|
Didaktikon
|
101#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:23/10/2007 04:38:43)
Reply to : brolga
Hi, Ralph.
Thanks once again.
You're welcome.
FWW. I have just finished listening to a talk I had recorded whilst in RCI Bellarine some five years ago. It is by "Pastor" John Andrews and is a "salvation" message. It really covers the host of what Revivalist teaching and doctrine stands for, and what we speak out against now, in the light of biblical truth. He talks about how other churches have compromised the Gospel, even to the point "they need to be shot". In the thirty minute talk, tongues was mentioned 48 times and he stated that God was the "God of Tongues"
Scary, isn't it? I think I've mentioned as much before here, but I've long been in the habit of taking a prepared 'tick-and-flick' checklist when I attend Revivalist services. 'Tongues' always gets the most mention, 'Jesus' is always near the bottom, whilst 'grace' always comes last--often with no ticks against this word at all  Speaks volumes about what's really important to Revivalists [  isgusted;]
It is a very convincing talk and for any new to this, would be easily mislead into believing the great lie, as many have and still do, but it does give one the insight of the spiritual abuse that is taking place when one has gained a little knowlege of Biblical truth.
Anyone can trawl through and 'proof-text' Scripture. Sadly, biblical illiteracy in the wider community (never mind the Christian one!) is mostly to blame for any ready acceptance that the Revivalist 'message' receives.
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Episkopeo
|
102#
|
Rank:Regular Rookier
Score:5700
Posts:267
Registered:30/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:23/10/2007 05:21:43)
It's amazing what slips into talks not noticed by most. I have asked people immediately after a meeting what the talk was on and they can't even remember the theme let alone the specific content. Almost all the talks would go unchallenged. A pity for the church.
About 2 years ago in a talk a Perth pastor stated that other churches worshiped a different god, a different gospel. How's that for utter nonsense?
It's not my intention to be critical just for the sake of it, but Revival churches need to take a good hard look at themselves.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
103#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:23/10/2007 05:37:56)
Reply to : Episkopeo
Hi, bloke.
It's amazing what slips into talks not noticed by most. I have asked people immediately after a meeting what the talk was on and they can't even remember the theme let alone the specific content. Almost all the talks would go unchallenged. A pity for the church.
Obviously very 'nourishing' fare, from a spiritual perspective, hey? 
About 2 years ago in a talk a Perth pastor stated that other churches worshiped a different god, a different gospel. How's that for utter nonsense?
The really sad thing is that your Perth pastor's statement is actually true! The Revivalist God doesn't match the biblical one (who is Triune); further, the Revivalist 'gospel' certainly isn't a message about the grace of God being made available through the ministry of Jesus as Christ, which is appropriated by faith 
It's not my intention to be critical just for the sake of it, but Revival churches need to take a good hard look at themselves.
Yes, and hopefully (my fingers are still crossed) that having done so, the various Revivalist groups might eventually become Christian.
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Aimoo Team
|
|
|
(Date Posted:23/10/2007 05:44:45)
This message has been deleted due to Termination of Account.
|
|
Episkopeo
|
105#
|
Rank:Regular Rookier
Score:5700
Posts:267
Registered:30/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:23/10/2007 06:40:54)
Reply to : Didaktikon
Hi,
I asked their views on the Trinity years ago but was never given an adequate answer. I think the answer was something like "it's up to you entirely how you view the Trinity" and they didn't give a church stand on it.
God Bless, Epi.
By the way, I'm not a bloke.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
106#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:23/10/2007 06:45:36)
Reply to : Episkopeo
'Epi',
By the way, I'm not a bloke.
Oops, mea culpa! 
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Episkopeo
|
107#
|
Rank:Regular Rookier
Score:5700
Posts:267
Registered:30/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:23/10/2007 16:07:09)
Reply to : Didaktikon
Reply to : Episkopeo'Epi',By the way, I'm not a bloke.Oops, mea culpa!Blessings,Ian
Hi Ian,
It's not a case of Oops, mea culpa or mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. You didn't know.
God Bless.
Episkopeo
|
|
Didaktikon
|
108#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:24/10/2007 01:26:51)
Reply to : Episkopeo
Blokette,
It's not a case of Oops, mea culpa or mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. You didn't know.
Aahhhh... be thou a 'closet' Tridentine Catholic, young lady? One who regularly prays the Latin Confiteor? 
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
Episkopeo
|
109#
|
Rank:Regular Rookier
Score:5700
Posts:267
Registered:30/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:25/10/2007 01:35:33)
Reply to : Didaktikon
Reply to : EpiskopeoBlokette,It's not a case of Oops,mea culpa or mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. You didn't know.Aahhhh... be thou a 'closet' Tridentine Catholic, young lady? One who regularly prays the Latin Confiteor?Blessings,Ian
Good morning Ian,
Tridentine. In nomini Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Santi. Yes I'm that.
.
"Closet" Catholic. No. I fully appreciate the reverence within the Catholic system. A reverence which I had almost forgotten. I had some trouble with transubstantiation and that's why I initially looked elswhere. Although, perhaps I should have viewed it spiritually.
Confiteor Deo omnipotenti. Although I'm saved and forgiven, there's merit in acknowledging that I don't shape up and will do better next time, which is what Catholics do before they begin their Mass and Communion. Reflection is good.
Lady. Yes.
Pax tecum. Episkopeo
|
|
Didaktikon
|
110#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:25/10/2007 01:39:04)
Reply to : Episkopeo
Bishette,
Cool. Et cum spiritu tuo 
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
woodfortrees
|
111#
|
Rank:Newbie
Score:520
Posts:26
Registered:29/09/2007
|
(Date Posted:25/10/2007 02:28:17)
Reply to : Didaktikon
Hello Didaktikon,
Your contributions here are appreciated, thanks. Interest in class action still remains amongst members of the GRC forum, I am wondering what your thoughts would be in regards to this.
I found the following definition of religious intolerance after 'googling' "class action against religious organisations", (admittedly this is from Wikip. ..raising an eyebrow)
Religious intolerance is either intolerance motivated by one's own religious beliefs or intolerance against another's religious beliefs practices. It manifests both at a cultural level, but may also be a formal part of the dogma of particular religious groups.
The mere statement on the part of a religion that its own beliefs and practices are correct and any contrary beliefs incorrect does not in itself constitute intolerance. There are many cases throughout history of established religions tolerating other practices. Religious intolerance, rather, is when a group (a society, a religious group) specifically refuses to tolerate practices, persons or beliefs on religious grounds...
Do you may have information regarding the 'rules' that dictate how religious groups can go on preaching when it is obvious that they use mind-control techniques. Does pursuing a class action over claims of mind control and manipulation then place 'us' in the category of being religion-intolerant, and what are the implications?
Somewhat new to the forum, should this be in another thread?
wft.
|
|
Didaktikon
|
112#
|
Rank:Old Forum Fogey
Score:31600
Posts:1517
Registered:29/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:25/10/2007 02:54:18)
Reply to : woodfortrees
Good morning, 'Wood'.
Your contributions here are appreciated, thanks.
Thanks for the support.
Interest in class action still remains amongst members of the GRC forum, I am wondering what your thoughts would be in regards to this.
Well, to be honest, I think such an action would likely prove to be both a waste of time and of money
Do you have information/thoughts regarding the 'rules' that dictate how religious groups can go on preaching when it is obvious that they use mind-control techniques.
Sure. In a 'nutshell', the Australian Constitution protects the right of individuals and groups to exercise religious freedom, and the freedom to express their beliefs. This extends to include the rights of the GRC to peddle their nonsense. Where the GRC might come unstuck, legally, would relate to their 'business' dealings: fundraising, the payment of taxes, etc. A case may even be made with respect to the possibility of financial 'extortion' through 'tithes', etc. But I'm not a lawyer, so I really couldn't say.
Does pursuing a class action over claims of mind control and manipulation then place 'us' in the category of being religion-intolerant, and what are the implications?
I seriously doubt that you would be able to pursue a class action on the grounds of 'mind-control' and/or 'manipulation'. You see, precisely the same claim could be made against the education system, so I can't see the legal powers-that-be opening what would quickly become a Pandora's Box of litigation.
Somewhat new to the forum, should this be in another thread?
Probably 
Blessings,
Ian
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
|
woodfortrees
|
113#
|
Rank:Newbie
Score:520
Posts:26
Registered:29/09/2007
|
(Date Posted:25/10/2007 08:21:28)
Reply to : Didaktikon
Reply to : Sure. In a 'nutshell', the Australian Constitution protects the right of individuals and groups to exercise religious freedom, and the freedom to express their beliefs.
Thank you,
'religious freedom', sounds rather ironic.
|
|
|
