| Author | Message | ||
     old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 5 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
Watchman Fellowship is a Christian apologetics ministry specializing in research and instruction in the areas of pseudo-Christianity, the occult and New Age Movement. We believe in ever one's right to practice their faith as a God given freedom. But, we believe that there is only one Jesus, one gospel and one Spirit (II Cor.11:3-4) and that it is the obligation of the Body of Christ to contend for the faith "once given." Homestead Heritage has proven from the groups written material to be outside that faith "once given." For information on the unbiblical teachings of Homestead Heritage, contact us at, Watchman Fellowship P. O. box 13340 Arlington, TX 76094 Or telephone 817) 277-0023 e-mail: parnn@watchman.org Ask for information on Homestead Heritage. p.s. For those former members who attended the April, 2005 Workshop in Waco the audio CDs are availabe on request. (Message edited by old_watchman on June 03, 2005) (Message edited by old_watchman on June 15, 2005) | ||
| dowen (dowen) Member Username: dowen Post Number: 53 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.54.214.51 |
Old_watchman, Would you please tell us where you have gotten this information on the "unbiblical" teaching of Homestead? The last time I checked, you and your organization had yet to contact a single leader or member of Homestead. In my estimation your spiritual attack on these people is reprehensible. Another thing, how can you attack a group of people when you have yet to get your ammo "Straight from the horse's mouth" so to speak? I am sure you will say you have some of their writings and that is all you need, maybe so. It just seems if you wanted your work to have credence, you would do all you could to obtain it. Even the Pharisees took their questions to Jesus! It is starting to seem that I would rather be known as a Pharisee than be a member of you camp. The "watchman" organization is, in my opinion, a group of rabble rousers and simply put, a brood of vipers. They have somehow received a fax from heaven that has revealed the True standard of Christianity unto them. How dare they self appoint themselves to run around measuring Churches against their own contrived "template". How unbelievably self-rightous and how sad. Do they not realize that for centuries men have been quarreling over Christianity? Are they so blind they cannot see that more quarrelling and accusation throwing will never get them anywhere? Have they forgotten that part of the Scriptures that talks about the Peacemakers being Blessed? Doesn't it seem that if the Peacemakers are Blessed, the strife makers are cursed? I have been to their website, some of the "Cults" they have listed surely deserve that label, but HH does not deserve to be lumped in with Moonies, Mormons, Hira Krishna and the like! How absurd! I am not trying to be mean to these guys, I am just playing by the rules they have established!!! If they can imperialistically sit at their computers and pronounce any group that doesn't fit their template a "Cult", then so can I!! The sad part about this game is people's souls are at stake. | ||
| mic_s (mic_s) New member Username: mic_s Post Number: 16 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.155.7.9 |
To get your questions answered directly Dowen, or anyone else for that matter, you've been given a invitation by the Watchman Fellowship to contact them directly. For information on the unbiblical teachings of Homestead Heritage, contact, Watchman Fellowship P. O. box 13340 Arlington, TX 76094 Or telephone (817) 277-0023 Ask for information on Homestead Heritage. The leaders of Homestead Heritage are personally monitering this site. Even going so far as to take measures to find out who the people here are who are posting. If HH wants people to contact them and are willing to honestly answer anyone's questions then they should post there contact information. (Message edited by mic_s on May 25, 2005) | ||
| dowen (dowen) Member Username: dowen Post Number: 54 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.54.214.51 |
Hay, does anyone want to join me in trying to tear apart the Watchman group? We can start a thread on tearing them apart! We can round up some false accusers and let the accusations fly! We can dig up all kinds of dirt on them! We can go into a frenzy of accusation making and tale telling! We can do it in the name of Jesus even, how perfect! We can start calling them TWF just for kicks, won't it be fun! I bet we can even find some ex-members of their group to help lend us credence on our agenda! We can just use those poor hurt souls to help us attack TWF! TWF has set an example, so lets follow it! Hurrah for the Battle!! Hurrah for the Blood!! Hurrah for the Pain!! Lets throw aside Peacefullness! Lets throw aside Love! Lets throw aside Longsuffering! Lets throw aside Patience and everything else good and Holy. Why should we let the Bible stand in the way of our vendetta? Why should we let innocent life stand in our way? If He is for us, who can be against us! The LORD has annointed us to vanquish his foes! How can we falter! How can we fail! Lets storm the City! Lets break down the walls! Can you feel the fever rising? Can you feel the tide turning? Can you hear the armor clashing? Can you hear the cries of men dieing? Fill your nostril's with the stench of blood! Fill your throat's with the dust of battle! Fill your heart's with rightous judgments! Fill your ears with lies! Fill your soul with deceit! Do whatever it takes to justify our participation in this battle! LET'S EVEN CALL OUR BATTLE HOLY!! Sound like fun boys and girls? Who wants to join this Crusade? We're doing it for the Lord right!!?? ************************************************** I revised the above post after receiving an e-mail from a concerned poster who felt I had finally gone looney and made a complete fool of myself. Maybe he is correct, I am not afraid of being a fool for what I believe. I hope the reader can understand the concept of illustrating absurdity with absurdity. I also want to reassure the Watchman fellowship that I do not want to take an eye for an eye! I honestly have no hatred for TWF, I am just trying to play their game by the rules they have established. Many of you feel that I speak of "that which I know not" when it comes to HH. You couldn't be further from the truth. Even today, if I have a question about them, I go and ask them for an answer! This board has brought up many questions for me, but I am not going to ask for second hand answers! Why should I when I can go straight to them! I simply want any un-biased person who stumbles across this board to not walk away thinking that HH is as bad as the Moonies, Krishna and the like. (Message edited by dowen on May 26, 2005) | ||
| just_curious (just_curious) Advanced Member Username: just_curious Post Number: 600 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 69.228.14.9 |
dowen, You're starting to sound a bit desperate and hysterical. | ||
| dowen (dowen) Member Username: dowen Post Number: 55 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.54.214.51 |
Just_curious, do you not see the fruitlessness of what the Watchman guys are doing in the grand scheme of things? Even the Roman Inquisitors couldn't stamp out the sect of Christianity they did't like! That is my point! Can I not use hysteria and desperation in the face of hysteria and desperation? I am an even tempered guy by nature, but desperate times call for desperate men! | ||
| dowen (dowen) Member Username: dowen Post Number: 56 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.54.214.51 |
Instead of going around trying to dismantle Churches, shouldn't we as Christians be more interested in building them? Just a thought. Church building seems so much more rewarding than destruction. | ||
| just_curious (just_curious) Advanced Member Username: just_curious Post Number: 601 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 69.228.14.9 |
dowen, Building THE CHURCH is Christ's business; after all, it is His Body and He is the Head. There is no way to dismantle that Church, the gates of hell won't even prevail against it! But we do have the responsibility as members of Christ's Church to recognize and expose false doctrine and spiritual abuse. I know very little about Watchman Fellowship (though I've noticed that my old "group" is not listed in their index and it should be!), but how would it be possible for them to "dismantle" or "stamp out" a religious group? Like you've said, people join HH of their own volition and they can ignore or engage FACTNet and Watchman Fellowship as they so desire. If there is no illegal activity, then there is nothing to fear on that front. If there IS false doctrine and spiritual abuse and it is exposed, then those who choose to continue in it are to be pitied. If there IS NOT false doctrine and spiritual abuse, then HH will be vindicated and Watchman Fellowship will have proved themselves to be as you describe them. | ||
| hater101 (hater101) Junior Member Username: hater101 Post Number: 31 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 70.112.0.204 |
   | ||
| the_general (the_general) Junior Member Username: the_general Post Number: 32 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.155.5.167 |
Dowen,if in the scope of world problems and Christianity in general you think that what is going on here on fact net is such a large and desperate issue, your world is very small indeed. | ||
| dowen (dowen) Member Username: dowen Post Number: 57 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.54.214.51 |
General, what a brilliant point you have made.(May I remind you that I didn't start this "desperate" issue here on factnet?) Your point is the point I have been trying to make all along! Many here are turning personal differences into doctorinal disputes, essentially turning mountains into mole hills. Talk about small worlds! I happen to think "my world" is not as small as you would like for it to be, but maybe I am an ignorant child as some think. We can let the open minded reader(if there is such a person) decide. I will also add that by your equation, my God's world is quite small also, for he even notes when a sparrow falls! It seems the only way people can write off my experiences is by saying my world is too small to make honest observations, my brain is too small to make intelligent computations, and my experiences are of little or no consequence in the grand scheme of what some are trying to do. It seems the only way for some of you to justify your positions is by saying my positons, and everyone who disagrees with you, are all wrong. Isn't that what so many of you accuse HH of doing??!! What an amazing double standard! I did not come to Factnet to make enemies, but rather to try to show by my personal experiences that there is a different side to the presentation that has been made against HH. The very first post on this board was an effort to "show a different side of the story". That is all I am trying to do also. I am truly sorry if I have offended anyone. Offense has never been my goal, I HAVE wanted to provoke honesty and maybe, maybe, inspire someone to sincerly search for the TRUTH. | ||
| the_general (the_general) Junior Member Username: the_general Post Number: 33 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.155.5.167 |
dowen,You have told your side and made your point but it seems that you also think that anyone who disagrees with you are "all wrong" and have in your postings become quite radical and hysterical in your defence of HH.I have no need to justify my position as you seem to think and my reasons for posting have nothing to do with personal differences with HH, but maybe if I agreed with you suddenly I would be a person who has been provoked to honesty and suddenly become a sincere seeker of TRUTH.And don't worry,you haven't offended me.I'm sorry that you have not been able to see that regardless of how many good people may be down at HH and how many good things they may have done, the doctrine they preach and the place that Blair and others have set themselves up in makes them completely wrong in a Biblical sense,which has been my point all along.Any individual in HH can have different experiences as far as wrongs done to them or not done to them and that fact makes no difference as to whether thier doctrine is ultimately of God or not.My point has not been to point out some bad personal experience that happened to me, but to make known what thier belief system is like so that people can see for themselves a side of the story that they may not have seen otherwise. | ||
| dowen (dowen) Member Username: dowen Post Number: 59 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 207.54.214.51 |
dowen,You have told your side and made your point but it seems that you also think that anyone who disagres with you are "all wrong" and have in your postings become quite radical and hysterical in your defence of HH. (emphasis mine)(the_general) How wrong you are, LOL. God Bless you though. Sorry for my feeble stab at humor not coming across corectly. Read the part in italics and I think you will see my joke. BTW, I am quite willing to agree to disagree on almost any subject, so you don't have to make me out to be such a knuckle-dragger! (Message edited by dowen on May 28, 2005) | ||
| the_general (the_general) Junior Member Username: the_general Post Number: 34 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.155.5.167 |
??? | ||
| charitygrace (charitygrace) New member Username: charitygrace Post Number: 14 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 216.79.206.186 |
bump | ||
| charitygrace (charitygrace) New member Username: charitygrace Post Number: 17 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 216.79.206.186 |
bump | ||
| charitygrace (charitygrace) New member Username: charitygrace Post Number: 22 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 65.0.38.67 |
bump | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 277 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Charitygrace, What is it you like so much about this thread? Maybe my rant against the assault that has been mounted against HH? Probably not...oh well... BTW, just an idea for any of you considering contacting the Watchman guys, first try 'googling' watchman fellowship, then 'google' the names of some of their "leaders". There is some pretty eye opening stuff out there. I have no idea how much of it is actually true, but I find it kind of sad (and comical) that WF goes around lighting fires like this one here on FACTnet which may or may not be based on truth, while others go about lighting fires against WF that may or may not be based on truth. What a vicious cycle. Oh well, it's a beast of a cycle that has been trampling people of all races and religions for centuries. So sad. All of you who have so gleefully attacked HH are simply walking in the steps of your forefathers...I am sure they are proud of you. I am reminded of the words of Charles Dickens. "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us, we were all going direct to Heaven, we were all going direct the other way-..." Sounds a little bit like today, doesn't it? I realize I am rambling, but the point I wish to make is that I can yell and hollar about the best times I spent at HH, WF and all of ya'll can yell and hollar about the worst of times spent at HH. We can all go on clamoring and hollaring for as long as we wish, but in the end all we are doing is the same thing our ancestors did. So much for the accomplishments of the 'Age of enlightenment'. In many ways we (our culture) are a fruit of that supposedly glorious Age. What rotten fruit we are... ******* The above may sound dismal, yet as I write I am struck with how fortunate of a young man I am. I know Jesus. He has offered me, and all of us, an alternative to the gloomy world we live in! He has shown all of us a HIGHER way! He has called us to be different than the world. As the Dickens quote above shows, this dark and murky world is as it has been forever. Please, all of you here, remove yourselves from this world filled with people who haven't a clue where they are going, nor do they care! DOwen | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Junior Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 46 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 64.146.89.99 |
Daniel, Glad your are back. I have always loved that quote by Dickens. Under Grace | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 74 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Forgiveness is the fragrance that the violet sheds on the heal that has crushed it. Mark Twain | ||
| old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 16 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
Young Mr. D I was passing by and saw that you had made a post to our friendly board. I read with interest your comment and suggestion that folks google WF and some of our leaders. You make it sound like some of our fellows had some really bad PR on the web. I took you up on your suggestion. I googled WF and this is what I found of a negative nature on links page 2 http://www.skepticfiles.org/atheist/clintonx.htm It is by a fellow named Fredric Rice. He calls it the Sceptic Tank. He calls us a hate group who publishes hate literature. He himself hates Scientology. We have had our run- ins with Scientology. They have sued us twice for publicly revealing their secret doctrines. Mr. Rice then publishes our 1993 Index of Cults and Religions. If it is hate literature why publish it? I am puzzled. Then I found this next site, http://www.leaderu.com/wri/pages/exjwtest.html It is a testimonial from a woman we helped. Then I took Mr Ds advise and looked up our fearless leader, James K. Walker, the President of WF. I went in about 4 or 5 pages of links and found only good comments even from ministries who are very sensitive to criticism of other religions, like religioustolerance.org in Canada and Moriel Ministries. I invite anyone who reads Young Mr. Ds comments to take him up on it. Young Mr. D, you are going to have to be more specific. Give us the urls for these exposes of my colleagues. With big bear hugs, Uncle Phil | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 75 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Greetings Old Watchman, My feelings are wrapped up in the following.... http://www.arrf.org/articles/protectfr.htm I believe someone took an idea to help others and have let it get out of hand and become a monster. I just pray you keep in mind all who promotes this site will each stand before God and give his or her account. Your eternal destiny is at stake. In Christ Pureheart | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 76 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
The salvation of a single soul is more important than the production or preservation of all the epics and tragedies in the world. C.S. Lewis | ||
| old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 17 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
An answer to Pureheart, This is a website article (the url in your previous post) by a minister of the International Community of Christ, Church of the Second Advent whose founder is Gene Savoy. Mr. Savoy teaches that his son is the second advent of Christ, thus the name of the group. You former members of HH will see why Pureheart is so drawn to this group. They believe this person is the new "Jesus come in the flesh." The reason Pureheart likes this article is because Watchman is mentioned or I should say singled out. I pulled this quote from the article, "Their (WFI) avowed purpose to quote their web page is to 'have some part in revealing the darkness of the cults, and ... bring about the downfall of the cults and ultimate delivery of their people.'" I did a search of our website to see if we ever said such a thing and sure enough we did. It was in our very first issue of our newspaper, The Watchman Expositor, from 1984. I just talked to our fearless leader, James Walker about the statement. His response, "We didn't mean we were going to burn their building down. I had in mind what happened to the Worldwide Church of God. A complete transformation of their church to orthodox Christianity." Hopefully we are better at expressing our purpsoe today than we were twenty one years ago. Go back to the top of this page and read my comments on our mission. Then go to our website and read our purpose statement at the head of our Index of Cults and Religions. Then, go down until you find the thumbnail on International Community of Christ. http://www.watchman.org/cat95.htm | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 77 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Greetings Again Mr. Watchman, There you go again making assumptions based on very little fact. This is part of my apprehension about your web site. I see this action repeated too often. I did not state that I support the International Community of Christ. I hardly know them. However, I do agree with this particular article. I believe everyone is entitled to their particular belief. If you will read my posts you will find I simply wish peace for all. Your jumping on my post and making all these additional statements plainly proves your group is very non-tolerant and destructive. I pray for Gods mercy on you and your group. Anytime you desire to discuss the Glory of Jesus and put some constructive remarks about Gods church on this site, give me a shout..Ill gladly join in.. But no matter what you doGod loves you and so do I, In Christ Pureheart | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 78 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Greetings Again Mr. Watchman, Also, do you suppose I struck a nerve because some other site is posting against your site? .. The reason Pureheart likes this article is because Watchman is mentioned or I should say singled out... Is this not what you folks are doing to thousands of Christian groups? Singling them out? Like Ive said before, what I think has very little value. What you think has very little value. What God thinks is everything. One day you and I will know how He feels about all this. We will be answering for all our actions. And then for whoever is wrong.ITS TOO LATE. This reminds me of a quote. The healthy man does not torture others - generally it is the tortured who turn into torturers..by Carl Jung In Christ Pureheart | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 278 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Old Watchman, I am not trying to start a fight, but I am curious. What, in your words, IS "Orthodox Christianity"? (Message edited by dowen on October 27, 2005) | ||
| old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 18 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
PH, I did not "jump on your post." You addressed it to me. You say you do not support the ICOC but you support their view of WFI. But look to what source you have to appeal to find a critical voice. You do yourself no credit by your choices of material that you use to substitute for your own voice. You quote an interesting group of people. For instance, Friedrich Nietzsche was an existentialist and though he admired Jesus he hated Christianity. (See Wickapedia) Mark Twain, I love Mark Twain, he was a hoot. But, I think he hated God because of the soul crushing losses of his children and wife. Carl Young was a psychologist who was heavily involved in the occult. But to each his own. Despite your thinking, we do not care if there are people out side our ministry who do not like what we do. If everybody loved and praised us we would be forgettable and useless. You ask, "Is this not what you folks are doing to thousands of Christian groups? Singling them out?" How in the world do you define Christian? Can a person believe Jesus is a psychedelic mushroom, like the Mushroom of the Cross group and be called a Christian? Can a person believe Jesus is the half brother of Lucifer who was born to a God and Goddess, who used to be humans on another planet, and be a Christian? These are the groups we are trying to shine the light of the Bible on. These are false expressions of Christianity. They have every right to exist but they do not have a right to call themselves Christians. And, I greatly appreciate your prayers for God's mercy towards me. I need all I can get. | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 79 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
OW, I do quote many people without agreeing with their overall outlook on life or their beliefs. If someone makes a statement that hits the mark, I will repeat it and give them the credit. Even an idiot occasionally creates a very profound thought. I know you folks do not care what people think of your actions. And your right, you can do and say and write and suggest anything you like. Its America and this is your ballpark. I just pray for those souls who stumble into your site and become short sighted vigilantes. You do bring to light some very on the edge groups but you have expanded to now include virtually every group dissimilar in beliefs to your own. I will close with this. You cannot go before your God on judgment day and plead you were not advised that your actions might be contrary to Jesus teachings. God only knows.You may be held in high esteem and told, Well done, my good and faithful servant. Then again, you may not. Its your destiny.Guard it carefully. May God bless you, PH | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 80 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Sow a thought; reap an act. Sow an act; reap a habit. Sow a habit; reap a character. Sow a character; reap a destiny. | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) New member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 23 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
watchman "How in the world do you define Christian? Can a person believe Jesus is a psychedelic mushroom, like the Mushroom of the Cross group and be called a Christian? Can a person believe Jesus is the half brother of Lucifer who was born to a God and Goddess, who used to be humans on another planet, and be a Christian? ** These are the groups we are trying to shine the light of the Bible on. ** " Then this thread should be disbanded. Shalom, Praxaluh | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Junior Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 48 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Pure Heart Glad you are back as well. You make an interesting statement.......... I believe someone (Watchman) took an idea to help others and have let it get out of hand and become a monster. I just pray you keep in mind all who promotes this site will each stand before God and give his or her account. Your eternal destiny is at stake. Pureheart have you ever sat down with someone that has spent ten or fifteen years in HH or a group like them then listened for four or five hours about their experience? You certainly have heard the experiences of Jeremy Crow, Forever His, Missionary Lady, Forgiven Much, Bob Beachner, Richard Harrison, The General, Under Grace and many others. Obviously, YOU DO NOT BELIEVE US! There is no way you could say our eternal destiny is at stake for sharing our experiences if you believed us. HH is under the bondage of the Old Testament Law! Do you really believe our eternal destiny is at stake for trying to help other people avoid the same legalistic nightmare we went through? It is simple as I stated above if you really think that you just do not believe us. The difference between you and Dowen is he is straight up and calls us liars. He really believes that we have made all these things up. You Pureheart dance around it saying you...simply wish peace for all. and pre-tend you do not judge anyone. Daniel and Real Truth are straight up (a phrase my kids use) they tell we are liars, Nimrods, friends of Korah. Why not come on out and say it PureHeart? Of course if you really said what you mean then you would be judging. Right? I have taken a quote from the website you referred........ Just because one group of people surrendered their individual choice to the control of a fanatic does not mean that we should tar and feather all minority religions or condemn any religion that we do not understand. The necessary distinction to make here is to understand that ninety-nine percent of all minority religious groups never cause harm to any individual. These groups must all be protected. If all religions are not free and safe within our society, then none are safe and none can enjoy freedom of religion. These folks acknowledge that there is one group where... people surrendered their individual choice to the control of a fanatic. The other .....ninety-nine percent of all minority religious groups never cause harm to any individual. PureHeart says ....I do agree with this particular article. So you agree with this article that at least some groups are unacceptable. So the difference between these folks and Watchman Fellowship is the number of groups they are willing to judge as unacceptable. Apparently the criteria that the group you referred us to uses is... a group is OK if the minority religious groups never cause harm to any individual. Based on this definition HH would have to be among the groups THEY DO NOT APPROVE of because there are many many instances where HH has caused harm to individuals and irreparable damage to families as a unit. Testimonies after testimonies have been given to show the damage that has been done. Maybe the difference between Watchman and the group you have referred us to is WFI actually researches the groups they talk about and your group does not. PureHeart said it better than I could when he posted ................ I believe someone (Blair Adams and Homestead Heritage) took an idea to help others and have let it get out of hand and become a monster. I just pray you keep in mind all who promotes (Homestead Heritage on) this site will each stand before God and give his or her account. Your eternal destiny is at stake. You know me Pureheart I believe in Grace and I believe the brothers and sisters I left behind in HH are going to make it (to use HH speak) . Their eternal destiny is heaven not because of what they believe and promote now but rather in spite of it. Another words most of the ones I left behind (including Blair and Howard etc.) experienced Grace when they started. They now have begun to work out their salvation under the law. I tried working under that same law for many years. Now I am happy living in grace, working by grace and to constantly be.............. Under Grace | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Junior Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 49 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Praxaluh, Thanks for your input as always. Are you saying to Phil that he is trying to define Christianity by giving the obviously far out examples of some groups? My take is that PureHeart who says he wants "Peace for all" is not willing to draw the line anywhere. Old Watchman was trying to make the point that there is a line. Maybe WFI has drawn the line too broad but if they have then they have it out there for everyone to agree or disagree, there can be no doubt where they stand. PureHeart goes from Mother Teresa to Mark Twain and everything in between with no boundries. I have no problem with groups like WFI disagreeing with me on many doctrines. Which in fact they do. At the same time there is a basic tenant to simple belief in the Gospel. Romans, Phillip in the chariot with the enauch, by grace are you save through through faith etc. I guess this time I missed your point. Thanks Under Grace | ||
| common_sense (common_sense) Advanced Member Username: common_sense Post Number: 537 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.239.204.114 |
They now have begun to work out their salvation under the law. I tried working under that same law for many years. Now I am happy living in grace, working by grace and to constantly be.............. Under Grace Under Grace, The following was posted on the thread devoted to the group in which I grew up. It ties right in with what you said above. For the grace of Godteaches us to say No to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives (Titus 2:11, 12) It has been my desire throughout this discourse...to point out the fallacy of trying to motivate Christians to godly living by a rigid system of man-made rules and regulations. Such restrictions bind us to men and frustrate the ability of the Holy Spirit to lead us and the grace of God to teach us. Not one person has learned godliness by the precepts of the law, neither Gods law or mans additions to it. All teaching of righteous living, to be effective, must be grounded in grace. Grace also sets standards for Christian conduct, but these are on a much different and infinitely higher plane. No dress code, no moral codenot even the Mosaic Lawcan demand what grace demands. An example of Gods standards under grace as compared to law is found in Matthew 22 and John 15. Christ, in answering the Pharisees, said, All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments, namely, Love the Lord with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and Love your neighbor as yourself. This is the limit for love on the human level under law. But in instructing his disciples before that final Passover he said, My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends. This is divine lovenothing less! Christians are to live out their lives on a much higher plane than the unsaved law keeper. The legalistic system practiced by..?..puts confidence in the flesh, the outward doing of things, in an attempt to gain acceptance with God. This is frightening because it looks so right, but is so wrong. When a leader legislates what you must do to act like a good Christian, he is putting you under law. He thinks he knows what is best for you mentally, physically, spiritually and morally. Then he requires that in the lives of those who allow him. He invents codes of dress and behavior that he thinks exemplifies holiness. Law is doing. Grace is being. Unless a change of heart has taken place on the inside, the changes on the outside are in vain. You become phony. The real inside always has a way of coming through the thin, gilded exterior you exhibit. Good works, to be acceptable to God, must spring from love. Love must be the motive for all things done in response to grace. Everything done apart from love has no value in the sight of God (1 Cor. 13:1, 3). Because the motive for serving God is love, that service must be voluntary. It cant be done grudgingly and should never be considered a duty performed or a responsibility fulfilled, like the work of a laborer for his boss. That is not the relationship between the Lord and those who are his. We shouldnt measure the labor rendered nor expect payment in return. It is without thought of gain or reward. Service under grace must be voluntary. Grace gives everything freely out of promptings of Gods love. That God expects a voluntary response or compliance is evident in the epistles. All the admonitions there are in words that clearly denote a voluntary response. Words such as beseech, urge and plead are frequently used. That they are free from any suggestion of compulsion is clear from the fact that they are often used in addressing God. It is an appeal for voluntary response on his part. Two other words used frequently are exhort and admonish. Though more authoritative, they still allow voluntary compliance. The idea of compulsion is excluded. Several very common expressions are let, should and ought. They imply freedom of will to comply or not. It is clear that our Lord does not seek a forced, slavish, or coercive service. He desires a voluntary and joyous labor of love that comes from the heart. A most sinister motive for Christian conduct or work is FEAR. The motive of fear is used to restrain people from doing wrong or to encourage that which is good. That amounts to offering appeasement to God. Fear is the dominant motive in the worlds religions because they know nothing of the love of God that is in Christ Jesus. But fear is often the motivating factor in the lives of Christians who do not fully understand the love and grace of God for them. Fear is the natural feeling produced by the instinct for self-preservation. Self-preservation depends upon self to preserve. There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love. (1 John 4:17, 18) | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Junior Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 50 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Common Sense, Well said! You have hit the central nervous system in HH and what makes it work. The only way you can keep people in a cast system under the law is through fear. Fear of being rejected, fear of losing your salvation, fear of losing your family etc. Sounds like you have been there done that and have the t-shirt to prove it. Under Grace | ||
| common_sense (common_sense) Advanced Member Username: common_sense Post Number: 538 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.239.204.114 |
Sounds like you have been there done that and have the t-shirt to prove it. I have indeed. But the credit for the above actually goes to someone near and dear to me. | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 82 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Im confused.Why would anyone willingly spend 10 to 15 years in a church where you are unhappy, do not agree with their doctrine, have a strong contempt for the leaders, and feel you have been abused; however you can leave at any time you wish? ..Apparently the criteria that the group you referred us toI did not refer you to a group but instead I stated I agree with the one article written by this lady. I do not agree with them as a whole or most of their other writings. But this one article portrayed my thoughts about that particular subject. I dont think I have ever insinuated anyone being untruthful. If I have, I ask for forgiveness. You list 8 people and including yourself that makes 9 that have left this church and Im sure there are more but I recall someone posting there are about 800 remaining members. If it is like all other churches there is a normal turnover of about 10% and most of the ones who leave a church leave because they are unhappy and/or hurt. So I dont see a unique problem in this area. All churches, including mine, have turnover. Another words most of the ones I left behind (including Blair and Howard etc.) experienced Grace when they started. I feel that you think all these folks are going to heaven in spite of themselves and we can all meet in Glory and maybe continue this debate. I can see it now. All the Angels and Christians around the Throne praising God but a few new arrivals are having trouble getting in the spirit because there are others in the crowd that they really just dont care for. That is my Main Reason for all this discussion. My belief, and once again its just my personal belief, is that God does not approve of Christians speaking or writing negative thoughts about other Christians. And if this is the case then some folks who are doing this might be, in my opinion, risking their eternal salvation. You see, I firmly believe once saved always saved is not correct. No one can take away your salvation but you can sure give it away. Jesus said people will fall away from the faith. And I do not want anyone to lose their trip to Glory. So my intentions are good no matter how eccentric or bizarre they appear. | ||
| common_sense (common_sense) Advanced Member Username: common_sense Post Number: 546 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.239.204.114 |
Im confused.Why would anyone willingly spend 10 to 15 years in a church where you are unhappy, do not agree with their doctrine, have a strong contempt for the leaders, and feel you have been abused; however you can leave at any time you wish? Good question, pureheart. In my case, it was a group that I was born into so the option of leaving was not available to me for a number of years. Another factor is that those dynamics were not all present when my parents joined the group; they evolved over a number of years. By the time we arrived at the realization that the abusive leadership was so firmly entrenched and had effectively indocrinated their followers to a probable point of no return, we were in a situation where the option of leaving carried with it the price of a divided family. That is a price we had to pay and continue paying to this day. Others have counted that cost and remain. No Christian leader has the Scriptural authority to demand that of fellow believers! | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 83 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Some folks stay and think youre a fool to leave and some folks leave and think youre a fool to stay. Different strokes for different folks. By the way, Im curious, do those that stay on ever write on web sites or other public venues about how terrible those folks are that departed? | ||
| common_sense (common_sense) Advanced Member Username: common_sense Post Number: 549 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.239.204.114 |
Pureheart, Do you ever look anything straight on and actually deal with the issues?! Please explain to me what is not to understand about it being WRONG for so-called Christian leaders to state that it is God's will for Christians to completely cut off their family members who have done nothing objectionable beyond questioning whether the teachings of those leaders are biblical? And, BTW, did I call anyone a fool for staying? I apologize to the ex-HH posters for sidetracking this onto my experience, but the basic issues seem to be similar. | ||
| truthbuyer (truthbuyer) Intermediate Member Username: truthbuyer Post Number: 117 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 216.82.193.194 |
Actually, what HH and other groups like it have done is go to an extreme. I remind you what Proverbs says about the fear of the Lord in relation to our actions. "By the fear of the Lord, men depart from evil." On the other hand, we have Paul telling us in Romans 2 that, "the goodness of God leadeth men to repentance." There is a positive and negative aspect to this issue. Both are essential. Leave out one and you have trouble, extreme trouble. The modern teaching regarding the law is perverted at best. Paul, possessing impeccable credentials regerding the law, gave us a body of teaching that is consistent in its one main point; the law was inadequate to provide salvation or to maintain salvation for any person. That salvation is provided only through Jesus Christ and only because He met the standard we were incapable of, absolute perfect observance of the law. And Romans 8 tells us that "the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death." So what Jesus accomplished by his death burial and resurrection was to transfer us from one set of law to another, "the law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus." We are still under law, but it is the law of the Spirit. And what does the Spirit help us do? That passage in Romans continues by saying "that the righteousness of the law may be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit." This righteousness is the same righteousness Jesus possesses, the righteousness of doing the law. The only difference is that it originates and emanates from the Holy Spirit, not from our fleshly desires or will. And much of what God commands in the OT we can fulfill through the Spirit. The problem most have is that they get caught up in petty issues. Rather than serving God with their whole heart, mind, soul and body, most want to serve God their own way, never remembering the words of Jesus that, "his commandments are not grievous." These petty issues end up being reduced to a code to follow rather than a life to live for the glory of God. So, when all of life becomes nothing more than a performance, the burden of fulfilling the standard of performance becomes heavy, indeed. And the Spirit has no part in it, regardless of the pure motives of the one acting under this burden. Unless the Spirit is heeded, bondage results. It matters not whether is inflicted personally or by others. Only the Holy Spirit can liberate from such bondage, as many on this forum can attest. Thank God for His grace! | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 85 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Truthbuyer, ......."Actually, what HH and other groups like it have done is go to an extreme"....... Exactly, just like the Amish and The Mennonites. Amen to the rest of your post. My only additional thought is that if mature adults wish to be a part of it, leave them alone to worship and live in a way they desire. Let God be the Judge of all of this. (Message edited by pure-heart on October 24, 2005) | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 86 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Common Sense, ........"Pureheart, Do you ever look anything straight on and actually deal with the issues?! Please explain to me what is not to understand about it being WRONG for so-called Christian leaders to state that it is God's will for Christians to completely cut off their family members who have done nothing objectionable beyond questioning whether the teachings of those leaders are biblical?"......... I agree this is a terrible thing. It is sad. But I would leave it to God. And pray. | ||
| old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 19 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
Young Mr. D, you have asked a question that is at the very heart of the issue before this group. What is orthodox Christianity? Orthodox Christianity would expound on those issue that are central to our understanding of the nature of our Creator and His relationship to His creation, a definition far too short, I realize. Christianity is the life lived in communion with the King who is our savior. All men who come into the world do not enjoy this communion. We all come into this world at enmity with our Creator. We call this enmity, sin. Most of us were born Gentiles; out side the covenants, alone in the world and without God.. But, God came into the world, because He loved what He had created and would give everything to redeem it back to Himself. God the Son came into the world to reveal to His creation His very Self and His great and unfathomable Love. Men beheld Him as a curiosity, an answer to poverty, as the fulfillment of the words of the prophets or as a threat. But, to those who really listened, there was a hunger, because there was emptiness, not of belly, but of soul. He said you most be born again. He said it would be by the Spirit. He said I will go away but the Spirit will come as I have come, from the Father. And the Spirit when He comes will convict the world of sin, righteousness and judgment. He shows man his sin and the great gulf that stands between him and God. He shows man that there is no way he can cross the gulf by his own efforts. Then he shows man the judgment, eternal separation from God, and a place with the enemies of God, Satan and the demons. But, then He shows him Jesus, standing between man and the Father. Man, what will you now do with this Jesus? is the great crisis of every life. If that man should cry out to Jesus and say, Lord, help me, a sinner. Then he is in that instant in the bosom of the savior and in the presence of His Father and Creator and he is an adopted child with all rights and privileges of a son. His filthy rags of a sinful nature are removed as far as the west is from the east and he is clothed with new garments of Christs righteousness. And so shall he forever dwell with, The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, The gospel is the bedrock of orthodox Christianity. It is Jesus plus nothing. It is the work of God in light of the desperation of man lost in sin. Just any man made Jesus will not suffice. Just any man made gospel will not do. Just any man made spirit will not do. There is only one Jesus! There is only one gospel! There is only one Holy Spirit! When you see a God and savior and gospel and Spirit that are not in agreement with the scripture, you must, as a Christian, speak out in defense of the faith delivered to the Church by the prophets and apostles anointed by God. There are some of you here who are in disagreement with us on the issue of the Trinity vs. Oneness. We at WFI believe that the trinity is the best expression of the revelation of the Godhead. We believe, along with most Bible honoring believers, that it is the position of the Church from the apostles to the present day. It is part of orthodox Christian doctrine. I am sure you realize that the Christian church has held this view of God throughout the centuries and only recently have Oneness teachers presented a different doctrine. Am I saying that Oneness people are not saved? NO!! I cannot say that. I did not know theology when I had my crisis encounter with Jesus Christ. I did not know anything about the trinity. I was a deist. I soon became convinced that the trinity was the best interpretation of the scriptures for the nature of God as set against the doctrinal interpretation of Oneness. If you are Oneness and you believe you had a life-transforming encounter with Christ and you believe you are born again and secure in Christ, then you are my brother and sister in the Lord. As to Homestead Heritage, the object of this discussion board, we at WFI use a scriptural evaluator I set forth in Is HH a cult? Do they add to the Word of God? The answer is yes. Do they deny the trinity? Yes. Do they rob Jesus of His divinity? Yes. He is now just a glorified man in the presence of the God. Do they add to the gospel with works? Yes. Do they divide the Body of Christ and separate families? Yes. You are free to take exception to our evaluation. But, by the criteria we use, which we believe is the criteria of the Bible believing church through the ages from the time of the apostles, we view Homestead Heritage to be a false expression of Christianity. | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) New member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 24 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
"Old Watchman" --- Is HH a cult? =================== Watch Do they add to the Word of God? The answer is yes. Prax They offer a different exegesis of the Word of God, on certain issues, as do many other groups. Differing interpretations does not qualifies as a cult. They accept and believe the same Bible books as all (let's say Reformation and Protestant and historic) Christian believers. ================ Watch Do they deny the trinity? Yes. As do many of the strong believers in the Lord Jesus Christ posting on this forum. You are accusing many here with a broad incautious and unscriptural brush, and other oneness believers on the forum should take careful note. ========================================== Watch Do they rob Jesus of His divinity? Yes. Not doctrinally. In fact this is a convoluted description, based on differences with their authority teachings, but not at all accurate in terms of their Messiahology. ================================== Watch He is now just a glorified man in the presence of the God. Wow, we are perhaps into eschatology combined with Messiahology. You seem to be implying that Homestead Heritage is either biblical-unitarian or ebionite in doctrine, where Jesus is simply a special man, rather than "God manifest in the flesh" .. 1 Timothy 3:16 KJB. So I would challenge you to quote them specifically in any way, with exact words, if you believe that they do not accept the Pauline description to Timothy above, and other Deity verses like Colossians 2:9 and John 1. ==================================== "Do they add to the gospel with works? Yes." This is a moving goal post, where to some even water baptism is a 'work', or a verbal confession of faith in Jesus is a 'work'. And from a hyper-nowork perspective 98%+ of Christendom (even much Reformation Calvinism, including Calvin) could be accused in the same manner. Acceptance of the Decalogue as God's eternal law will similarly be accused of being a work, despite the rich historic Christian acceptance of same in Reformation understanding. (For a relatively modern example, read Arthur Pink). Every Christian community group would of course be similarly accused of being a cult by the same criteria. ========================= "Do they divide the Body of Christ and separate families?" Yes Then you must blame Jesus Christ, Himself. He specifically said that such division would be the result of following Him. Personally, I know that every time I stand up for a truth of the Word of God, I can expect exactly the same types of accusation of divisiveness. Shalom, Praxaluh | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 55 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Praxaluh, Once again you show an incredible breadth of knowledge in doctrine and church history. If you ever decide to hold classes I would like to attend. Interesting reading your post. One thing I wanted to address.......... (OW) "Do they divide the Body of Christ and separate families?" Yes (Prax) Then you must blame Jesus Christ, Himself. He specifically said that such division would be the result of following Him. Personally, I know that every time I stand up for a truth of the Word of God, I can expect exactly the same types of accusation of divisiveness. It is true that there are times when one must follow his or her conscience and convictions at the risk of altering and sometimes actually losing relationships. Sometimes wives, husbands, children, other relatives or best friends are not willing to follow where God is calling you and you must go alone. It is part of walking in the kingdom. You said it in your post you must stand up for the truth of the Word of God. However, my experience and observation of what happened in HH was not broken relationships for the sake of the truth but rather families being torn apart for the sake of what was best for HH and adhering to false doctrines not the truth of Gods word. That was not something one could place the blame on Jesus Christ, Himself. If HH were practicing basic Biblical principles regarding relationships it would be different. What I saw was couples told for example you need to listen to what we (the leadership of HH) are saying and not tell you wife or your husband. The marriage covenant was placed way below the covenant made to the fellowship. (I am not talking about the covenant we have in Christ and to the body of Christ in general, but the covenant unto death that was made to HH specifically.) Many families have been torn apart in that manor. It was not for the truth and Jesus was not to blame. Does that make HH a cult in and of itself? That is for smarter people than me to decide. Under Grace | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) New member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 25 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
Hi Under_Grace, Greetings and thanks. I have long been concerned about how 'cult' is used as a smear word, and then used as a tool to get a type of 'Christian-gang' mentality, to be supported by secular media, (often with the backing of various psycho-babble pseudo-Christian and secular and new age experts), and then used as a tool to work the government into an anti-Christian position of persecution. Now, as an example closer to your discussion above, the Mennonites have been criticized for their community practices for many years, especially vis a vis disfellowship and shunning. Such critiques are fair areas of biblical discussion, and if one thinks it is improper then they have every right to challenge them, to publicize, to discuss the biblical apologia, to inform those attracted to their ideas. In that sense I have no difficulty discussing and considering doctrinal and historical matters. My concern above is with the tainted effort to take a legitimate exegetical difference and use it as part of the broad-brushed 'cult' attack, one that ultimately could be used against virtually any group. Toe the line or we will cultify you. As an example, even if one emphasizes grace, if you defend the efficacy of water baptism, you could easily similarly be accused of being a legalistic cult of works !. Let's have some discernment  And what we saw above was a real twisting of the Homestead Heritage beliefs, e.g to claim that they reject the Deity of Messiah, or that they "add to the Word of God" (what systematic theology or eschatology view has not been accused of that !?). So I have no problem listening closely to the views about authority, and I would completely agree that compelling questions can be raised, however please understand that I do not really wish to divert this particular discussion away from the very questionable view that I will paraphrase ..... "we are the 'watchman' and we declare oneness and community and Decalogue-acceptance beliefs as simply legalistic non-Christian cults to be attacked - we declare that such views are rejection of the New Testament and the Deity of Messiah" When I hear mishegas like this, then I will take a stand against the supposed 'watchman' . Shalom, Praxaluh | ||
| old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 20 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
Well, Prax...Now you are a full blown cult apologist for the Homestead Heritage. In previous posts I have quoted from HH literature showing that I not only have their material but I have read it. You have taken the negative position, now defend it. Quote from HH literature and prove that my statements are incorrect. | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) Junior Member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 26 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
Hi Folks, No, Philip, that is not how it works. "he who affirms must prove" And this is doubly, even triply, true if what you 'affirm' is actually an accusation, meant to smear with a broad brush. And you are the one who made very dubious accusations. So I answered them point-to-point, on this thread. I have no requirement to go on some vague fishing expedition to try to find a way to support your strange accusations to which I responded. You seem to be a bit stung that I am not a cult-hunter syncophant. And that I think for myself. So you try to smear me as well -- 'full blown cult apologist' - sheesh Have you no shame ? ---- Folks who read this forum will see lots of critiques and questions and concerns that I raise about the views of Homestead Heritage (e.g. review the water baptism thread). They can also see similar about another community-oriented group on Factnet. However, such questioning and critique does not make me into some sort of backdoor cult-hunter, lurking in the background taking pot shots from some privileged position, and popping my head up to smear, and then ducking back into the shadows. So why don't you start by stating fully your views, the supposedly true Christian views, directly for the forum, so we can see if you are 'orthodox' or perhaps part of an anti-cult 'cult', or immersed in psycho-babble, or have any heretical or false doctrine, or what. Folks have a right to know, since you make yourself the accuser and arbitrator. (btw.. even above I noted you played both ends against the middle -- look above about oneness, labeling it as a cult, yet under certain conditions, the individuals can get your ok as being Christian. What type of abject confusion is that ?) So, to start, you can tell us your views, the acceptable views, of the Gospel, eschatology, law and grace, water baptism, speaking in tongues, OSAS, calvinism, Christian community, the Decalogue, the sabbath, soteriology, the Athanasian creed (is it fundamental?), eternal generation of the Son, Athanasian vs. Cappadocian trinity views, pastoral and eldership and church body authority, and is there a tangible inspired, preserved Bible ? Those who accuse have a far greater responsibility to put their views forth, on the table. Shalom, Praxaluh | ||
| old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 21 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
Young Mr. D, I apologize for allowing myself to be distracted from our conversation by an interruption. Chalk it up to getting older. They say you are only as old as you feel. I am 112 today. However, the interruption had one good suggestion, I should support my points concerning the cultic teachings of HH from their literature. (At the top of this thread you ask where I got my information on HH). I got it from the literature written by the groups founder and theologian). I used our criteria for evaluating a Bible based group to examine the teachings and practices of Homestead Heritage. The results of that examination brought forth our conclusion that Homestead Heritage is not representative of a Christian fellowship. Let me support that, point by point, on their doctrinal statements. First I asked, Do they add to the Word of God My answer was, Yes. I believe the most concise statement is found at the end of the document titled Constitution on Koinonia Membership. Allow me to quote from the last page, You acknowledge by signing this Constitution that you hold to the Holy Bible as interpreted by the Spirit moving through the appropriate channels of leadership as your curriculum, your course of faith, supplemented and more precisely defined and expounded by the interpretation given by the Spirit and recorded in Salvation Is of the Jews; Hallelu Yah; The Garden of God; Covenant Love; The Temple; The Bedrock; The laws of Consistency; The Foundations of the Temple Series, Volumes 1, 2 and 3; The Order of Perfection; The Service of the Temple; The Narrow Gate; Koinonia Covenant Confession; Who Owns the Children?; Wisdoms Children; Building Christian Character; Beyond Violence; Beyond Pacifism; Culture as Spiritual War Series; Knowledge as Spiritual War Series; Justice Is Fallen; the Koinonia Curriculum and others that might be added in the future through the appropriate channels of leadership per the above, including various specific position and conviction papers, such as those on home birth and home education. You see, Daniel, it is not the Bible that is their authority, it is what they say the Bible says as more precisely defined and expounded by their interpretation as set forth in their literature. The Jehovahs Witnesses have the same mandate for their people. In the Watchtower magazine of October 1, 1967, page 587 they state, Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this reason the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovahs visible organization in mind. In the Witnesses Year Book for 1939, page 85 we read, It should be expected that the Lord would have a means of communication to his people on the earth, and he has clearly shown that the magazine called The Watchtower is used for that purpose. Can you see that they are both saying the same thing? The second question I asked was, Do they deny the Trinity? My answer, Yes. In their book, The Bedrock, Blair Adams and Joel Stein make this statement, we recognize that the views that culminated in the Trinitarian doctrine began circulating in the church during the second and possibly even the first centuries. The source of this view, however, was never scriptural; it always stemmed from confusion that entered the church from pagan philosophy or religion. (p. 50). I think that makes the point. Next, Do they rob Jesus of His divinity? Yes. I must confess that this is not a concise way to state the Question. May I rephrase it by asking, Do they hold to a Biblical view of Jesus Christ? In this case, the answer is, No. Lets read some statements from Who Do Men Say That I Am. On pages 179 & 180 we read, So the Son of God was not a person coeternal with another person, the Father, but we see from the above scriptures (Rom. 5:14) that when Jesus speaks to the Father of the glory I had with you before the world began (John 17:5), It means that the Messiah, the Christ, who is Gods wisdom, had been preconceived in the mind of God, the God who calls things that are not as though they were(Rom. 4:17). Now, this may be a view held by many in the Oneness churches but it is not the view held by conservative, Evangelicals of whom our theological positions would be representative. Now let me give you an Evangelical view of the pre-existence of the Son of God. Lets look at one of the most famous and well-known passages in scripture, John 1:1. In the beginning was the Word (we want to look at the Greek verb used here for was. It is in the indicative imperfect tense, which in English would mean it is past tense, linear or continuous action, or in this case, state of being. So, we have In the beginning the Word eternally existed. Now, the second clause, and the Word was with God. We want to concentrate on the wordswas with, en pros. The preposition, pros, when used to show relationship, means face to face. So, we have John saying, and the Word was eternally existent, in a face to face relationship with the Father at the time of the creation. And the last clause is a predicate nominative, and the Word was God or God was the Word. So, what we have is, In the beginning, when God the Father began to create, the Word was eternally present with the Father in a face-to-face reciprocative relationship, and the eternally existent Word was in His very essence, God The Modalism of Oneness doctrine is undone by the precision of Johns impeccable prolog. Now, what does HH say about the incarnate Word of God that they call Jesus Christ. Now, Jesus is the name of the Father according to HH, we are then the children of our Father, whose Name is Jesus (Who Do Men Say That I Am), pager 187. When HH speaks of The Son, they are speaking only of the human man, The Son does not exercise coequal authority in respect to the Father (Ibid. 173). On the same page it says, Coeternal Person or Begotten Son? Does the Bible say that the Father and the Son are coeternal, that the Son preexisted with the Father? Or does it say the Son had a definite beginning in time? In The Bedrock, we read, Hence, the Son (we speak here of Christs humanity) who has been given power is not equal to the Father who has given Him that power, since the Sons power is derivative and not original. (p. 88). Daniel, the writer has voiced two Christological heresies in these two statements. The first heresy is called subordinationism. The second heresy is the denial of the generation of the Son. Remember, John said, Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also. (I John 2:23). There cannot be an eternal Father without an eternal Son. Now, let us look at one more Christological heresy. Homestead Heritage declares that Jesus is no more than a glorified man in Heaven; So Stephen did not see the second person of the Trinity standing at the right hand of the first person. Stephen simply saw Jesus the One who humbled and abased Himself totally, exalted to the highest place(Ibid. , 188); and then So the One who must reign over our lives until all enemies are put under His feet is Jesus sacrificial humanity.(Ibid., 190); again, His humanity must reign until all dominion, authority and power; have been destroyed (I Cor. 15:24) (Ibid., 191). Evangelical Christianity calls this heresy. Does Oneness accept and teach this as truth? I asked a pastor of New Life UPC in Austin if this represented the beliefs of their church. He responded, We do not believe that "when Jesus was resurrected the Father left the human body." Here is what we believe: Jesus is God manifest in the flesh (I Timothy 3:16). All the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Him (Colossians 2:9). This statement of Scripture was written after the ascension; it describes Jesus in His present existence. The Incarnation is permanent. Today, Jesus is God manifested in glorified human flesh. He is not merely an anointed man, but He is both God and man at the same time. In eternity, we will see the one God on the divine throne in heaven. We will know Him as both "God and the Lamb," as one being with one face and one supreme name, sitting on one throne (Revelation 22:3-4). Bro. Bernard Even Oneness would hold Homestead Heritages view of the resurrected Christ to be heresy. Point four asks, Do they add to the gospel with works? Yes In the Constitution of Koinonia Membership, they make this statement, It is just like buying land on an installment contract: you can live on the land, husband it, bring forth fruit from it and say its yours--as long as you keep making the payment. If we fail to walk on, we will fall in the wilderness of unbelief and miss our inheritance with Jesus and be literally repossessed by the world and its ruler. (p.11). On the subject of water baptism, The water of I Peter 3:21-22 saves us by bringing us to the place of Gods right hand, the place of the Name. (Who Do Men Say That I am) p. 188. The idea of faith and repentance plus something else is carried on in this statement, if God has truly taken over the authority and control of our life, then this will be evidenced by the fact that He has taken over the control of our tongue, as we speak in tongues as the Spirit gives utteranceWhen man no longer controls his own tongue with his own words of his own language, but instead God begins to speak through him in a language only the Spirit can give, then man has started a new relationship where God is Lord, is Helmsman. (Introduction to the Foundation Series) p. 10. In the same work, on page 10, it speaks of a third work in the salvation process, So we can see that the laying on of hands, which is Gods means for setting His people in order, far from being a peripheral matter, is essential, is in fact foundational, to the salvation of our souls. Now, many millions of people believe that water baptism is essential for salvation. But, is this what the Bible really teaches? Evangelical Christians believe this is a heresy, since it adds works to the grace of God. Lets look at the two main scriptures used by baptismal regenerationists. The first is Acts 2:38, And Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. It seems straightforward in English that baptism is part of the salvistic process. But what does it say in the Greek? The word for or eis, for the remission of sins, is at the heart of the controversy. In this case it means for the purpose of identifying you with the remission of sins. In I Cor. 10:2 the people were baptized eis for or unto identification with Moses, his mission. The word Repent is second person plural and the verb shall receive is second person plural. The modifying clause is Gift of the Holy Spirit. The verb be baptized is third person singular. Remember number and person must agree in grammar. Now, HH mentions I Peter 3:21 as a proof text. First lets look at Romans 6:3, For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection. Baptism is a type or symbol or likeness of Christs death, burial and resurrection. I Peter 3:21 says. The like figure whereupon (Gk. antitupos: a figure correspondent to some other) even baptism doth also now save us, (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, Here, as in Romans 6:3, baptism is a figure of our death to sin and our resurrection to eternal life. The gift of eternal life is predicated on faith in Jesus Christ alone, (Eph. 2:8-9). Then HH adds laying on of hands and speaking in tongues as necessary for salvation. Cornelius and his family were saved before baptism. (See Acts chapter 10). Orthodox Christianity calls this works salvation and declares it to be heretical and antithetical to the true gospel. Now, for our last point, Do they divide the body of Christ and separate families? Yes Here is an extensive quote from the HH book, the Garden of God, A God-centered culture, then, is one that encourages the individual to conform himself to the image of God; this is because the corporate image of the community that rests upon that culture is conformed to the image of God. This image is the image of covenant; for covenant expresses Gods nature---His faithful, eternal loveand thus true godly culture is the culture of covenant. Gods law-Word, which expresses the terms of His Covenant, conforms us to a particular order of relationships, a way of life, a way of seeing, believing and behaving; and from that order, life style and visionthat is, from our conformance to the covenants termsis formed the corporate image that God has ordained for his community. We, in turn, enter into oneness with God by conforming ourselves to the image that He has ordained for us, both as individuals and as a community. Only by conforming our lives in every area to the pattern and way of life ordained by God can we enter into true oneness with our fellowman, with nature and with God Himself, for only this God-ordained culture fully expressed His covenant. And only through His covenant can we know Him. With His Word sown within us, and with us planted in His covenant community and culture, we can become once again the garden of God. We can grow into oneness with the God who is love. And this oneness with Him, as we know, is our salvation. (p. 124). And, then this quote, That is, salvationrests upon information (words, knowledge) that comes from God through the channels of covenant and through which the image of God is formed within man. P. 125. Daniel, do you believe that oneness with God, which they say is salvation, is a learning process brought about by conforming yourself to the patters taught in a community led by Gods chosen channels of authority? That is not the salvation of the Bible and it is not the salvation of orthodox Christianity. As to the tearing apart of families, I will point you to the many posts on this board for confirmation. I hope this answers most of the reasons why Watchman Fellowship and orthodox Christianity considers Homestead Heritage to be a false expression of true Biblical Christianity. They may believe and practice what they will, but they have no right to call it Christian. know there are Oneness believers posting here. This section of the Factnet board is about the doctrines and practices of Homestead Heritage not Oneness churches. I have given you my person view above. I came to Christ through the Assemblies of God. So I am not a stranger to Pentecostalism. WFI uses four cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith to make an evaluation of any group in question; Do you add to the Word of God with written of spoken word that is held to be equal to or superior to the Bible (Mormonism); Do they subtract from the deity of Christ; Do they multiply the requirements for salvation; Do they divide the Body of Chirst? Many groups who are considered to be mainline Christian and even conservative churches may have a doctrine that violates one of the above, and would be guilty of teaching a heresy. But, when a group hits on all four points it must be said to be non-Christian. We believe HH is such a group. | ||
| pureheart (pureheart) Member Username: pureheart Post Number: 93 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 205.157.244.33 |
Greetings, Well Old Watchman is still proclaiming his understanding and interpretation is the truth, fact, and perfectly accurate while others whose beliefs do not line up with him are wrong. It would be one thing to simply promote ones opinion but in this format it could have tragic consequences to a new believer or someone contemplating conversion. .I used our criteria. Just as stated it is their own biased criteria and not an official criteria established by God. And the Watchman statesI came to Christ through the Assemblies of God Amen, praise the Lord. But now you sponsor a web site that calls them a cult? They brought you to the Lord. How dare you! How many others have they taken out of Satans snare and brought into the Body of Christ? And you take exception to the Jehovah Witnesses. While I do not agree with them in many areas, I admire them for going door to door trying to reach the lost. When was the last time you got up and went out into the world and approached people cold turkey about Christ? If they can save a soul that is lost to the enemy then they should be applauded. If they are doing something inappropriate then let God deal with it. He is in control; not you sir. Plus, what a waste, with all the resources at your disposal you could really make a difference in the fight with Satan. There can be open debate about doctrine and scripture interpretation without attacking groups based on their beliefs. Remember the part in my post If I were the Devil ..Id do my best to divide the well-meaning ones. If I could get them fighting each other, theyd never get around to fighting me.. I keep praying that one day we all walk together toward Glory. | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 294 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Old Watchman, I am considering taking on the task of responding to your above critique of HH. Right now my only thought is it is sad that you know so little of what Homestead is all about, yet you try to come across as such an expert. I guess we all have images that we must try to uphold... You are guilty of a vast amount of "proof texting" to say the least though. I just finished listening to the edited version of the meeting you held way back when with a few ex-HHers and it reinforced and strengthened my belief that when it comes to what HH believes, you haven't a clue. You can scrape together excerpts from any document and make them appear to be anything you wish, that doesn't make them correct though. P.S. I do find it interesting that you make a living out of measuring groups of people against your self proclaimed "four cardinal rules", while the Jesus you claim to serve had a "cardinal rule" that went something like, love your neighbor as you love yourself. He made a "living" by loving, not attacking others. But wait, drum roll...... I just added to His word, so now I MUST be a cult............ (Message edited by dowen on October 28, 2005) | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 295 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
By the way, I DO believe that there is a valid place for a ministry devoted to shedding light on groups that do not serve God. But it is a task that requires much, much research and a very sensitive approach. Something that is sadly lacking in your approach to Homestead Heritage. I do not project myself into the position of judging ALL of your employers endeavors, but I do feel that I have a duty to point our your groups shortcoming in the way you have handled my family's Church. If my approach to your accusations has been harsh and offensive, I apologize. I wish no harm upon you. I just want the TRUTH to be known. Blessings, DOwen. | ||
| old_watchman (old_watchman) New member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 24 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
dowen Ask your dad for all of the books I quoted. You cannot know if I quoted out of context unless you are able to read the context. Better yet, ask Blair for the books. p.s. the CDs are not edited. You have all five hours just as It happened. | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 61 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Hey Dowen, I have a some questions for you. This does not come with a rebuke. I do not and have not questioned your sincerity or your passion, but I would like to know where you are coming from in the quote below......... By the way, I DO believe that there is a valid place for a ministry devoted to shedding light on groups that do not serve God. But it is a task that requires much, much research and a very sensitive approach. Something that is sadly lacking in your approach to Homestead Heritage. Are there any groups that need the light shed on them? If there are groups that do not serve God what criteria or doctrinal measurement or behavioral standard would you use to make a judgment? You told OW....I do find it interesting that you make a living out of measuring groups of people against your self proclaimed "four cardinal rules". You would have to use some basis to make a judgment, what would that be? You said to judge a group....that requires much, much research and a very sensitive approach. Something that is sadly lacking in your approach to Homestead Heritage. What would you call reading through HUNDREDS of pages of books and Temple Patterns written by BA, JS, HW and the staff of proof readers and researchers at HH. What would you call spending over five hours with over thirty ex-members who had all read those same books. How about OW spending countless hours on the phone, face to face and e-mails with former members of HH. As for the other posters who are former members some of us spent TEN YEARS and more reading the books and living in the HH community. That does not qualify as research to you? You may not agree with us Daniel and that is OK, but I think you would have to concead that what we say regarding HH and its leadership is not from lack of research or fore- thought. If it is and you still maintain that position, please tell me and the rest of the posters here how much research and experience would it take to qualify us to speak about HH? You said.......I just finished listening to the edited version of the meeting you held way back when with a few ex-HHers and it reinforced and strengthened my belief that when it comes to what HH believes, you haven't a clue. You can scrape together excerpts from any document and make them appear to be anything you wish, that doesn't make them correct though Regarding the meeting in Waco what you heard on those tapes was the entire meeting, I believe others including OW will verify that. So calm down there was no editing out the good parts that was shared about HH. I have a set of the same CDs you do. Sort of like a disfellowship / disassciation meeting only instead of one of us it was HH. You may remember what those meetings were like. I sat through more than I care to remember. My question for you regarding that meeting stems from your comment.....I just finished listening to the edited version of the meeting you held way back when with a few ex-HHers and it reinforced and strengthened my belief that when it comes to what HH believes, you haven't a clue. I believe you slipped in the door for part of that meeting Daniel. Is that correct? There were thirty former members of HH that represented almost 200 YEARS of experience in HH and hundreds of hours reading HH literature. You dismiss that as OT and the former members not have a clue when it comes to HH. Again Daniel, you may not agree with what was said, but to dismiss that meeting arbitrarily strikes me at worst dishonest or at best extremely naive. May you move where.....The path of the righteous is like the first gleam of dawn, shining ever brighter till the full light of day and always remain.......... Under Grace | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 297 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Hey Under_Grace, You had some questions and I have some answers. First of all, the post that you have dissected was addressed to OW, and HIS group, but I will humor you. "Are there any groups that need the light shed on them? If there are ?groups that do not serve God? what criteria or doctrinal measurement or behavioral standard would you use to make a judgment? You told OW....?I do find it interesting that you make a living out of measuring groups of people against your self proclaimed "four cardinal rules".? You would have to use some basis to make a judgment, what would that be?" (UG) #1. Are there any groups that need the light shed on them? Of course, and when I wrote that I was referring to some of the groups that WFI have listed as cults on their website. I should have made myself clearer, I guess that was a product of the "4th grade education" I received at HH. (An accusation that was made during the 'meeting' OW presided over.) #2. If there are ?groups that do not serve God? what criteria or doctrinal measurement or behavioral standard would you use to make a judgment? Well, I see what you are trying to do here and I am impressed at your effort to lay a trap for me. Now, when I said I believe there is a place for apologetics I should have been more clear. When I think of apologetics I think of defending the beliefs I hold dear, NOT attacking others for what they hold dear! HH NEVER attacked WFI for what they believe, so WFI has no right to attack HH.} Judgment should not be passed in the way that OW passes it, namely, (read with your best "John Kerry" voice) "I have determined that HH is I a cult and outside of Christianity, therefore my group is at opposition with them and we will endeavor to cause them as much grief and trouble as we possibly can". I don't have a problem with OW thinking whatever he likes about HH, I do have a problem with him publicly declaring that they are a cult and respecting them less than one would respect a dog. THAT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH!!! Now, moving on, you made a fascinating comparison that I would like to point out. "I have a set of the same CD?s you do. Sort of like a disfellowship / disassciation meeting only instead of one of us it was HH. You may remember what those meetings were like. I sat through more than I care to remember.(UG) So the meeting that OW held was "sort of like" a "disfellowship meeting" at HH. Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to believe that one of the main reasons many of you left was because you hated those meetings, or "don't care to remember them". What is that scripture about dogs returning to their vomit..... What a testimony you guys are. Now to the paragraph dealing with whether or not OW has done enough research to justify his slandering HH. You "gracefully" said, "What would you call reading through HUNDREDS of pages of ?books? and ?Temple Patterns? (UG) I would say, that judging from what I heard on those CD's and what I have read on this site, OW didn't really read ANY of those books. He may have sifted through them looking for quotes he could twist, but he did NOT read them. If he had he wouldn't be here today. "What would you call spending over five hours with over thirty ex-members who had all read those same books. How about OW spending countless hours on the phone, face to face and e-mails with former members of HH." (UG) I would call that tale bearing and gossiping. I would also say that OW must not have listened much to what those people were saying, or they were lying. Why? Because he asked questions during that meeting like "How many of you had Bibles in your homes?", and "Where you ever taught that you should actually read them?" and other nonsense like that. If OW had even done a little open minded research he wouldn't have made a fool of himself by asking questions like those, and in doing so expose himself as the fraud he is. "As for the other posters who are former members some of us spent TEN YEARS and more reading the books and living in the HH community." (UG) OK Under_grace, The rubber needs to meet the road here. You say you have spent 10 years at HH reading and practising what they believe. Great, I ask you this, is EVERY accusation made on this board true? WFI has "four cardinal rules" they use in passing judgment on others. Lets look at the second "Cardinal rule". Does the group in question deny the deity of Christ. OW says yes. This is a big one UG! You say you are a Christian, if you are then you must come forward and defend your brethren who are under fire from OW! OW has made a false accusation, if you spent 10 years at HH you know what I say to be true. Do your Christian duty and call OW what he is, a false accuser! | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) Junior Member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 36 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
Hi Daniel and friends, Daniel, I want to thank you for a well-considered and expressed defence of your views about the current controversies. While I may have some particular amens ,and some differences, I just first want to thank you for spending the time and effort to put forth a strong and spirited explanation, point-to-point .... and for now I will stay aside, leaving room for the dialog between yourself and Under_Grace and any others. Well, hmmm.. I will give a hearty amen on the last paragraph about the Deity of Messiah, and the clearly false accusation from Watchman vis a vis the doctrines of Homestead Heritage. And I heartily second your call to Under_Grace to clearly and publicly speak up, even to break ranks ... separating himself from that convoluted and false accusation on foundational Christian doctrine. Under_Grace (and perhaps others) should do this, if only for their own peace before God, although fairness and accuracy and truth also comes to play. Shalom, Praxaluh PS. Maybe we should have a separate discussion somewhere as to whether any overt orthodox Athanasian Creedish Trinitarian really can truly believe in the full Deity of Messiah | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 298 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Thanks Prax, It is somewhat unnerving to post in an arena like FACTnet. Pouring ones heart and soul into a post and then having it torn apart is a bit frustrating, lol. I think we have all been on both sides of that fence. Blessings, DOwen. | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 63 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Hey Dowen and everyone, What is with the ?????? marks it has invaded several previous posts, perhaps we can blame it on Halloween. May I join Praxaluh in complimenting you on a thoughtful and insightful post. It is a pleasure to have dialog with you when you write like you just did. Thanks. Regarding my not separating myself from OT’s coming against Oneness. For now I will say that I do not agree with OT’s position and I will devote a rather lengthy post toward that end at a later date. Thanks for mentioning that P. And while I am thinking of it thanks for your recent posts to ML and ART. None of us will agree on things all the time but I appreciate your attitude. Just wish I had your vocab. Allow me to clarify some of my post to Dowen. D. you posted...Are there any groups that need the light shed on them? Of course, and when I wrote that I was referring to some of the groups that WFI have listed as cults on their website. I should have made myself clearer, I guess that was a product of the "4th grade education" I received at HH. (An accusation that was made during the 'meeting' OW presided over.) UG...I was not trying to insult your intelligents, just wanted to see what groups you thought needed attention. Regarding the 4th grade education comment, OT ask how far did your education go while you were in HH and someone a former member said 4th grade or there abouts. HH stressed the education of children was the responsibility of the parents. Ultimately, that is true and you really can not blame HH for lack of education. What was being said was the lack of history (as it was being re-written by BA and company). The ineffectiveness of the charts etc. I would not imply you Daniel or your education only reached the 4th grade as I have complimented your postings many times. D.posted....HH NEVER attacked WFI for what they believe, so WFI has no right to attack HH.} Judgment should not be passed in the way that OW passes it, namely, (read with your best "John Kerry" voice) "I have determined that HH is I a cult and outside of Christianity, therefore my group is at opposition with them and we will endeavor to cause them as much grief and trouble as we possibly can". I don't have a problem with OW thinking whatever he likes about HH, I do have a problem with him publicly declaring that they are a cult and respecting them less than one would respect a dog. THAT I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH!!! UG....First I am assuming the quote is a summery of what you think OT was saying as I could not find the quote you posted. Is that correct? It is true as far as I know HH has never singled out WFI to correct them. They have however, in the literature lumped virtually every other Christian group as being deceived in regards to many many doctrines. They do not single them out, it is more a generic attack. Although they do speak of errors in historical terms and names. I understand that you do not believe that HH teaches false doctrine. That is OK. At this point I am not in anyway speaking for OT. My purpose for being here is I believe that if someone joins HH they have the potential to be harmed as many of the posters here on the website were harmed. I am not saying you were harmed as you have testified you were not. However, many people have been harmed and many former members do not recover to even have a discussion like we are having. People thinking of joining HH or on those on Friday night status waiting for an invitation to a Sunday meeting do not, I believe get the whole story before they join. My hope is this website will give them the opportunity to see the other side of the coin. HW once gave a great illustration that if you are looking at a table you can only see it from one perspective at a time. If you are facing the table you can see the top, the front legs and part of the front on the back legs. You can not see underneath the table, the other edge of the table or either end of the table and not the back of the legs. I want people to see the table (HH) from every angle and if they still want to join. So be it. I know it angers you and others that WFI or Hank the Bible Answer man or anyone to call’s HH a cult. I understand that. You admit that some of the groups on the Factnet board are cults. You said.....“Of course, and when I wrote that I was referring to some of the groups that WFI have listed as cults on their website.” In order for a group to be a cult you have to have platform of belief for calling a group a cult. You understandably do not believe the doctrines and practices of HH fall into that category. I have never formed a cult criteria and do not know much about JW or Mormans etc. so for myself I can not say that any group is a cult from what I have written on the subject. However, from every definition of a cult I have read by their definition HH is a cult. Taking away Oneness does not change the picture, which would not be in my definition if I ever decide to write one. What I do know is what I stated above. I feel that HH is harming lives and destroying families. Not all of them of course, but I have met many of them (former members) and spent hours and days with them after they came out of HH. I have tried to help them move forward and not lose their faith altogether as others have. D.said....“So the meeting that OW held was "sort of like" a "disfellowship meeting" at HH. Correct me if I am wrong but I seem to believe that one of the main reasons many of you left was because you hated those meetings, or "don't care to remember them". What is that scripture about dogs returning to their vomit..... What a testimony you guys are.” UG....Former members gathering together to discuss their experiences while they are in HH is going to be distasteful to you because you still believe the teachings and practices of HH....“When I think of apologetics I think of defending the beliefs I hold dear”. As I have stated before there is nothing wrong with that. But the people that were there at that meeting with the exception of you, believe that many of the doctrines and teachings in HH are false and they were hurt by them. This is nothing new. I listed many on this web-site many of which were at that meeting that have testified to that on this website. What myself and others believe about HH does not take away from your good experience, but it does mean that either HH is deceived or the former members are deceived about many of the beliefs and practices in HH. I wish it were not that way. You said......"What would you call spending over five hours with over thirty ex-members who had all read those same books. How about OW spending countless hours on the phone, face to face and e-mails with former members of HH." (UG) “I would call that tale bearing and gossiping. I would also say that OW must not have listened much to what those people were saying, or they were lying. Why? Because he asked questions during that meeting like "How many of you had Bibles in your homes?", and "Where you ever taught that you should actually read them?" and other nonsense like that. If OW had even done a little open minded research he wouldn't have made a fool of himself by asking questions like those, and in doing so expose himself as the fraud he is.” UG......Several people testified the leadership discouraged people to read the Bible but rather the literature. Daniel that is true and many ex-members including me will testify that the group leaders encouraged us to read the literature over the Bible. That is a fact. Again I wish it were not so. D. you posted...."As for the other posters who are former members some of us spent TEN YEARS and more reading the books and living in the HH community." (UG) OK Under_grace, The rubber needs to meet the road here. You say you have spent 10 years at HH reading and practicing what they believe. Great, I ask you this, is EVERY accusation made on this board true? UG.....As to the number of years that I spent reading literature and living in the community, please let me clarify. I should have said “there are many posting on this board that have spent up to ten years or even more reading books (HH literature) and living in the HH community.” As to the question is “EVERY accusation made on this board true?” The answer is NO. I am not Absolute Real Truth--100%, I leave that claim to someone else. May I ask you a question, are your claims that HH is doctrinally and experientially all true100%? As for me I try with the best of my knowledge and ability to be as accurate as I can be. I trust you do the same. In my opinion only a fool would claim to be 100% right all the time. It is really late or early depending on how you look at it and I will live to write another day. I bid you adieu my young friend. May we all be blessed in our going out and coming in and forever remain....... Under Grace | ||
| common_sense (common_sense) Advanced Member Username: common_sense Post Number: 601 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.239.204.114 |
Religious Cults and Sects Potentially Destructive Religious Cults and Sects. Is your religious organisation guilty of enforcing cultic behaviour or using mind control? What are your personal experiences? I just wanted to point out FACTNet's description for this section of their discussion board. Being listed on this board initially is simply representative of an individual's opinion (not necessarily that of FACTNet). Note that this is also a listing of sects; and it is evident that HH falls into that category. Whether or not they are "potentially destructive" is again a matter of opinion, and that is the basis for discussion. sect (sĕkt) n. A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice. A religious body, especially one that has separated from a larger denomination. A faction united by common interests or beliefs. [Middle English secte, from Old French, from Latin secta, course, school of thought, from feminine past participle of sequī, to follow.] | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 302 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Howdy Under_Grace, I hope you are enjoying the gorgeous weather here in Waco! As to the "4th grade" comments, thanks for the compliments. I am thankful my folks took the time and responsibility to educate me. It really broke my heart when I heard that accusation leveled. I know that my Mom did, and still does, spend countless hours pouring her life into her children's education. To make a mockery out of the sacrifices made on my, and others behalf, grieves me deeply. I think what hurt the most was the round of laughter that followed that comment during the meeting. "Regarding my not separating myself from OT’s (I think you meant OW?) coming against Oneness. For now I will say that I do not agree with OT’s position and I will devote a rather lengthy post toward that end at a later date." (UG) Lookin' forward to it... Although I don't remember bringing up oneness in that post??? "It is true as far as I know HH has never singled out WFI to correct them. They have however, in the literature lumped virtually every other Christian group as being deceived in regards to many many doctrines. They do not single them out, it is more a generic attack. Although they do speak of errors in historical terms and names." (UG) I see your point but I must say, every church I have ever attended does the same thing. It is unfair of you to single out HH on this issue. That is, unless you feel that you need to take on alot of Church's out there... "I understand that you do not believe that HH teaches false doctrine. That is OK. At this point I am not in anyway speaking for OT. My purpose for being here is I believe that if someone joins HH they have the potential to be harmed as many of the posters here on the website were harmed. I am not saying you were harmed as you have testified you were not. However, many people have been harmed and many former members do not recover to even have a discussion like we are having." (UG) #1. "I understand that you do not believe that HH teaches false doctrine." (UG) I have never said that. Please refrain from placing words in my mouth, it makes you look desperate. #2. " My purpose for being here is I believe that if someone joins HH they have the potential to be harmed as many of the posters here on the website were harmed." (UG) Interesting, you are here to maybe, just maybe save someone from being harmed. That seems noble at first glance but I humbly submit to you that while you might, possibly 'help' an unknown person, you are hurting about a thousand others in the process. Let's look at it this way, you might maybe help somebody you've never seen nor know personally, yet you most certainly WILL HURT 1000 people you know quite well. It just seems like a concept that has not been thought out very well. #3. " ...many people have been harmed and many former members do not recover to even have a discussion like we are having." (UG) This may be true, but again, humbly, I submit that former members of any Church will, almost without exception, have hurt feelings. Please don't single out HH. (Which also makes you look desperate.) "People thinking of joining HH or on those on Friday night status waiting for an invitation to a Sunday meeting do not, I believe get the whole story before they join. My hope is this website will give them the opportunity to see the other side of the coin." (UG) Maybe, yet I must say that if I was visiting HH and read the above quote, I would feel that you think I'm to stupid and ignorant to make decisions for myself. That wouldn't make me want to listen to much of what you have to say. In fact, I'd probably write off everything you have to say... (Especially when no one even knows who you are...right now you are just a guy in the shadows with a bag over his face yelling "listen to me!, I know the Truth!" Comical, yes, Credible, no.) "Several people testified the leadership discouraged people to read the Bible but rather the literature. Daniel that is true and many ex-members including me will testify that the group leaders encouraged us to read the literature over the Bible. That is a fact. Again I wish it were not so." (UG) Honestly, I feel that people who have said things like that are lying or delusional. From the time I was old enough to read my parents had me reading the Bible. The first book I remember buying was a Bible. My dad spent/spends far more time reading the Bible than reading HH literature. I have read a good deal of HH literature though, then and now. What I find in HH's writings is that the bulk of any of their book's is quotes from the Bible. Contrast that with the fact that the Book Mr. Arnn passed out at his meeting has only ONE, solitary quote from the scriptures in it. Just a thought. Well, I think I hit on the highlights of your post, and since you sidestepped addressing the central question of my previous post, I will ask you again; WFI has "four cardinal rules" they use in passing judgment on others. Lets look at the second "Cardinal rule". Does the group in question deny the deity of Christ. OW says yes. This is a big one UG! You say you are a Christian, if you are then you must come forward and defend your brethren who are under fire from OW! OW has made a false accusation, if you spent 10 years at HH you know what I say to be true. Do your Christian duty and call OW what he is, a false accuser! | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 64 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Dowen, Thanks again for a well thought insightful post. The remark concerning education is regrettable and I am sorry that it was made and that it hurt you and you mom. Your mom was always smiling and kind to my family and I. You can not be around your mom and dad and not sense their love for each other as well you and your brother and sister. Your answer #2....“Interesting, you are here to maybe, just maybe save someone from being harmed. That seems noble at first glance but I humbly submit to you that while you might, possibly 'help' an unknown person, you are hurting about a thousand others in the process. Let's look at it this way, you might maybe help somebody you've never seen nor know personally, yet you most certainly WILL HURT 1000 people you know quite well. It just seems like a concept that has not been thought out very well.” UG....I can understand what you are saying, however my objective as I stated is to....“My purpose for being here is I believe that if someone joins HH they have the potential to be harmed”. You acknowledge that I might possibly help some but would hurt current members (approximately 1000 people) in the process. It is my understanding that the current members are not allowed to view this web-site under penalty of discipline for doing so. I heard through the ex-member grapevine that your dad is at least one of the designated to monitor this site, but those not chosen for that are not to look. Am I wrong about that or are the members free to read on this web-site? If I am right about that the only ones I might have an effect on are those who are considering joining and thus are the people I would want to influence. Dowen....#3. " ...many people have been harmed and many former members do not recover to even have a discussion like we are having." (UG) This may be true, but again, humbly, I submit that former members of any Church will, almost without exception, have hurt feelings. Please don't single out HH. (Which also makes you look desperate.) UG.....We agree that former members of any group as you put it “almost without exception have hurt feelings.” The reason I have single out HH, is when people leave HH they think they have lost their salvation. Some are able to overcome that with time, but it is one thing to leave a church because the pastor did not come to visit you when you were in the hospital. Another thing to leave or be disfellowshipped from HH thinking the only way you can regain your salvation is to repent and re-join HH. Before you say it I know you and ART feel that is not the case for the two of you (maybe very disturbed as well). However, the vast majority of those leaving have a struggle in also leaving their faith. I think even if you do not agree that assessment because I do it is a reason for me to single out HH. Dowen #3 continued....."People thinking of joining HH or on those on Friday night status waiting for an invitation to a Sunday meeting do not, I believe get the whole story before they join. My hope is this website will give them the opportunity to see the other side of the coin." Maybe, yet I must say that if I was visiting HH and read the above quote, I would feel that you think I'm to stupid and ignorant to make decisions for myself. That wouldn't make me want to listen to much of what you have to say. In fact, I'd probably write off everything you have to say... (Especially when no one even knows who you are...right now you are just a guy in the shadows with a bag over his face yelling "listen to me!, I know the Truth!" Comical, yes, Credible, no.) UG...Hard to get over not knowing who I am. It is still interesting to me that you have no problem with ART’s anonymity saying listen to me I have the ABSOLUTE REAL TRUTH--100%. Yet because I remain anonymous I am just a “guy in the shadows with a bag over my head” with no credibility and comical at that. The only difference between the anonymity that I ask for and what ART ask for is that you agree with what he says and disagree or at least have a struggle with everything I post. I give you this challenge, when you start calling ART comical, posting with no credibility and not knowing the truth based not on what he says but the fact that he remains anonymous, then I will consider your problem with my anonymity. As far as me thinking people are stupid for considering joining HH it is quite the contrary. Most of the people considering joining and those that joined for the most part were extremely intelligent and dedicated Christians. If you go back and read the rest of my post what my goal is and I quote myself.....“People thinking of joining HH or on those on Friday night status waiting for an invitation to a Sunday meeting do not, I believe get the whole story before they join. My hope is this website will give them the opportunity to see the other side of the coin. HW once gave a great illustration that if you are looking at a table you can only see it from one perspective at a time. If you are facing the table you can see the top, the front legs and part of the front on the back legs. You can not see underneath the table, the other edge of the table or either end of the table and not the back of the legs. I want people to see the table (HH) from every angle and if they still want to join. So be it.” Dowen still on #3....."Several people testified the leadership discouraged people to read the Bible but rather the literature. Daniel that is true and many ex-members including me will testify that the group leaders encouraged us to read the literature over the Bible. That is a fact. Again I wish it were not so." (UG) Honestly, I feel that people who have said things like that are lying or delusional. From the time I was old enough to read my parents had me reading the Bible. The first book I remember buying was a Bible. My dad spent/spends far more time reading the Bible than reading HH literature. I have read a good deal of HH literature though, then and now. What I find in HH's writings is that the bulk of any of their book's is quotes from the Bible. Contrast that with the fact that the Book Mr. Arnn passed out at his meeting has only ONE, solitary quote from the scriptures in it. Just a thought. UG....Again I am not discounting your experience. But I am not lying and neither are the other former members lying. Maybe we were far enough down the totem pole that they (HH leadership) felt it would be better for us to read the literature over the Bible (though the literature is loaded with scriptures0. By reading the literature with the commentary of BA and company we could go straight to the revelation needed rather than trying to figure it out for ourselves. Whatever the reason many of the former members including myself were encouraged to read the literature over the Bible. I am not saying that they said you can not read the Bible but only the literature, there is a difference. Maybe your dad was just way smarter and had more insight than many of us. I am not saying that tongue-in-cheak your dad is a sharp intelligent guy and you have said he is an Elder now, so that may be why our experiences are different. Daniel, thanks again for this discussion. Regardless of our differences there is room plenty of room for all us to forever remain......... Under Grace PS Regarding OW saying HH denys the diety of Christ, I will address that in my upcoming post on Oneness. Please bear with me. | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) Junior Member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 37 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
Hi Folks, It looks like Under_Grace is going to combine the Deity and oneness issues together. "Regarding my not separating myself from OT’s coming against Oneness. For now I will say that I do not agree with OT’s position and I will devote a rather lengthy post toward that end at a later date." So if a rather lengthy post is forthcoming, then we can't really say he is sidestepping the issue :-) At least not at this time. I too look forward to Under_Grace posting on this, and I hope he will directly address the Watchman attack on oneness, which they use as a key component of their "cult" accusation. Similarly when UG said "I understand that you do not believe that HH teaches false doctrine.", there was nothing desparate, he was just giving his perception, at least on some or many or all "foundational doctrines" (e.g. Hebrews 6). Let's cut some slack in reading each others posts. Going in another direction, I notice a Factnet usage of "Potentially Destructive Religious Cults and Sects." Wow... what are the non-potentially detructive religious cults and sects ? How does one discern such "potentials" ? Do the non-potentially detructive religious cults and sects have a bulletin board too ? Shalom, Praxaluh | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 305 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Hey Praxaluh, Thanks for the input. "It looks like Under_Grace is going to combine the Deity and oneness issues together. And "So if a rather lengthy post is forthcoming, then we can't really say he is sidestepping the issue :-) At least not at this time." (PRAX) Duly noted. When I made the "sidestepping the issue" comment I didn't know Under_Grace was combining the subjects. In the same vein I will add that I think it is a desperate manuever to put words in others mouths. I see your point but when people put words in my mouth those words usually taste really bad, lol. Blessings, DOwen. | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 313 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Hello again Under_Grace, You have made a complicated and convoluted mess out of your defense, and it seems you are finally realizing that the ground you stand on is crumbling at an alarming (to you) rate. Let's examine your opening statement; "My purpose for being here is I believe that if someone joins HH they have the potential to be harmed. You acknowledge that I might possibly help some but would hurt current members (approximately 1000 people) in the process. It is my understanding that the current members are not allowed to view this web-site under penalty of discipline for doing so. I heard through the ex-member grapevine that your dad is at least one of the designated to monitor this site, but those not chosen for that are not to look. Am I wrong about that or are the members free to read on this web-site? If I am right about that the only ones I might have an effect on are those who are considering joining and thus are the people I would want to influence." (UG) This argument holds about as much water as a bucket full of holes... #1. "It is my understanding that the current members are not allowed to view this web-site under penalty of discipline for doing so." (UG) It is your understanding??? Already, the rest of your argument is baseless because you have foolishly based it on hearsay and gossip. #2. "I heard through the ex-member grapevine that your dad is at least one of the designated to monitor this site, but those not chosen for that are not to look." (UG) Again, UG, I am surprised that you would level an accusation based only on things you "heard through a grapevine!!!" Now you may say 'I didn't make an accusation' or something like that, but intentionally or not you have planted a seed in a readers mind. Imagine my grandmother reading this site. She comes across a statement like you made and she immediately thinks that HH designates people to monitor web pages. That is of course not true, yet the seed has been planted. You have indicted CHRISTIANS on accusations gained by} hearsay, good grief man! You are either grasping for straws or not being careful of your words. It just smacks of desperation on your part. #3. "Am I wrong about that or are the members free to read on this web-site? " (UG) Now you acknowledge that you haven't a clue about that which you speak! About your question, I really do not know. I do know that they (HH) don't have WWW access in their homes, which IS wisdom. Beyond that, I don't know. #4. "If I am right about that the only ones I might have an effect on are those who are considering joining and thus are the people I would want to influence." (UG) This beats all. If the gossip you received was correct, then you are justified. You sure seem to put a lot of faith in hearsay. Ever played the childrens game "telephone"???? "We agree that former members of any group as you put it “almost without exception have hurt feelings.” The reason I have single out HH, is when people leave HH they think they have lost their salvation. Some are able to overcome that with time, but it is one thing to leave a church because the pastor did not come to visit you when you were in the hospital. Another thing to leave or be disfellowshipped from HH thinking the only way you can regain your salvation is to repent and re-join HH. Before you say it I know you and ART feel that is not the case for the two of you (maybe very disturbed as well). However, the vast majority of those leaving have a struggle in also leaving their faith. I think even if you do not agree that assessment because I do it is a reason for me to single out HH." (UG) #1. "The reason I have single out HH, is when people leave HH they think they have lost their salvation." (UG) I think you need to clarify that statement. You make it seem that all people who leave think they are lost. Simply not true. #2. "Some are able to overcome that with time, but it is one thing to leave a church because the pastor did not come to visit you when you were in the hospital. Another thing to leave or be disfellowshipped from HH thinking the only way you can regain your salvation is to repent and re-join HH." (UG) Well, I believe that repentence IS necessary for Salvation, I hope you do to but maybe you have bought into "free grace" and don't believe in daily laying down your cross... Returning to HH, that is up to the individual. #3. "Before you say it I know you and ART feel that is not the case for the two of you (maybe very disturbed as well). However, the vast majority of those leaving have a struggle in also leaving their faith. I think even if you do not agree that assessment because I do it is a reason for me to single out HH" (UG) You sure like to single people out don't you  . Do you really think that out of all the folks that have parted ways with HH the three of us are the only ones to feel we didn't "lose our Salvation" when we left? Your last sentence says it all. I see I will never change your mind. Let me just say I HIGHLY disagree with your position. Now to the anonymity issue. "Hard to get over not knowing who I am. It is still interesting to me that you have no problem with ART’s anonymity saying listen to me I have the ABSOLUTE REAL TRUTH--100%. Yet because I remain anonymous I am just a “guy in the shadows with a bag over my head" with no credibility and comical at that. (UG) First of all, as I have said previously, I really don't care who you are. That is just my point. When a group of people is attacked for their belief's, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for them to defend themselves if they don't know who is attacking. You are using a very 'below the belt' type of tactic in your attacks and as such you have little or no credibility. "The only difference between the anonymity that I ask for and what ART ask for is that you agree with what he says and disagree or at least have a struggle with everything I post. (UG) Simply untrue. That is not the "only" difference. There is a difference between agreeing or disagreeing on an issue and RT being a good Samaritan to HH and you attacking HH! Once again you are placing words/ideas in my mouth. I can't stand that! Besides, those words/ideas taste horrible, lol. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about this, but RT has not falsly accused and attacked another Church! "I give you this challenge, when you start calling ART comical, posting with no credibility and not knowing the truth based not on what he says but the fact that he remains anonymous, then I will consider your problem with my anonymity." (UG) It doesn't work like this UG! My beloved and sadly embattled President is fond of saying something to the effect of, "We (The US) do NOT negotiate with our enemies! You have made yourself an enemy of myself and my family, therefore I do not and will not negotiate with you. We can debate and exchange ideas, but you must understand that as long as you are on the side of those who mercilessly attack Children of God, we will remain enemies. You and those in your camp who have sponsored this web site have initiated an attack upon harmless people! It is not my duty, nor is it the duty of those you have attacked to negotiate with you. RT hasn't attacked any Churches that I know of and as such he is safe from me calling him comical or not credible. Moving on to your last set of comments regarding members of HH reading their Bibles; "Again I am not discounting your experience. But I am not lying and neither are the other former members lying. Maybe we were far enough down the totem pole that they (HH leadership) felt it would be better for us to read the literature over the Bible (though the literature is loaded with scriptures0. By reading the literature (did you mean Scripture?) with the commentary of BA and company we could go straight to the revelation needed rather than trying to figure it out for ourselves. Whatever the reason many of the former members including myself were encouraged to read the literature over the Bible. I am not saying that they said you can not read the Bible but only the literature, there is a difference. Maybe your dad was just way smarter and had more insight than many of us. I am not saying that tongue-in-cheak your dad is a sharp intelligent guy and you have said he is an Elder now, so that may be why our experiences are different." (UG) This is abunch of gobbeldy-gook and speculation but I am going to take a stab at sorting it out. #1. "Maybe we were far enough down the totem pole that they (HH leadership) felt it would be better for us to read the literature over the Bible (though the literature is loaded with scriptures)" (UG) There are no "totem poles" or caste systems at HH to begin with. Secondly, when you write stuff like that your bitterness is quite apparent so maybe you should consider toning it down a bit in the future. (Just a hint to help you on your mission to save those HH visitors) #2. "(though the literature is loaded with scriptures0. By reading the literature (did you mean Scripture?) with the commentary of BA and company we could go straight to the revelation needed rather than trying to figure it out for ourselves." (UG) What Church doesn't write about what they believe? What Church doesn't write about revelations they have received from the Scripture? What preacher does't preach about revelations from the Scripture? #3. "I am not saying that they said you can not read the Bible but only the literature, there is a difference. Maybe your dad was just way smarter and had more insight than many of us." (UG) Back to your cheap shots eh? Oh wait, maybe you will redeem yourself, "Maybe your dad was just way smarter and had more insight than many of us. I am not saying that tongue-in-cheak your dad is a sharp intelligent guy and you have said he is an Elder now, so that may be why our experiences are different." (UG) No, just more cheap shots...it's a good thing you are under Grace. | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) Junior Member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 41 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
Hi folks, So how is everybody tonight ? Greg and Beverly are still walking the land of Israel. Past Arad, and heading into the Negev. http://tinyurl.com/b3673 Jerusalem to Arad - October 29, 2005 http://www.trailjournals.com/entry.cfm?trailname=3579 Holy Land Walk of Faith's 2005 Israel National Trail Journal I think it is fair to say that Greg and Bev are friends of Homestead Heritage, having visited and such. At any rate, they appreciate the support of brothers and sisters, the believers in Israel, USA and elsewhere, for this prayer hike :-) Shalom, Praxaluh | ||
| under_grace (under_grace) Member Username: under_grace Post Number: 65 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.65 |
Hello Dowen, Jesus said ....... “But I tell you: LOVE your ENEMIES and PRAY for those who PERSECUTE YOU.” It is nice to know that I am loved by you and your family. Though you haven’t directly said it I expect you are praying for me as well since it would follow that if you think I am your enemy you think I am persecuting you as well. Please know that you are not in the camp of my enemies in fact I often pray for those I left behind in HH. When I pray it is for God’s blessings on my HH friends and brothers. You do love me and pray for me don’t you Daniel? Dowen....#1. "It is my understanding that the current members are not allowed to view this web-site under penalty of discipline for doing so." (UG) It is your understanding??? Already, the rest of your argument is baseless because you have foolishly based it on hearsay and gossip. UG...Let me clarify I know for a FACT that current members are not allowed to view this web-site. Dowen...."I heard through the ex-member grapevine that your dad is at least one of the designated to monitor this site, but those not chosen for that are not to look." (UG) Again, UG, I am surprised that you would level an accusation based only on things you "heard through a grapevine!!!" Now you may say 'I didn't make an accusation' or something like that, but intentionally or not you have planted a seed in a readers mind. Imagine my grandmother reading this site. She comes across a statement like you made and she immediately thinks that HH designates people to monitor web pages. That is of course not true, yet the seed has been planted. You have indicted CHRISTIANS on accusations gained by} hearsay, good grief man! You are either grasping for straws or not being careful of your words. It just smacks of desperation on your part. UG.....Deny it all you want to but Homestead Heritage DOES monitor this website. You would expect us to believe that this web-site dedicated to exposeing false doctrine in HH is not monitored by their leadership? Frankly, since as you have pointed out some ‘outsiders’ will read this site they would be negligent if they did not monitor it. You say I “have indicted CHRISTIANS on accusations gained by} hearsay, good grief man!” “Indicted CHRISTIANS” for reading the web-site? You think that “accusing” HH of monitoring this web-site is indictment? Dowen....#3. "Am I wrong about that or are the members free to read on this web-site? " (UG) Now you acknowledge that you haven't a clue about that which you speak! About your question, I really do not know. I do know that they (HH) don't have WWW access in their homes, which IS wisdom. Beyond that, I don't know. UG...Daniel you know and I know that there has been a directive for members not to read on this web-site. Let me clarify again....It is a FACT that members of HH have been told not to read this web-site. You say “I really do not know. (if that directive has been given)”. All you have to do is turn around in the shop and ask your dad as he is an Elder in HH a fact you have mentioned many times. Ask him. As to HH members not having the WWW many of them do for their business’s. Anyone can go to the local library and get on this web-site, as I talked to one member who has done just that. Dowen...#4. "If I am right about that the only ones I might have an effect on are those who are considering joining and thus are the people I would want to influence." (UG) This beats all. If the gossip you received was correct, then you are justified. You sure seem to put a lot of faith in hearsay. Ever played the children's game "telephone"???? UG...“If the gossip you received was correct, then you are justified” Then you concur because as I have clarified it is not gossip and it is correct. No I have no idea what the children’s game telephone is. Dowen...#1. "The reason I have single out HH, is when people leave HH they think they have lost their salvation." (UG) I think you need to clarify that statement. You make it seem that all people who leave think they are lost. Simply not true. UG I did clarify that you, ART and Very-Disturbed may not think that way. I should have said the vast majority of former members I have talked with. Does that sound better? Yes it is true that the majority of the people leaving HH whether the walk away or are disfellowshiped and do not make it back, think they may be walking away or have out right lost their salvation. Daniel that is why so many young people leaving HH just go hog wild because the thinking goes I am going to hell anyway so might as well have some fun. That is not peculiar to HH it happens to people of many groups. In HH they were under the law, when they come out they lose their restraint. Dowen....#2. "Some are able to overcome that with time, but it is one thing to leave a church because the pastor did not come to visit you when you were in the hospital. Another thing to leave or be disfellowshipped from HH thinking the only way you can regain your salvation is to repent and re-join HH." (UG) Well, I believe that repentence IS necessary for Salvation, I hope you do to but maybe you have bought into "free grace" and don't believe in daily laying down your cross... Returning to HH, that is up to the individual. UG...Grace is not “free” it was bought with an awful price. You know that. My quote was...“Another thing to leave or be disfellowshipped from HH thinking the only way you can regain your salvation is to repent and re-join HH.” One has repent. But there is a huge difference from repenting turning to the arms of Jesus and thinking the only way one can repent is to repent and go back under the law in HH. Dowen....#3. "Before you say it I know you and ART feel that is not the case for the two of you (maybe very disturbed as well). However, the vast majority of those leaving have a struggle in also leaving their faith. I think even if you do not agree that assessment because I do it is a reason for me to single out HH" (UG) You sure like to single people out don't you. Do you really think that out of all the folks that have parted ways with HH the three of us are the only ones to feel we didn't "lose our Salvation" when we left? Your last sentence says it all. I see I will never change your mind. Let me just say I HIGHLY disagree with your position. UG...ATTENTION FORMER MEMBERS POSTING ON THIS BOARD! Other than the three that I mentioned do you think this is a fair statement?.....“However, the vast majority of those leaving (HH) have a struggle in also leaving their faith.” Dowen..“Now to the anonymity issue.” You say....“First of all, as I have said previously, I really don't care who you are. That is just my point.” UG... Daniel if you “don’t care who you are” why do you consistently bring it up? Dowen...When a group of people is attacked for their belief's, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for them to defend themselves if they don't know who is attacking. You are using a very 'below the belt' type of tactic in your attacks and as such you have little or no credibility. UG...Why is that? Why not address what I post? The only reason you need to know who I am is so you can do what HH has always done attack the messenger and then the message. The handicap you suffer is that you are only able to attack my message as you do not know who I am. Dowen..."The only difference between the anonymity that I ask for and what ART ask for is that you agree with what he says and disagree or at least have a struggle with everything I post. (UG) Simply untrue. That is not the "only" difference. There is a difference between agreeing or disagreeing on an issue and RT being a good Samaritan to HH and you attacking HH! Once again you are placing words/ideas in my mouth. I can't stand that! Besides, those words/ideas taste horrible, lol. I am not sure what is so hard to understand about this, but RT has not falsly accused and attacked another Church! UG....Do you read your posts while you are writing them? Honestly... You say my statement is “Simply untrue” Then the rest of your statement confirms that my statement is true or as ART would say Absolute Real Truth--100%. Dowen...."I give you this challenge, when you start calling ART comical, posting with no credibility and not knowing the truth based not on what he says but the fact that he remains anonymous, then I will consider your problem with my anonymity." (UG) It doesn't work like this UG! ......(It does not work like this because)....“It is not my duty, nor is it the duty of those you have attacked to negotiate with you. RT hasn't attacked any Churches that I know of and as such he is safe from me calling him comical or not credible.” UG...In another part of your answer I am your enemy....so you can not negotiate with me. Your duty? Please....... It is a fair question and a fair challenge. You can come up with all the excuses you want to but you JUST CAN NOT FACE THE TRUTH. As for ART not attacking the Churches that is not true either. Daniel I hate to break it to you but I am a part of the Church. Christ dwells in me and when ART attacks me he is attacking the Church. Dowen....#1. "Maybe we were far enough down the totem pole that they (HH leadership) felt it would be better for us to read the literature over the Bible (though the literature is loaded with scriptures)" (UG) There are no "totem poles" or caste systems at HH to begin with. Secondly, when you write stuff like that your bitterness is quite apparent so maybe you should consider toning it down a bit in the future. (Just a hint to help you on your mission to save those HH visitors) UG...Of all the posts you have made this one is the most ridicules. HH TEACHES A CASTE SYSTEM OR LEVEL’S WITHIN THE BODY OF HH. That is one of the main teachings former members have posted against. But I do appreciate you warning people that are looking to join HH on this web-site by saying ....(Just a hint to help you on your mission to save those HH visitors) As to ‘bitterness’ you think I have, people reading this web-site can decide for themselves whether it is bitterness as you think or simply the truth. #2. "(though the literature is loaded with scriptures0. By reading the literature (did you mean Scripture?) with the commentary of BA and company we could go straight to the revelation needed rather than trying to figure it out for ourselves." (UG) What Church doesn't write about what they believe? What Church doesn't write about revelations they have received from the Scripture? What preacher does't preach about revelations from the Scripture? UG...All true statements. And yes I meant Scriptures. The difference between what you are saying and HH is most churches don’t normally suggest you read their literature over the Bible. Dowen .... You thought my last two statements were cheap shots. UG... I did not intend them that way. My apologizes. I know you can not perceive that it could be true coming from an ‘enemy‘, but I do highly respect your family and you. I think your are deceived regarding HH doctrine and practice. I know once you place someone in a enemy camp it is hard to take them out. Whether you believe it or not I do love you, your dad and mom, many more people that reside in HH and I pray they will forever join me.... Under Grace | ||
| dowen (dowen) Intermediate Member Username: dowen Post Number: 314 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.234.187 |
Under_Grace, I haven't much time to respond to your above post, but I want to address two issues. I take it you are not very pleased that I used the word 'enemy' to describe you. Contrary to what you may think I think long and hard before I use certain words, usually I look them up if I am unsure or uneasy about what those words may mean. I believe that words DO mean something and since all I have at my disposal in this battle is words, I try to wield them as effectually as possible. This brings me back to the reason I chose the word 'enemy' to describe you. Here is how Webtser defines "enemy"; en·e·my Pronunciation: 'e-n&-mE Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural -mies Etymology: Middle English enemi, from Old French, from Latin inimicus, from in- 1in- + amicus friend -- more at AMIABLE 1 : one that is antagonistic to another; especially : one seeking to injure, overthrow, or confound an opponent 2 : something harmful or deadly 3 a : a military adversary b : a hostile unit or force (emphasis mine) Judging by that definition you are an enemy of my family, myself, and HH. As to you being so afraid to back your words with your name, go ahead, remain a coward. It makes me wonder what you are so afraid of. My name has backed my words from day one. People have called me names behind my back but not to my face, on this site. It is kinda funny to me that you accuse HH of attacking the messenger instead of the message yet over the last 5 years I have heard ex-members call HH folks all kinds of nasty derogatory things so either you are preaching to the wrong people on that point or you are scared of those in your own fold. If I wanted to attack these "messengers" instead of their messages I would post their names, but that I refuse to do. After reading the above I wouldn't blame you for cowering behind your pious handle. I hope I have made my point... (Message edited by dowen on November 04, 2005) | ||
| praxaluh (praxaluh) Junior Member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 42 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 24.193.219.212 |
Dowen, "As to you being so afraid to back your words with your name, go ahead, remain a coward ... you for cowering behind your pious handle." This is getting a bit tiring, considering the earlier discussions. This was even an area where watchman made a lot of sense. Nuff said. Shalom, Praxaluh (who is not always positively and completely able to project the absolute and complete and total and real unvarnished fully shining perfection truth .. yet seeking to receive the perfect Word of God, and to be under the grace of the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, though submission to His Word) | ||
| charitygrace (charitygrace) Junior Member Username: charitygrace Post Number: 29 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 67.33.108.15 |
bump | ||
| old_watchman Member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 85 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
bump | ||
| old_watchman Member Username: old_watchman Post Number: 86 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 69.15.65.110 |
bump | ||
| dowen Advanced Member Username: dowen Post Number: 782 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.236.230 |
Stirring the fire again OW? What a sad existence your's must be. Making a living off of stirring people up and causing grief. Satan must be really pleased with your devilish little "ministry". You have branded thousands of Christians heritics, and spend your time looking for more folks to attack. Why, Satan doesn't even need to work with jackals like you running about. | ||
| missionary_lady Senior Member Username: missionary_lady Post Number: 1472 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 200.205.163.50 |
know where you got your manners... | ||
| dowen Advanced Member Username: dowen Post Number: 791 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 67.9.93.81 |
Just another pathetic jab of your pitchfork. Sigh. I used to think you were better than this. ML, Why do you refuse to recognize OW for the hyena that he is? His organization has already attacked your denomination, yet that little fact is forgotten because of course,The enemy of my enemy is my friend. You claim you stand for truth. Well, then stand for it! Stand against the jackal and his bloodthirsty minions! Of course, you don't have the integrity to do it. Because he is the enemy of your enemy, he is your friend. What a shallow way to pick your friends. | ||
| foreverhis Intermediate Member Username: foreverhis Post Number: 351 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 69.176.48.179 |
Bump | ||
| missionary_lady Senior Member Username: missionary_lady Post Number: 1488 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 200.147.7.82 |
say on...dowen.... | ||
| dowen Advanced Member Username: dowen Post Number: 793 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 67.9.93.81 |
Back to trolling ML? Stop messing with me and get back to the real issue here; Your disgusting "death covenant" accusations. | ||
| missionary_lady Senior Member Username: missionary_lady Post Number: 1489 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 200.147.75.143 |
trolling? | ||
| missionary_lady Senior Member Username: missionary_lady Post Number: 1490 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 200.147.75.143 |
ask your parents if they signed a covenant unto death? | ||
| dowen Advanced Member Username: dowen Post Number: 794 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 67.9.93.81 |
What is a Troll? An Internet "troll" is a person who delights in sowing discord on the Internet. He (and it is usually he) tries to start arguments and upset people. Trolls see Internet communications services as convenient venues for their bizarre game. For some reason, they don't "get" that they are hurting real people. To them, other Internet users are not quite human but are a kind of digital abstraction. As a result, they feel no sorrow whatsoever for the pain they inflict. Indeed, the greater the suffering they cause, the greater their 'achievement' (as they see it). At the moment, the relative anonymity of the net allows trolls to flourish. Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). You cannot negotiate with them; you cannot cause them to feel shame or compassion; you cannot reason with them. They cannot be made to feel remorse. For some reason, trolls do not feel they are bound by the rules of courtesy or social responsibility. Perhaps this sounds inconceivable. You may think, "Surely there is something I can write that will change them." But a true troll can not be changed by mere words. (From AOL.com) ML, Please note the underlined words. | ||
| missionary_lady Senior Member Username: missionary_lady Post Number: 1491 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 200.147.75.143 |
my missionary mom did... | ||
| missionary_lady Senior Member Username: missionary_lady Post Number: 1492 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 200.147.75.143 |
did your parents sign a covenant unto death????Answer Daniel...don't result to childess name calling...answer in black and white... | ||
| praxaluh Advanced Member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 721 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 74.73.4.159 |
Hi Folks, Although it is good to see that Mrs. Alvear senses that right now she can't get away with the 'death covenant' blasphemy lie here on Factnet, this is by no means sufficient. A cleansing is needed. A renunciation of the term. In English and Portuguese. I can see no dialog with Mrs. Alvear until this is done. There are Holy Spirit bounds. An apology is also needed, to the forum and especially to HH. The cleansing through renunciation comes first. In English and Portuguese. To my heart, that is the minimum that can restore dialog. Shalom, Praxaluh | ||
| missionary_lady Senior Member Username: missionary_lady Post Number: 1494 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 200.147.6.135 |
I sense nothing..a death covenant...a covenant unto death mean the same to me.I have already explained what the term death covanent means to us... Death for some would have been a small price compared to the slow agony they are going through because of HH doctrine and covenant. From now on...I owe no answers to Prax and his self rightous judging spirit...I have stated truth....so I have no time to address Prax... Some of our people want to write on this board just what they saw in the people that came from hh to Brazil... Maybe if I have time today I will help them register and they can write here...over at my office is a computer and a brother that works for me that can put their words right here...I am very busy with a load of people coming from south Brazil for special service... I owe no apology to HH or to anyone about anything said about HH for it is truth and I hope I can help lead people out of that world of darkness and deception. | ||
| praxaluh Advanced Member Username: praxaluh Post Number: 729 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 74.73.4.159 |
And yet again, for the third recent time, Mrs. Alvear indicates that she uses the term 'death covenant' because she equates it with agony and death, not because it has anything to do with the HH view and language. Although she couches a bit more this time, the earlier comments let too many cats out of the bag. Then Mrs. Alvear brazenly lies again, since she knows full well that nobody in her lands calls a "till-death-do-us-part marriage covenant" a "death covenant". What a brazen lie. The term is used for suicide and murder, for brujeria, for occult, for death-pacts, not lifetime covenant and committment. Mrs. Alvear just outright lies to the forum. This is so absurd and sick. Go looking for there term anywhere used the way she claims and you will not find it. This is even documented in the Repent thread with examples like http://www.terra.com.mx/formato.aspx?articuloid=154204&paginaid=1&formatoId=15&canal=noticias Terra - Pacto de muerte: Se suicidan 4 jvenes (Death covenant, four youths commit suicide) And dozens of more examples easily could be given. And of course Mrs. Alvear and every reader here knows that in English such terminology is never used the way she claims. Mrs. Alvear is lying in the English language and culture (which she knows well) and she is lying about the phrases of the Latin cultures. So now Mrs. Alvear is reduced to brazenly lying, and not one oppositionalist cares a whit. (Why ? That is complex. It seems she cannot retract or apologize for anything she says against HH, no matter how ugly and false, is I believe the fundamental reason. Pride. So she lies rather than being forced into the truth of a retraction and apology. Remember also how so much of her presentation is, ironically, "I am not lying". So when she is caught in a brazen lie she has to try to steamroll ahead. Complex, sad, sick.) And She is especially encouraged to continue the lies by the shilling of the 'death covenant' supporter Robin, and the silence and diversions of the others. Apparently we have seen the true face of the anti-HH cause here, and it is very ugly. Understand, I never expected this, I really thought there was some earnestness, caring and integrity amongst those who left and wanted to express concerns. Substantive concerns or nonsense, interesting or silly. And for a while some put on a good show. However, apparently I was very wrong about earnestness and integrity, there is none, at least not among the current crew of oppositionalist Factnet posters. Shalom, Praxaluh (Message edited by praxaluh on December 13, 2006) | ||
| majajh New member Username: majajh Post Number: 1 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 68.206.150.106 |
I know a few people at Brazos de Dios from 1982-83 when I attended Prince of Peace Church with them. Butch and Diane were in my home group. They are Baylor educated. They and Stan are fine people, period. Butch and some of the others, who later left to join Brazos de Dios, were clearly unhappy that I joined the military. They had pacifist leanings. They also supported illegal San Salvadoran immigrants in their trek across the U.S. We strongly disagreed on these things, but I loved them deeply, and still do. I went to last falls festival. They had very little comment on my having been to Iraq, but the non-verbals were one of mixed surprise and disappointment. That was a kind of a bummer. Oh well. Old friends of mine that I hadn't seen in about 24 years called the folks out there "Mennonots" "They're not Mennonites". Baylor-educated people pushing a plow struck me as odd. It is like a retreat from reality; a sort of pulling back from the nasty old world into a community/commune. Face it- Brazo de Dios is a man-made religion. Making all the women wear their hair up, rules on TV, etc. are legalism at its finest. They use technology, but wouldn't send their kids to be the engineers that design those products they use. They make men do guard duty at the gate 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, rather than putting in an electronic gate. Man-made religion shows the world they are Christians by dress and appearances rather than simply living amongst the heathen and being Christian. Legalism- I truly despise it. Christ + works= I'm on the right track with God. | ||
| dowen New member Username: dowen Post Number: 5 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.153.236.189 |
Hey Maj, I just wanted to say thank you for your service. The folks at HH try to stay as disengaged from current politics as possible, and are non-violent, almost to a fault. They are free to live how they see fit, I just know that I am thankful for folks like you willing to defend that Freedom. Also, on the legalism comments, I see what you are saying, but look at it on a larger scale. Current fashions trends dictate that I should not wear bell bottoms, is that legalism? If someone told me that I MUST watch every TV show out there, would that be legalism? Legalism is just a very loaded word, best used sparingly. Again, thanks for your service, you guys are hero's! DOwen. |
