Questions for Jim

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

Username: jim_faucett

Post Number: 212
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.90.181.249
Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 7:27 pm:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Short and sweet.

Well, maybe just short.

There are people who are happy to come on factnet and join the demonizers. Let's make a demon of everyone and everything inside GGWO. Let's call anyone who thinks otherwise "deceived" "naive" "egotistical" because we can always knock down straw men.

Not everyone inside GGWO is a demon. Not everyone drinks the koolaid--some of those posting are happy to say that while they were in they were not completely fooled. I guess that makes them better and smarter.

The facts are that scripture COMMANDS us to be reconciled to one another and to God. If God has given us the steps to do so and we must follow them to the point of absolute refusal then we have done all we can. If we don't attempt to be reconciled to our brothers then we disobey Christ.

If we say that these folks are not brethren, therefore I do not need to be reconciled to them--we err yet again because God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself--and we don't know his mind but that he wants the gospel preached to every creature. If they are brothers then reconcile if at all possible, if they are not brothers then they need to hear the gospel of saving grace in Christ. There are no other categories. No other options. There is no option saying we must demonize. I don't have to be a partaker of error, and I don't have to be tolerant of their aberrations--but I do have to love them. If you have nothing to do but **** and moan what in the world are you accomplishing? A sort of public online catharsis? Well isn't that special.
*****************************************

anon_brief (anon_brief)
Posted on Friday, December 31, 2004 - 7:49 pm:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim - a few questions:

Are you saying that the biblical process needs to be followed repeatedly until reconciliation takes place?

When can one be considered unentreatable?

Where does that leave those who have previously followed the biblical process without resolution?

These are questions that have been asked to me that I am unable to answer. Can you provide me with some guidance on this?
*******************************************
terra_cognita (terra_cognita)
Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 12:36 am:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excellent questions anon.
My understanding is that attempts for reconciliation have been met with lying, deception, coverup and no repentance.
Communications with the lawyer/elder months ago stated that personal grievances could be brought but no mention of CHS' sins, doctrinal issues, etc.
Notice the positioning of my wording lawyer/elder. His job is negotiating. He will negotiate the best deal for his client CHS/GGWO. This deal is presented in a way that does not open the door for lawsuits. It is also to preserve the "legacy" of CHS. The current atmosphere amongst leadership is one of positioning. People are seeking the most favorable position they can place themselves in. Please remember that TBS/GGWO was founded upon adultery. Yes, when CHS refused correction by the Baptists, he escaped through the back of a church in Bath and holed up in a Holiday Inn until the heat was off. TBS came into being because he refused correction. The ministry from that point has been based on multiple adulteries, lying, manipulation and false doctrines to support self-preservation.
I find it interesting that nothing has been said on Factnet about the meeting scheduled in February with approximately 27 affiliated pastors. One pastor said there was a 70 percent chance that all would disaffiliate if their grievances weren't met. Are you invited to that meeting Jim or Dave. Last I heard, you weren't.
Jim, you tried to reconcile years ago, we have tried. The problem is them. The word isn't reconciliation. It is REPENTANCE. They will talk your ear off about tweaking doctrines and making this change and that, but will they repent? Will they get outside help? When they do, then they mean business.
************************************
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 11:37 am:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terra Cognita,

That's sure an interesting question about a meeting of affiliated pastors in February. I just went to GGWO's missions page (http://www.ggwo.org/missions/index.html) and counted about 50 affiliates in the US and another 4 in Canada. Why the disparity between 50 affiliates and 27 pastors at the February meeting?

Hodeuon

[rjfernalld (rjfernalld)]

bob_brinton (bob_brinton)
Posted on Saturday, January 01, 2005 - 11:30 am:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Does this mean, Jim, that you've given up on trying to influence the elders? Do you consider GGWO a church or a cult? And if you consider it a church, then how can you take action together with Roberta toward it while she still considers it a cult? I'm not questioning your actions or decisions, just wondering what they are and why.

If it is a cult, then it really is not bound by that which binds the Church, is it? That would make it a human organization rather than the spiritual organism it portrays itself as. Their decisions could give lip service to 'the dictates of God'; but what actually motivates and rules their actions is human motivation. If it is a cult, are you looking to turn a cult into a church?

Are we concerned with saving or fixing an organization, or with the people who are in it? My own concern is for people. There are organizations all over the place that vary in how bad they are. Why fix a bad one when you can start fresh? Will you reach and help more of the people that way? Did Jesus try to fix Judaism? Did Paul straighten out any of the local temples? Just wondering, as 'they' say.

[terra_cognita (terra_cognita)]

Hodeuon,
So far, approximately 27 of the 50 indicated that they would show up.

[dave_drago (dave_drago)]

Bob said:
"Are we concerned with saving or fixing an organization, or with the people who are in it? My own concern is for people. There are organizations all over the place that vary in how bad they are. Why fix a bad one when you can start fresh? Will you reach and help more of the people that way?"

IF, you are implying that those who engage the leaders do not care for the people then you are not accurate. It all comes down to the objective and the approach. It is a complicated process.

1. IF your objective is to reach those who have left then it is a one on one approach. This is critical. And, it needs to be done. Keep doing it.

2. IF your objective is to help those who are still in then your approach is multi-faceted:

You can engage (one on one) your brother helping him see the light and leave. This is critical and it must be done. Keep doing it.

And, you can confront the decision makers to repent and change so that those who are still in will be helped. This is critical and it must be done keep doing it.

Also, you can come up with a document that clearly reveals that real people with real stories were really hurt by the organization of GGWO. Did you ever consider the influence a document like that could have on the elders, members and any organization that might want to help the injured be compensated and have their grievances addressed? This is critical and it must be done.

3. IF your objective is to close the doors of GGWO then your approach is to vilify anyone who attempts anything else other then your objective. This is counterproductive. Keep it up. I am so sincerely gullible that I believe your prideful potshots really help.

4. IF your objective is to stay anonymous while criticizing and belittling the motives, methods and minds of those who try then your approach (although cathartic) is childish and unfair.

I have requested three areas for change:

1. Immediately start from the pulpit renouncing the false doctrines and correcting the errors.

2. Have Jim and I go to the conference for all the reasons Jim mentioned.

3. Bring in an outside Evangelical agency to ASSIST them in making the necessary transitions to include doctrine, polity and compensating those who have been deemed legitimately hurt by the organizations abusive practices. This would involve a fact finding commission that the agency would preside over.

But, I am too gullible and easily deceived to confront Michael Mar with that approach. I have been too busy drinking in the system of evil. Also, not one of those three mentioned areas has happened. Will it? Time will tell. Time will tell. Time will tell.

IMHO, it all comes down to what your objective is and how you approach it.

For Him,
Dave

[bob_brinton (bob_brinton)]

Dave, I do not think that you and Jim don't care about individuals. I'm not against you trying to do whatever you honestly think may help. I don't see why this message board is not already what you're asking us to do; also with many of our names and particular events attached. The documents (CRI Report, etc.) are quite strong evidence by themselves. Other than as noted (particularly by Roberta) none of what's here is copyrighted. You are free to cull it for all it's worth.

I strongly agree with the idea that outside help from never been GG people in the Christian Community at large is needed. I've said that before. But they haven't heeded these approaches when they've been previously taken, and likely won't now. If you going brings some individuals out into the light, then it will be time well spent. May God be with you in whatever you're able to do. At the same time, you have to admit that you, Jim and Roberta make an awfully strange alliance. Roberta calls GG a cult and not a church. Why don't you try to have David Henke and/or Hodeuon with you? Are they unwilling?

[hodeuon (hodeuon)]

Terra Cognita - Thanks! That answers my question.

Hodeuon

[bjerwin (bjerwin)]

It would be wonderful if Dave and Jim were invited to this meeting. However, I'm sorry to say, my faith, hope and optimism can't reach that far, (albeit I would love to be proved wrong in this circumstance).

In the New Testament, didn't Paul have to lambaste Peter once or twice? I would pray that all Godly men would be as entreatable as Peter was, but not sure these folks would listen to Jim and Dave. I personally believe the elders in GG are Godly men, however I believe the ones that were more entreatable to the Word are on this side of Factnet.

Usually I'm a "glass half full" kind of person. I don't really feel bad for those left in this ministry. The Lord is taking care of them and they are growing. The tough part is when they leave.

There are so many personal dynamics wrapped up in the lives of the Pastor/elders. I do believe many love the Lord with all their hearts. However, supporting their families, seeing how others have been so easily "cast away" would tend to make anyone nervous. If a leader can cast away his own "son" so very easily, who is safe?

Are the elders ready to "listen and repent?" I wouldn't hold my breath.

[maria_t (maria_t)]

HEY......JIM!!

Where have you been lately? No longer posting?

I was wondering whether you and Dave Drago got invited yet to that meeting next month?

Hope you don't stay away long.

Maria