Truth

[Tzaia]

I haven't really read a "Sower" in years (as far as I was concerned, they were too wordy and hard to follow), but I've thought more and more it's necessary, if only to hone my critical thinking skills. This month most of the magazine focuses on truth and relationships. I'm going to be honest about this. For years, I had a hard time having a "deep relationship" with anyone who I wasn't sure was non-trinitarian. It was a point of commonality for me that was a deal breaker. This belief in the importance of the belief caused me to shut out people that I knew were trinitarian.

The truth is that I could not have a non-antagonistic conversation with someone about the trinity. I was so wrapped up in the "truth" of my belief system that I could not imagine myself apart from it. And then it happened in October of 2002. I got my first taste of being ministered to by trinitarians. Granted, none of them knew I wasn't one of "them". But I stopped thinking of them as "them". I don't keep my beliefs hidden anymore, but I don't go out of my way to push what I believe onto my friends and make it a point of contention. Why? It came down to semantics. I believed Jesus became a functional equal to God. Trinitarians believe he always was. I say "believed" because I'm not so sure about any of it anymore. I opened up my mind to possibilities and I saw that none of it was as cut and dried as I once believed. The other reason is that I frame my discussions around the notion that I'm in "learning mode". I want them to help me to understand why a particular belief is so important to them. I have been able to have very deep conversations with people once I stopped trying to convince them that I was right and they were wrong.

DG in his article about truth and relationships is dismayed that a long time friend gives up "truth" for relationship. He doesn't understand why someone would do that. He dismisses other's truth as being subjective, while believing his truth is objective. Well, I used to think the same thing. I used to believe that somehow I had a better ability to objectively view things than others. I will say that I have a higher than normal ability to step back and view things objectively, but I am far from being totally objective about my world view. Once I realized that even my awareness of that could be highly subjective, I stopped believing in any kind of absolute truth. Just because someone can state that they are objective about why he or she believes something, doesn't mean he or she is. EVERYONE works off of a set of assumptions and presumptions and no one can be 100% sure his or hers are the correct ones. DG acknowledges that while trying to convince the reader that his view is truth rather than his truth.

DG describes himself as a "genuine" truth seeker while (IMO) looking at others as less of one. Those who are not genuine appear to be people who won't consider his (opposing) position. He defends his stance because he doesn't hold the position "for position's sake". I beg to disagree. Once one makes a statement regarding a "truth", it becomes a position. Once a relationship is dissolved based upon doctrine (position), then it really does become "for position's sake."

Why am I bringing this up? Because I see many of the same tactics that were used within TWI to keep people from thinking for themselves. I have observed these "truth seekers" first hand and how they refused to entertain any position other than their own. I have witnessed and been at the other end of how they drew information out of a person only to use that information against them at a later date. The reality is that the vast majority of people who invest money into STF do NOT have the depth of relationship with the people at the top that they think they do. If you read the letters and testimonials, they are full of "way speak." Basically people who believe that because these guys came out of TWI that they somehow have a better way of approaching God's word when it comes to proper understanding. I would agree that STF has a system, but it's flawed. I personally believe ALL systems of bible study are flawed, because they are designed by humans and therefore have biases.

I believe that in order to be a true "truth seeker, " one must continually question what they think and believe, and never ever ever leave it up for someone else to decide.

Edited September 28, 2009 by Tzaia

[GarthP2000]

The trinitarian vs. unitarian argument. ... That old chestnut? ... Again?

... For the past 1600+ years??

<_<

[Tzaia]

The trinitarian vs. unitarian argument. ... That old chestnut? ... Again?

... For the past 1600+ years??

<_<

Pretty much the gist of why the relationship soured. I don't get it (anymore).

[pond]

I also have no desire to be right.

I see a difference between being right and truth. the bible speaks of truth and God highly favors truth the "being right part is a cut and dried situation only one is Jesus christ.

I can have my truth and still listen effectivly to others and their truth it is really what raocks my world.

DG is an academic star or in the least a wanna be star as is most "teachers" and those who proclaim learning academics as their life style.

knowledge of scripture is his claim to fame and not position sake because he believes it was the work of the academics of the bible that prove his status as a truth seeker.

in discussion about God or the bible I can maintain my faith in what I believe to be true and still find others views awesome as far as teaching I only engage when the water is cool and then only with love in my heart for my own lessons .

[Tzaia]

DG is an academic star or in the least a wanna be star as is most "teachers" and those who proclaim learning academics as their life style.

Maybe I would have agreed with you a few years ago (I can agree with the wannabe part) about DG, before I started an academic journey. The problem is that he hasn't subjected himself to the rigors of academia. He reads a book and if he likes what it says, he adds it to his repertoire. What does he do with the things that he doesn't agree with? He thinks he gives them thoughtful consideration. I beg to differ. The truth is that he hasn't ever really seriously taken apart all of his belief systems (at least when it comes to religion) and examined them. That's my opinion.

[pond]

Well I know for my self as a christian I would not switch to another God. So Im not switching religion either.

Many christians would consider that faith. Jesus Christ reveals his self to christian actualy to all men, We always have a choice to seek or to know or to worship . to obey or not is the whole crux of being a christian really.

I am educated many christians have great knowledge of scripture, it isnt all about academics and book nlearning.

it is spiritual. God asks us to examine our life on a daily bases if we are to know the lord as King of King and chapters are written about how christians are often perplexed and confused and just plain old wrong.

such is knowing Him.

Only a fool claims he/she knows anothers true heart and how they think, that is why we worship God really because as the creator only He can make our life whole. Only He knows who we can be for Him and what we truly believe.

DG is a DR. isnt he? regardless of his educational background , the bible clearly states and Paul testifys for his own life the "rigors of academia " is what had him murder hundreds if not thousands of people who chose to follow Jesus Christs teachings atthe time, the LORD taught him a different way to learn in a very spectacular manner did he not?

kind of blows being subject to the rigors of academia out of the water if you chose to read the bible storys about that.

my point is God is able to proclaim truth to his people and needs us to chose to believe it or not on a personal level to change the world and to give others a chance to live forever with the Father and His Son in the kingdom.

the purpose of a christian is examined by our ability to know Him and his way. How that is accomplished is written for each to read and for each to experience god is not a book but life itself. We get to know one another by what we write here at GS it is the same with the bible we each have the ability to learn about God in many forms in life.

I do not chose to engage in your war with stf, but honestly if I read in a book that the moon is made of green cheeses I would not give it "thoughtful consideration" I believe every person gleans from information what we process with our own intellect .

That is exactly why we have schools. because some things have been proven to be true and others false and is it not the will of every mand to decide for their own self what that may be? or you can be in a dream world and pretend everything is just what your next thought may be that is not exactly the rigors of academia is it?

Different schools of thought in the world you bet ya!!!!

that is why life is so great!

Edited September 29, 2009 by pond

[Tzaia]

Don't get me started on pauline theology :wacko:

[pond]

your last reply kind of explains your position.

your rolled eyes say to me a disdain or in the very least a strong opinion.

you may be like those you have issue with more than you think.

When i am in discussion i do not think the other party should or may have to "learn" anything i just talk and love and listen and learn and add my own view if it is cherished as a giving of self.

See the stf people have made a vocation of teaching others the information they have. They provide answers for folks who want to know their work.

They have pride in their work and anyone who has pride (not a bad thing) naturaly stands behind their work.

I believe it is the choice of every man to decide if the information will work for them .

I see no need for them to advertise to those who want to debate thier ideals that seems like a waste of time for everyone involved doesnt it?

If you want to buy red meat why would one find issue with the man who owns the fish store?

Edited September 30, 2009 by pond

[Tzaia]

My emoticon doesn't explain anything. Take from it what you want. <== freely offered. My issue with STF is that no one knows them well enough to understand where all this "wisdom" is coming from. They say they place a high value on character, but pay no attention to their own character issues. They say they place a high value on truth, yet they often don't tell the truth. They say they place a high value on relationships, yet there is a trail of broken relationships, some happening in a very public manner.

Now I have to say that this last Sower was more honest about where they believe relationships should be on the value scale. Now we know relationships are somewhere underneath "truth". Truth is what they define it to be.

[pond]

" truth as what they define it to be" is what every person believes tzaia . Each person decides what is their own truth in life. Even if they want to blame the other guy. I need truth to be a base line of my relationships . You dont? what is then?

[Tzaia]

I think truth has a high place in relationships. I just don't think that it's imperative that we be in agreement regarding that truth. If non-trinitarians had proved themselves less dastardly due to their "truth," then I might not think that. However, I've found that agreement has led to exploitation of relationships; that somehow someone deserves a free pass because we're in agreement on a few things, when they were reluctant to reciprocate. I have little problem with the overall doctrine taught by STF, other than the "we have the truth" part, my problem is with the character of the higher ups in the organization.

[pond]

I think truth has a high place in relationships. I just don't think that it's imperative that we be in agreement regarding that truth. If non-trinitarians had proved themselves less dastardly due to their "truth," then I might not think that. However, I've found that agreement has led to exploitation of relationships; that somehow someone deserves a free pass because we're in agreement on a few things, when they were reluctant to reciprocate. I have little problem with the overall doctrine taught by STF, other than the "we have the truth" part, my problem is with the character of the higher ups in the organization.

JS has a teaching about relationships and doctrine in which he states he has struggled with this issue, I do not remember his point tho it is on his web page if your interested in hearing his position on relationship and doctrine.

I read you to say your experience with them was not a good experience for a relationship.

yes many times satan does cause those working in the field of God and His will to fight and agrue about many issues.

I believe that is why forgivness and love is so powerful in the teachings of Jesus christ. When folks get hurt they become bitter and angry and find problems with one another maybe with "reason". it happens alot.

The best I can do is limit my own sin as best as possible and move on with the Lord who will never leave or forsake me (or any of Gods beloved). I try to remember that I am loved by the blood of Jesus not by what any of us may or may not "do" for one another.

Bible stories are written by people in the bible better able to work together to get the job done than others, it is nothing new. For me the clear who is right or wrong is never gonna happen till the return and we live in the kingdom because of the war zone we all face on a daily bases.

it is all good anyways.

I think the twi background really set the stage for in fighting and who is who importance in organizations and is common between those who believed the whole "As He is" line of crap twi instilled wrongly.

Once at the rock of ages I would ask how are you today and the answer was "As he is".

oh come on so next week your hanging on a cross for me?

it fed the ego of many.

I believe Jesus Christ IS God ONLY begotten Son, and the rest of Gods children should worship him as scuh, I have no problem with the trinity doctrine mostly because I have spoken to so many who claim it as doctrine and have no clue what it even means.

I can clearly say Jesus Christ is not God and I believe I have some bible verses that wil concur BUT what is that to anyone who is not a bible student? not much, so I do not think it is all that important to those who do not want to know bible verses ok then.

For the love of God I do not know I got into a life time of it my own self.

I wish I was normal.

to late for me.

The doctrine of being born again is simple and without question the most important. The rest is like icing on cake to be enjoyed and cherished to have the type of life God wants for each of His precious children. We should know as christians the Father would love us to learn about him by study but how that plays out in each person is up to Jesus He is the only teacher we need .

[Rejoice]

DG is not a doctor. That is the other board member who is an anesthesiologist.

[Tzaia]

I don't believe that satan is the cause of the arguing over doctrine. It is arrogance. Anytime you turn someone into a "them" it is a bad thing (IMO). STF continues to mimic TWI's methods by turning anyone who doesn't agree into a "them".

Anyway, STF's teachings sound good until you line them up with the simple stuff like loving one another. Then it is obvious that they regress into the TWI model of loving by "loving" with the "truth of the word," which is, in reality, a qualifier.

[batcave]

Tzaia, your original post was excellent! That's very similar to the experience I've had since leaving CES/STFI. I never really went through that process leaving TWI because I was siding with a group of leaders that had splintered off and was doing their own thing, instead of questioning my faith and "truth". I've also run across other people with similar backgrounds as mine and they have had a similar journey. The trinitarians are not the "bad guys" and ultimately, the creation is forever trying to explain the creator. We won't see the whole picture in this life.

[pond]

I don't believe that satan is the cause of the arguing over doctrine. It is arrogance. Anytime you turn someone into a "them" it is a bad thing (IMO). STF continues to mimic TWI's methods by turning anyone who doesn't agree into a "them".

Anyway, STF's teachings sound good until you line them up with the simple stuff like loving one another. Then it is obvious that they regress into the TWI model of loving by "loving" with the "truth of the word," which is, in reality, a qualifier.

Are you saying you believe anyone who doesnt believe in stf is a them?

if yes is being a "them" negative or bad or something? what?

I am gonna say God does a whole lot of not loving people in the bible, He has many "qualifiers". In my own nope do not love everyone not at all . God put people to death for what we could consider minor crimes today and many would not consider that as Loving?

tazia define what you think love is.

[waysider]

God put people to death for what we could consider minor crimes today and many would not consider that as Loving?

Maybe it's just me.

I have a hard time jumping on the bandwagon for a God who would put people to death for minor crimes.

[Rejoice]

In another thread, someone said this about TWI---"We had some serious boundary issues in TWI. . . . they translated into many areas of our lives. . and instead of seeking the proper help like a counselor, doctor, or trained pastor we went to each other and sought our help" in house". . . . many times to our extreme detriment."

It seems that this is what continues with CES/STFI. There are no checks and balances from an independent source with neutral affiliation or stake in the group. Therefore, their perspective on truth is bound up and sealed.

[Tzaia]

Are you saying you believe anyone who doesnt believe in stf is a them?

if yes is being a "them" negative or bad or something? what?

I am gonna say God does a whole lot of not loving people in the bible, He has many "qualifiers". In my own nope do not love everyone not at all . God put people to death for what we could consider minor crimes today and many would not consider that as Loving?

tazia define what you think love is.

I don't believe that anyone who doesn't think STF holds the truth is a "them". STF does and I believe encourages its followers to think that way. Yes I think classifying people as "them" is a bad thing.

I think you are missing the point, or at least choosing to miss the point.

[Twinky]

Wouldn't it be nice if those who hold a trinitarian/non-trinitarian view concentrated on what they have in common, not what they have differences about.

Establish the common ground, before exploring the differences, and the reason(s) for the differences.

Jesus died for ALL of us (whether Jew, Christian, Buddhist, animist or whatever), that "WHOSOEVER shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." After that, we can do this:

Ro 12:3,18 - Every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly...As much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.In other words, we shouldn't be doing the work of the enemy, the father of lies, and debate about the "worth" or another or another's opinion, but rather, should "speak the truth in love". There is (I say it again) a lot more that we have in common than what separates us. Even if what we say is absolutely true but we don't speak it in love but in contention, then we're wrong.

[Tzaia]

Twinky - I agree, and that's what I started doing in my own life - just focusing on the commonality.

[Ham]

I don't see what is so objectionable about being "wrong"..

Isn't that the whole point? Its easier, losing it all in one moment.. I think anyway..

what if you found EVERYTHING you were taught was wrong..

it can be either.. your worst nightmare, or a dream come true..

[Tzaia]

There is nothing objectionable about being wrong. I'm wrong on occasion. I've even said I was wrong when I didn't believe I was. I've raised my standards on what I will stand up against. It has to be something that will matter in 10 years.

[pond]

There is nothing objectionable about being wrong. I'm wrong on occasion. I've even said I was wrong when I didn't believe I was. I've raised my standards on what I will stand up against. It has to be something that will matter in 10 years.

I think it is ironic your quote claims it is all about what a person can do for the Lord yet your willing to compromise His truth (as you know it) to people please?

Stand up against ? what does that mean exactly ? It sounds like your in a war with other christians. Jesus asks us to loveone another and the "stand up against " sounds like a defense mode to me.

Jesus is a teacherof truth not a fighter of man .

Integrity has alot to do with how one approches another, if I believe I am right I do not compromise what I cherish as truth in my life for anything. To me it is lying about me and not what I want to share with the world or anyone.

But I do not consider anyone eles wrong or less than , that is why Im excited to hear what others have to say, I can learn many many times and I believe that is why we are considered His body , bride etc.

I believe any person has to have a standard of truth and for me that is the bible I have many friends true friends of other religous sects whom I love dearly, do I think they will be in the kingdom? no. so says God almighty but I still love them and enjoy the company.

I am not defending stf BUT it is their mission to teach the bible for those who want to follow Christ the Risen Saviour so I can understand why they would correct wrong believing if they heard it it is their mission. Why is that wrong? many do seek the lord and the truth He offers.

As far as the trinity goes I happen to believe many are born again the Lord will teach each of Gods children right and wrong in life clearly He knows every person intent better than man does.

I read the bible to say many of those who call LORD LORD willl not enter the kingdom of heaven as well.

I do not believe it is a crap shoot tho I believe it is a personal relationship with god our Father and His son Jesus Christ.

[geisha779]

Best be careful TZ. . . . looks like you are looking for unity in diversity, and you just might end up finding it in the first cause. :) God is a being in relationship.

DL Moody was invited to speak at the Mormon Temple. . . a big deal, he was a trinitarian. . . . Ravi Zacharias was also invited to speak over 100 years later. . . . . . . . and he did a great job explaining why Jesus and why who we believe He is matters. It is a great speech and one I hope you get a chance to listen to. . . . I thought of it after reading your initial post.

The reason I mention it at all is because you are looking for the commonality. . . . I don't think you will find it. . . . but, what you can find are people who are willing to share the why's with you in a non-confrontational and loving humble manner.

I don't think we kill truth in the road for the sake of relationships. . . . . but, we can be in relationship to others with truth. It is how it should be. . . . . we are called to love even our enemies. . . . . . doctrinal differences are not a qualifier.

Hope you get a chance to listen. . . a trinitarian speaking to Mormons about the whys. . . . kind of what you were seeking.

<embed src="http://blip.tv/play/Ab2XEozWCA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="640" height="510" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed>

Edited October 5, 2009 by geisha779