It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A "good" person may yet come round with time and attention, and if his or her behavior is otherwise not going to lead people astray, is it harmful to allow them to continue to fellowship?
I guess it's hard for me because I just don't like the company of large groups of people. It makes me uneasy and always has no matter who they are. I hope God will forgive me for that, but He made me and has to know the fear and upset I feel when surrounded by people I don't know and know somewhat well. I honestly have a hard time with an extended family grouping for long periods, so church with strangers is very hard.
People ask “Why do we need to take part in church life? Isn’t it possible for someone to be a Christian on their own?” Yes, it is possible, but the detached Christian makes himself vulnerable. He is vulnerable to discouragement in isolation, and he is vulnerable to “wandering from the truth”.
originally posted by: SeaWorthy
a reply to: DISRAELI
People ask “Why do we need to take part in church life? Isn’t it possible for someone to be a Christian on their own?” Yes, it is possible, but the detached Christian makes himself vulnerable. He is vulnerable to discouragement in isolation, and he is vulnerable to “wandering from the truth”.
I would add that you don't have Christians you can help either. Many times we want to be giving but finding out you gave to wolves is depressing and your money went to some rich guy who loves this world. You want to give to good People who need help but your efforts cannot be directed and giving toe true Christians first is not possible if you don't know any.
Now, Jehovah’s Witnesses are taught to expect the visible rule of Christ on earth. How are they being trained to tell the difference between the true Christ and the false Christ? If they cannot tell the difference, is it possible that they might find themselves unwittingly accepting the false Christ instead?
They are also being taught to regard “Christendom”, the rest of the Christian world, as alien to God. So if they accept the false Christ, and he asks them to help him round up the other Christians for imprisonment, why should they refuse?
Thus they could find themselves walking into the ultimate trap of unconsciously taking the badge of the Beast and entering his service. And of course a similar wrong choice is open to any other group adopting the attitude of “the enemies of God are that lot over there”. T
hat is another reason why it is important to recognise fellow-believers as part of the “blessed company of all faithful people”.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: SeaWorthy
Well those things I think are problems with the church. Too many these days are wanting to go more contemporary. They go away from the Bible and more toward a Joel Osteen/Rick Warren approach which is more self-help than it is Christ-centered. They don't talk about sin and repentance; it seems to be more about feel-good and "Buddy Jesus" if you've ever seen the movie "Dogma" to know what I mean.
Judge not and all that where the idea of judge not is all "you be you and I won't say anything about what that means" ... you know, because that's mean and judgmental.
Men will surender to the spirit of the age. They will say that if they had lived in our day, Faith would be simple and easy. But in their day, they will say, things are complex; the Church must be brought up to date and made meaningful to the day's problems. When the Church and the world are one, then those days are at hand because our Divine Master placed a barrier between His things and the things of the world... ...St. Louis De Montfort (18th century):
Deceptive Tolerance All of this is being done in the name of “tolerance.” But it is a perverted tolerance. It is a subtle ploy of Satan to corrupt the Church from within. The deception sounds so appealing: “Why draw lines of fellowship over doctrinal differences? The only thing that’s important is sincerity. Reach out and embrace all those who profess to believe in God, regardless of who their god may be. Ignore doctrinal differences. Do it in the name of Christian love. Do it for the sake of religious unity.”
This type of thinking has led Earl Paulk of Atlanta to call for the Evangelical Christian world to embrace even the Mormons! It has motivated mainline liberal spokesmen to advocate that Christians show tolerance toward Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other pagan faiths by restraining ourselves from sharing the Gospel with them.
Consider, for example, the following words of Episcopal Bishop John Spong of New Jersey:11 In the fall of 1988, I worshipped God in a Buddhist temple. As the smell of incense filled the air, I knelt before three images of Buddha, feeling that the smoke could carry my prayers heavenward. It was for me a holy moment for I was certain that I was kneeling on holy ground… I will not make any further attempt to convert the Buddhist, the Jew, the Hindu or the Moslem. I am content to learn from them and to walk with them side by side toward the God who lives, I believe, beyond the images that bind and blind us.
Again, it all sounds so wonderful, so soothing, so tolerant! Tragically, it makes a liar of the very person they profess as Lord, for Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me” (John 14:6). Those are not tolerant words.
www.jw.org...
originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: SeaWorthy
Yes, that is just about what I expected- focussing on the first "beast" and ignoring the second.
I don't wish them any harm, as individuals, but I think their separation is self-induced.