Oakspear

Here we go again...don't we all know by now that any time anyone says anything critical of Wierwille WhiteDove will raise his hand from the back of the class and remind us of the lack of documentation and witnesses and how that makes it all opinion and not facts. Then we all argue with him. And he doesn't change his mind. I recommend putting him on "ignore".

Can the answer to "What (or who) is a Christian?" be as simple as "Anyone who says they're a Christian"? All this talk about certain groups who claim the name Christian being considered not Christain, or following another Jesus...

I wouldn't call it their description of a Christian so much as they accept that anyone who calls themself a Christian is a Christian. This, a quote from their section on Christianity:

As long as none of the glasses are TWI-colored

I was initially referring to participants on this board IIRC. And isn't Christianity the world's largest religion?

I didn't give anything definite because it isn't definite. I doubt most believers can be specific and detailed about what convinced them. But I didn't say we are equal to [the biblical] God, I just expressed a lack of belief in him. I'm sorry, I don't understand wghat you're saying here, could you please reword it? Really? can you give me any examples?

Well, something more than the nothing that I've gotten so far. I don't quite follow the logic in that line of thinking, although I've heard it before. I wonder what the percentage is. I know only a handful of former wayfers, including my own family, and I'm the only one who is avowedly not a Christian, although one or two may be agnostics. It's certainly possible, I don't know that it's likely. And on the other hand, what will Christians say or do if some other belief turns out to be true? That reminds me of the South park episode where the "True Faith" turns out to be the Mormons, and heaven is a very interesting place

I don't really know. I believe that there is survival after death in some form, but don't necessarily believe in the body, soul, spirit separation. I can't speak for others, but I am only irritated by those who feel it is necessary to inform me that their opinion is that I am eternally damned. I see no convincing (to me) evidence that any divine being has judged me, so I have no problem with any hypothetical biblical god. After all, he hasn't personally told me anything, so I have no argument with him.

Did someone say something about dancing around the issue? So...do I think Christians are intolerant? More to the point, do I think that the Christians on this board are intolerant? My answer is "no". Tolerance has nothing to do, in my opinion, with whether you agree with me or not. In an environment like GSC, an intolerant poster would be one who called for the banning of all non-Christians, or who sugested that non-Christians should not post in the Doctrinal Forum. The latter has happened, time and time again, I don't recall the former ever coming up, although frequently new posters mistake this for a Christian site. So, in my view, if you don't think that non-Christians should be participating in this site, then you're intolerant. If you're simply convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that your worldview is the only correct one than you're wrong...um...I mean not intolerant <_< But if you think that you can post about how your interpretation of the bible is the only correct one, and how non-Christians are eternally damned, well, you're going to get an argument, and I would expect an argument from the Christians if their religion was portrayed as unequivocally wrong.

I don't think that I ever said that pagans couldn't be intolerant. Some of the ones that I know are every bit as dogmatic and uncompromising as, well...you Geisha, the non-Christians are a tiny minority on this site. There's about 6 atheists and/or agnostics, two pagans and one Buddhist that I know of. The Christians are hardly being overwhelmed here. You make proclamations about your god and the bible all the time, so do plenty of others, some disagree. I disagree. I don't think the non-Christians are immune from intolerance, but not any more suseptible to it. A non-Christian objecting to a Christian telling him that he is going to hell, or that his faith is illegitimate because it varies from the Christian's, is similar in my estimation to a black person being asked to be more tolerant and accepting of the Klansman or White Supremicist.

Pre-TWI, I didn't think about it much. I lived in a pretty homogenous neighborhood, probably 80% + one denomination, overwhelming majority were two European ethnic groups, other than Jews, I didn't encounter any non-Christians that I knew about, even in high school, maybe not even in college. Oh, I was as intolerant as anybody else in TWI while I was part of it. Remember those Way Magazine articles in the 90's about goddess worship? I did a lot of the groundwork several years before, taught branch and limb meetings on the subject. So, yeah, I was intolerant. I believe that Christianity is at once exclusive and open. Open in that anyone can be a Christian if they confess the right confession, there's no preconditions, but I believe that's true of most religions these days. I know of some ethnic-based faiths that discourage people of other cultures from joining, and even consider those from other ethnic groups to be not of their faith even if they do all the right things. Some Native American and Hindu traditions come to mind. (Not all or even most, but I have heard of them). Exclusive in that for most Christians, anyone outside the pale is damned, S.O.L. as far as eternal life goes. Personally I don't have any problem with people believing that, but I don't agree with it. Now, as far as viewing my faith as TRUE, I don't really expect that. I understand that about Christianity. What I object to is Christians who "invade my space" to make sure that I know that they think that I'm going to hell or whatever.

Brush: My observation was that any self-righteousness and arrogance came later in a wayfer's life, when the youthful zeal and enthusiasm had waned. I was involved in TWI from 1978 - 2001 and virtually all the people that I saw get involved got involved because they wanted to learn more about God, or they liked what they saw in the people.

Was the definition put forth by geisha in the initial post in this thread. Are Christians tolerant or intolerant? The definition above mentions two characteristics of tolerance, recognition and respect. I guess it depends on what you mean by recognition and respect. I imagine that most if not all Christians recognize the existance of other beliefs and respect the right of those folks to make those decisions. So I guess a Christian, by definition can be tolerant and still be a Christian. Although I have encountered those who think that we aren't true citizens and that our faith should not be recognized as such. But since most Christians would view my choice of faith as wrong, and somehow bad, then I doubt that there's any real respect there. Can something be true for you and not for me? I think where some folks miss it is seeing different doctrines and religions as mutually exclusive, rather than different aspect or facets of the same whole. Some religions are exclusive in that they don't believe that other religions can be true, some are more inclusive.

Interesting site, and I will look it over when I have more time, butI disagree that I would not be judged...my chosen faith is called bondage. Sounds like judgement to me. Thanks for the link anyway.

Does the body's life residing in the blood necessarily translate into "soul life" being transmitted via the sperm?

Even in the 90's, certain people could get away with doing the "forbidden" if they were ballsy enough about it, TWI needed their money, leadership wasn't paying attention, you were leadership, no one ratted you out, etc. Usually Martindale would rant about something from the stage at the auditorium; how that got translated into actual policy and procedures varied.

I haven't gotten my phone call yet, although I'm sure they know where I work.

Lunch break! Bride: Let me preface my remarks by saying that nothing that I say in these types of threads should be interpreted as a disrespect for Christians or Christianity. I've seen many people turn their lives around and find real peace within the faith. However, that doesn't mean that I can't bring up things that I believe don't make sense, or be critical. No, because I don't believe that the god that you describe and that is described in the bible exists. To me, it's more like telling me that there's a car parked in my driveway that I cannot see no matter how hard I look. There's an owner's manual for the car, and even some people who swear that the car is there, but I still can't see it. Bride, you are a bible believer, and it appears to work well for you. Your take on the biblical god is that he is "gracious". Me, I'm a polytheist, and believe that I can choose which gods to honor. The god as described by the fire & brimstone set is not a god that I choose to worship. Some aspects of the biblical god seem loving, gracious as you say, merciful and kind. Other aspects seem (to me) to be hateful and vindictive. I have a hard time reconciling the extremes. So the whole "goin' to hell" thing does little to motivate me, and demotivates me.

Thank you I don't "well know"...my fifty year old brain cells can't keep track of every discussion in every thread. I'm sure that what you say is true, but I'm talking about the way it comes across. If I did I would understand if it were misunderstood. I've done it and learned to be more clear. I have to go to work now, and IT blocked my access to GSC, so I'll miss out on any responses until tonight. Have a great day!

When one quotes someone else, or provides a link in the midst of a discussion, the implication is that one agreed with the quote or is otherwise using it to bolster one's argument. Saying "I didn't say that" is splitting hairs IMHO. Besides, Bramble didn't say that they were your words, just that they were your doctrine, i.e. that you held the same position. And geisha, you seem a little ruffled that Bramble referred to you as a "lovely person", yet you referred to her and me and "kind & gentle" in seemingly the same context. :huh:

It's still "in dispute" because not everyone agrees with you. There are some who use the pejorative label "cult" to describe those who disagree with them on some issues, while others define a cult as a group that follows certain behaviors.

It's not much of a choice when the "choice" is do what I say or you're toast! :o Now if you're a Christian who doesn't believe in the traditional hell, and just believe that you return to dust when you die, then, okay, God is offering you a choice between the natural order of things, i.e. death and eternal life. In this scenario, unless God intervenes, you just stay dead. Quite different than the scenario where God created Hell, then sends you there if you don't fall into line. The first is either a rescue if you accept it, or no rescue if you don't. the second is reward if you accept it, a punishment if you don't. I believe Bramble is talking specifiacally about the Christians who believe in Hell as a place of eternal torment.

I don't get a lot of people volunteering to tell me that I'm going to Hell, possibly because I generally exude a "Don't F*** With Me" attitude I imagine that it would irritate me if someone, unsolicited, told me that I was going to Hell, not so much because their opinion bothers me, but because they presume to mind my business. I suppose that if you believe that Hell awaits those who don't believe a certain way, it makes sense to tell people that, kind of like how advocates of healthy eating don't want to see their loved ones' arteries get clogged with cholestrol and drop dead of a heart attack at age 42. From my point of view, I pretty much agree with Bramble, a god who tosses those who don't believe a certain way into eternal flame or ice or whatever, isn't a god that I will worship or respect.

Are you thinking of Devil's Advocate with Keaneau Reeves (sp?) and Al Pacino?