers
Guest
|
Post by Questions for workers on Apr 29, 2008 12:31:21 GMT -5
Have you visited all the people in your field this year? Who have you left out? Why did you not visit them? Are you a good sheppherd?
Do you actually know any of the concerns of those in your area? What are the things that worry most of your "friends"?
|
|
|
Post by more questions on Apr 29, 2008 12:34:00 GMT -5
Do you believe in following Jesus, poor and homeless?
|
|
|
Post by poor needy on Apr 29, 2008 12:36:20 GMT -5
Would you allow a tramp or down and out to attend meeting? You know,one who smelled like Lazarus at the rich man's door?
|
|
|
Post by last mite on Apr 29, 2008 12:38:23 GMT -5
Would you put your last two cents, pennies, whatever into the treasury for the poor and trust God to provide for you? Would you really give all your money to a charity?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 3, 2008 2:36:05 GMT -5
It was too mindlessly uncaring to warrant a reply. Typical of the smug, self-centred attitude that bypasses the reason for exes becomiong exes, it is absurd in its ignorance. How can there be rules if, like you say, we "don't need to keep" them?! There are no such rules as you refer to. aileen was right in #4 as these "rules" seem to be solely in the minds of the "exes". They quit because they thought there was a rule! Well, we have no such rules as you seem to be implying. Who told you that you would not have salvation if you watched TV? Did you not read your Bible when you were a "2x2"? Did you not realize that the rules you had in your mind were not in the Bible explicitly? Did you not also realize that not every guideline or rule is a requirement for salvation?
|
|
|
Post by Guest 1 on May 3, 2008 6:10:53 GMT -5
Of course 'there are no rules' , CUL.
In fact that is mantra # 1. Now of course a mantra is not a rule. In past years if you had offended in one of the mantra there were consequences for offending. These consequences depended on where you lived, what your standing was in the fellowship, and who the worker was that you were dealing with.
The consequences for having a TV varied along the following lines : * If there was a meeting in your home it would be removed. * If you were an elder someone else would take your place. * If you were an ordinary Joe you might be silenced in meeting, or if you refused the request you might be asked not to attend.
* You most assuredly be spoken about behind your back re your bad spirit.
Now I have only addressed one issue here- there were many more 'mantra' for the professing person to be aware along with the consequent sanctions.
Of course there were no rules !!
|
|
|
Post by clap trap on May 3, 2008 11:01:14 GMT -5
It was too mindlessly uncaring to warrant a reply. Typical of the smug, self-centred attitude that bypasses the reason for exes becomiong exes, it is absurd in its ignorance. How can there be rules if, like you say, we "don't need to keep" them?! There are no such rules as you refer to. aileen was right in #4 as these "rules" seem to be solely in the minds of the "exes". They quit because they thought there was a rule! Well, we have no such rules as you seem to be implying. Who told you that you would not have salvation if you watched TV? Did you not read your Bible when you were a "2x2"? Did you not realize that the rules you had in your mind were not in the Bible explicitly? Did you not also realize that not every guideline or rule is a requirement for salvation? This is the most dishonest twist I have read about the rules in 2x2ism. Ask those who were exed over not folowing any given rule whether it was a rule or not? iF WORKERS DEEMEMED THE POSSESSION OF A TV SUFFICIENT TO BLOCK MEMBERS FROM FELLOWSHIP, who are you to come on here saying that keeping the rule was NOT a requirement for salvation. OF COURSE the rules are not requirements for salvation, that is why there ois SO much anger that workers acted as if they were and have offended so many good christians.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 3, 2008 20:12:12 GMT -5
Of course 'there are no rules' , CUL. Good, so we agree? Nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 3, 2008 20:16:10 GMT -5
This is the most dishonest twist I have read about the rules in 2x2ism. Ask those who were exed over not folowing any given rule whether it was a rule or not? iF WORKERS DEEMEMED THE POSSESSION OF A TV SUFFICIENT TO BLOCK MEMBERS FROM FELLOWSHIP, who are you to come on here saying that keeping the rule was NOT a requirement for salvation. OF COURSE the rules are not requirements for salvation, that is why there ois SO much anger that workers acted as if they were and have offended so many good christians. 'clap trap', you seem confused. Do you think they are or are not? If "workers deememed the possession of a tv sufficient to block members from fellowship", it does not matter "who" the other poster is -- anyone can and should say that there is no such requirement for salvation -- are you implying that you believe that if the 'workers' thought that way, that keeping the rule would be a requirement for salvation? Your next paragraph seems to contradict that. Hence -- you seem confused.
|
|
|
Post by Guest 1 on May 3, 2008 21:32:53 GMT -5
"........Nonsense".
Thankyou CUL for dismissing my knowledge and experience so lightly. I will not enter into further discussion with you as I see that only your limited experience is to be valued and considered.
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 3, 2008 21:43:31 GMT -5
I did not dismiss your knowledge and experience. I did, however, dismiss your dismissal of my knowledge and experience and your blind over-generalization from your experience to the universal case.
Your insistence on a 'mantra' was nonsense indeed. Perhaps you thought the rest of your post was worthy of further comment, however. First, you apply all of these things to me -- you say "you" -- whereas I have had no such experience. Perhaps that was not your intent?
Whether or not my experience is "limited", it is enough to disprove the existence of any such "mantra" as "there are no rules".
The things you described may have occurred in specific and isolated instances, but you have not shown any evidence to suggest that they were universal, as you assert at least for the "talked about" claim ("most assuredly"). It is easy to call such universal claims nonsense, especially when no evidence is given and the universal is disproved by other testimony and experience.
Now what did you mean by "in past years"? 1942-1944? 1920-1980? Which years?
|
|
More lies from CULT
Guest
|
Post by More lies from CULT on May 6, 2008 11:12:21 GMT -5
It was too mindlessly uncaring to warrant a reply. Typical of the smug, self-centred attitude that bypasses the reason for exes becomiong exes, it is absurd in its ignorance. How can there be rules if, like you say, we "don't need to keep" them?! There are no such rules as you refer to. aileen was right in #4 as these "rules" seem to be solely in the minds of the "exes". They quit because they thought there was a rule! Well, we have no such rules as you seem to be implying. More lies Called unto Liberty. Do you need a list of the rules that have been enforced over the last 100 years? Enforced and punished by excommunication, people forced by one means or another OUT of fellowship. Real people and REAL RULES. Albeit silly rules and unnecessary ones. Let's begin with the Long Hair for women, no trousers for women, no TV for anyone, no radio at one time. No parties, dancing, alcohol, pub visits, cinema, makeup. Would you like to hear some more? Yes there are and always have been rules and consequences for the nonkeeping of the rules. Lying will not make the facts change. Neither will lying to cover up knowledge of the beginnings of the 2x2 novement. Who told you that you would not have salvation if you watched TV? Did you not read your Bible when you were a "2x2"? Did you not realize that the rules you had in your mind were not in the Bible explicitly? Did you not also realize that not every guideline or rule is a requirement for salvation? YES there were rules, enforced and sometimes most cruelly. There are friends out there who are OUTSIDE because of the rules YOU say do not exist except in the minds of some exes. What kind of conscience have you got?
|
|
|
Post by calleduntoliberty on May 6, 2008 16:31:20 GMT -5
YES there were rules, enforced and sometimes most cruelly. Most cruelly? I'm not aware of any allegations of torture being used to enforce any supposed rules. Yes, the rules were in the minds of those "exes". They would not be rules if they did not accept them! Are there different kinds?
|
|
elle
Junior Member
Posts: 192
|
Post by elle on May 6, 2008 23:36:02 GMT -5
I’m a B&R F&W currently living in Australia. In my experience, there are guidelines (or rules if you prefer to call them that) for remaining in good standing within the group (or in fellowship, if you prefer this turn of phrase). These change from time to time, place to place and person to person. And these are plenty of threads on this board that demonstrate this is the case elsewhere too!
These rules aren’t anything to do with salvation. But they do exist.
Some of the exes who post here had been previously led to believe that complying with the group membership rules was required for salvation. Some people within the F&W group still think they are.
If you see salvation only coming within the F&W, you might also think that membership in that group is necessary for salvation and that complying with the rules is also necessary for salvation.
|
|
|
Post by aileen on May 7, 2008 15:00:06 GMT -5
I’m a B&R F&W currently living in Australia. In my experience, there are guidelines (or rules if you prefer to call them that) for remaining in good standing within the group (or in fellowship, if you prefer this turn of phrase). These change from time to time, place to place and person to person. And these are plenty of threads on this board that demonstrate this is the case elsewhere too! These rules aren’t anything to do with salvation. But they do exist. Some of the exes who post here had been previously led to believe that complying with the group membership rules was required for salvation. Some people within the F&W group still think they are. If you see salvation only coming within the F&W, you might also think that membership in that group is necessary for salvation and that complying with the rules is also necessary for salvation. one of the more sensible and realistic posts for a while...
|
|
|
Post by Hmmmm on May 8, 2008 16:09:32 GMT -5
It was too mindlessly uncaring to warrant a reply. Typical of the smug, self-centred attitude that bypasses the reason for exes becomiong exes, it is absurd in its ignorance. How can there be rules if, like you say, we "don't need to keep" them?! There are no such rules as you refer to. aileen was right in #4 as these "rules" seem to be solely in the minds of the "exes". They quit because they thought there was a rule! Well, we have no such rules as you seem to be implying. Who told you that you would not have salvation if you watched TV? Did you not read your Bible when you were a "2x2"? Did you not realize that the rules you had in your mind were not in the Bible explicitly? Did you not also realize that not every guideline or rule is a requirement for salvation? Of course there are no rules per se; there is no published code of conduct or similar but Tommy Gamble in Ireland was heard to lament from the platform about the women folk (always the wimmin!) finding (I quote verbatim) "loopholes in the guidlines". Now if they were "guidelines", they'd be just that: guides but the fact that Tommy bewailed the finding of loopholes suggests to me (pedant that I am) that the guidelines are much more than that - namely "rules". These "guidelines" range from his hobby-horse of split skirts (I mean who wears such a thing now?!) dyed hair, cut hair, immodest apparel generally and big frothy weddings. The rules on weddings presumably has changed - there were two extravaganzas last summer and neither couple had sanctions imposed. Another thing that has been relaxed is dating outsiders. I notice that one can openly date an outsider and still partake in full fellowship without sanctions. This I know from first hand observation, so it is not hearsay.
|
|
|
Post by Rule Salvation on May 8, 2008 22:45:59 GMT -5
I’m a B&R F&W currently living in Australia. In my experience, there are guidelines (or rules if you prefer to call them that) for remaining in good standing within the group (or in fellowship, if you prefer this turn of phrase). These change from time to time, place to place and person to person. And these are plenty of threads on this board that demonstrate this is the case elsewhere too! These rules aren’t anything to do with salvation. But they do exist. Some of the exes who post here had been previously led to believe that complying with the group membership rules was required for salvation. Some people within the F&W group still think they are. If you see salvation only coming within the F&W, you might also think that membership in that group is necessary for salvation and that complying with the rules is also necessary for salvation. This is very nicely put, but unfortunately does not stand the litmus test.Look at the number of people who have been exed by not complying with the rules which you say are not requirements for salvation!!!
Your last statement is a giveaway. You are obviously not a fully committed member of 2x2 if you even contemplate salvation coming form any other source than 2x2 workers ONLY!!
In most countries you would receive a worker visit and excommunication PRONTO!!
|
|
elle
Junior Member
Posts: 192
|
Post by elle on May 8, 2008 23:35:57 GMT -5
I’m a B&R F&W currently living in Australia. In my experience, there are guidelines (or rules if you prefer to call them that) for remaining in good standing within the group (or in fellowship, if you prefer this turn of phrase). These change from time to time, place to place and person to person. And these are plenty of threads on this board that demonstrate this is the case elsewhere too! These rules aren’t anything to do with salvation. But they do exist. Some of the exes who post here had been previously led to believe that complying with the group membership rules was required for salvation. Some people within the F&W group still think they are. If you see salvation only coming within the F&W, you might also think that membership in that group is necessary for salvation and that complying with the rules is also necessary for salvation. This is very nicely put, but unfortunately does not stand the litmus test.Look at the number of people who have been exed by not complying with the rules which you say are not requirements for salvation!!!
Your last statement is a giveaway. You are obviously not a fully committed member of 2x2 if you even contemplate salvation coming form any other source than 2x2 workers ONLY!!
In most countries you would receive a worker visit and excommunication PRONTO!!Perhaps I wasn’t clear enough, but the way I see it, the rules can’t be requirements for salvation. It is not scriptural for these man made rules about TV and outward appearance to be requirements. My opinion about these rules not being requirements for salvation doesn’t mean the rules don’t exist, neither does it mean that others in the F&W group share my view. In fact, many probably do think that the rules are requirements for salvation. I think part of the confusion could be that some think along the following lines 1. Only F&W are saved 2. There are some rules that need to be followed to stay in fellowship with the F&W. 3. Therefore sticking to the rules means you have salvation. I don’t agree with the first point and so I don’t agree with the logic in the third ( salvation does not equal being in fellowship with F&W) My last statement isn’t really a giveaway- go to my profile and read through previous posts. You’ll see that I’m probably not your definition of a fully committed member of 2x2, but I am a fully committed Christian.
|
|