Storyteller, BIG RED FLAG...
Thank you Windy, I now understand why you refuse to answer by which group you belong too, unless one PM's you and they are willing to come to Africa and join your group.
A person belonging to True Christian Community group will answer as Jesus would, tell the truth when asked and identify whom they belong too because Jesus Commands ones yes to be yes and no to be no. Also the holy Spirit within acts according to truth and reveals truth as well to; therefore, when I read Windy's statements and Rains they share none this.
Proselytizing for a specific group is forbidden on this Form and the evidence I read below is called gaming, seduction, to get people to sell all and move to their unidentified group's country of origin. I wrote a response to both of them, demonstrating that the verses they use - they themselves are taking out of context as is the manner of cults.
They way a true christian community works is that they do buy and sell and produce goods such as the Hutterites, Mennonites, Anabpatist groups. Though I disagree with the Emergent Church communities, they too understand that they need to wok, or not eat, and thus produce goods for sale in order to take care of their group's needs.
On the other hand, cultic groups will not identify themselves and will seek new members to sell all their possession and join their group. Jim Jones used this method See this Link on Jim Jones
. They seek constant stream of new folks to join their loving community. The words they use and format of debate sound eerily similar as Windy's and Rain style here. Such groups as Jones are not self sufficient but rather depend on more and more converts to join so the funding is there so they all can eat. Bible is clear not to isolate oneself from the world but be becomes of light midst a dark world.
Dealing with folks from true christian communities, these folks are more than willing to identify with their group and willy share and provide info on their group. One can easily leave their groups too. However, as a mod here on this forum with an obligation to protect readers from Cultic Proselytizing, I must directly challenge both Rain and Windy to identify their group.
I suggest all reader following this, let the mods know if Rain or Windy two have sent anyone any Privet emails and send a copy to one of the mods.
I underlined troubling statements below:
windywherever wrote:... Although Rick strongly disagrees with our interpretations, that one sentence tells me that we've accomplished what we're meant to do here. Whatever people choose to do with these teaching in their personal lives is between them and God...
On that note what we're aiming to discuss boils down to two points; 1) There is a standard and 2) There is a reason for the standard. We may find the standard (in this case, forsaking all) difficult. It may seem unrealistic or even impossible. Regardless of how we feel about it, we need to be able to recognize that the standard exists. In the gospels Jesus refers to himself as the "corner stone". A corner stone is a tool used to measure straight walls and 90 degree angles. It's designed to keep the standards of the building true and stright. If the corner stone were not there then there would be no guide to keep the other bricks in line. The bricks would eventually become skewed and disjointed, ruining the integrity of the entire building.
These words are an admittance to an agenda. Next, they are the only ones capable of defining the standards which are design to make the reader feel guilty. They only have the right interpretation of the words of Jesus and only they know. Everyone else is implied as being wrong. Then seduction comes in with smooth sounding words that eventually say, give to the group all you have, and the group will take care of you as you must forsake all to follow Jesus.
Now read the next part of Windy's statement and I pray the readers will see the Hook...
windywherever wrote:This is why Jesus' teachings on forsaking all and working for love vs working for money are so important. They are part of our arsenal of tools for measuring what is right and what is wrong. They are not a legalistic list of rules to follow, but rather they are the standards by which we become citezens of the Kingdom of Heaven. For example, in the Lord's prayer Jesus says we should pray, "thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven". In Heaven they don't help one another for payment. There is no payment we could offer God to buy his help. He gives it to us freely because he knows we need it and wants to show his love. This is how Jesus wants us to behave towards our brothers and sisters, as well.
You say you have a daughter which you need to care for. Fair enough. God can care for her as much as he cares for anyone. I realize that probably sounds cliche, but even with that we need to ask WHY does it sound cliche. Don't we believe it? This is one of the problems of a monetary system where people only help one another for payment. It causes us to see a comment like, "God can care for your material needs if you seek his Kingdom first" as unrealistic. This is one of the benefits of Christian community. The record shows that thousands of Christians chose to live this way and it specifically says, "they shared all things in common and everyone was provided for according to their need". There are answers, but we'll only be able to see those answers when we stop depending on the systems of man..
...That's the point of becoming spiritually mature and being sincere. We're always looking for new truth, new ways to serve God and new ways to change ourselves to be more consistent with the values of Heaven. This is what the forsake all teachings are about.
When Jesus was talking to Nicodemus he said, in what sounded like a somewhat frustrated tone, "If you do not believe me about earthly things how can I tell you about heavenly things"? It must have been so frustrating for Jesus, having so much spiritual knowledge and wanting to share it with us but knowing that we'd probably be too stubborn to really hear it.
What they offer is a system of man built upon taking the bible out of context in order to build man's kingdom of controlling others.
Again, let me post my response to forsaking all in regards to Acts 2:44-48
Basically what happened in Jerusalem in Acts 2:44-48 was local event, due to the large influx of new converts. Due to persecution of the early Church which is well documented by the religious authorities towards the Jewish believers in Messiah, these Leaders would: First - put believers out of the fellowship of the synagogue as John 9:22, and John 12:42 mentions.
It was a serious thing to be excommunicated from the synagogue with all its perks and privileges. There was no means of support or rights one had after this. Next, secondly - Due to persecution, believers would have their property confiscated, lose employment, lose land right of ownership - Lose the farm) all rights as Jewish citizens were taken away.
These folks had no choice other than do what they did in order to survive and collections elsewhere were gathered for them from the Church
. It was not meant to be a welfare state. In fact, Paul mentions this in Rom 15:25,26, "to make a contribution for the poor among the saints in Jerusalem
," due to the persecution going on there.
Point is, Rain and Windy, nowhere else was this practiced as a norm in the spreading early church, unless in cases of extreme persecution. In fact Paul also wrote, 2Th 3:10,12 For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, 12 Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to work in quiet fashion and eat their own bread.
Please review the commentaries quoted above again and I pray it helps you grasp the truth...
"Utleys, You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series states this concerning Acts 2:44-47:
Utleys, You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series wrote:
▣ "and had all things in common" This early experiment in "community" was not successful (cf. Acts 4:32 to Acts 5:11). It was not meant to be a universal principle, but an attempt at a loving, mutually supportive community or faith. This is a good example that not everything recorded in the Bible is meant to be universally implemented! These early believers had a great love for one another. Oh, that we could regain this love and sense of the presence and power of God among us (cf. John 17:11; John 17:21-23)!!
Acts 2:46 "with one mind" The early church was characterized by this unity of purpose (cf. Acts 1:14; Acts 2:46; Acts 4:24; Acts 5:12). This is not to say that they agreed on everything, but that their hearts and minds were knit together in kingdom priorities instead of personal preferences or agendas.
Notice the early church attended the temple and probably the local synagogues until the rabbis instituted a curse formula (about A.D. 70), which forced synagogue members to curse Jesus. This caused the break between the church and Judaism. The early believers maintained their weekly worship, but also met on Sunday to commemorate Jesus' resurrection. Remember, Jesus Himself met with the disciples, three Sunday nights in a row.
As Utley pointed out: This early experiment in "community" was not successful...
Next, Biblical Illustrator Commentary expresses this on this subject:
Biblical Illustrator Commentary wrote:Communism
What about this so-called communism in the early Church? What was it in nature and extent? The passage describing the community of goods is critical. Social reformers, not always Christian, point to this as the ideal state from which the Church has wandered
1. The arrangement was purely voluntary. What any man put in was still his. The sin of Ananias was not that he had kept back a portion of his estate by fraud, but that he lied about it. It was still in his power after the sale as before. The community of property flowed out of the new spiritual life. (See Acts 4:32-37.) “In point of fact, their experiment was simply the assertion of the right of every man to do as he chooses with his own; and they chose to live together and help each other. It was a fraternal stock company for mutual aid and protection. No man was bound to come into it unless he wished; but if he did come in, he was bound to act honestly.”
2. It was a spiritual result, and not a social experiment. It cannot be explained except on the spiritual basis. It must be studied in its true setting. The Brook Farm, “Utopia,” and all kindred institutions, have been social experiments. Bellamy’s “Looking Backward” Society is allied with them. They have arisen for lack of the Holy Spirit. This sprung up spontaneously because of Pentecost.
3. The community of goods seems to have been a community of use, not ownership. Nobody said that aught that he possessed was his own. They were of one heart. The circumstances were peculiar. Many of the people were away from home. All had to be cared for. No one should suffer.
4. The plan was local. Jerusalem was the only city where it was tried. No trace of it is to be found in any ether Church. It evidently did not commend itself to other churches as a wise plan. The other churches took up collections just as now when a case of need was presented. (See 1Co 16:2; 2Co 9:6-7.)
5. It was temporary. It lasted while the circumstances in which it arose continued.
6. It did not relieve poverty. It was not devised for that purpose. Many writers insist upon seeing a close connection between this incident and the subsequent poverty in Jerusalem. Thus Meyer: “And this community of goods at Jerusalem helps to explain the great and general poverty of that Church. It is probable that the apostles were prevented by the very experience acquired in Jerusalem from advising or introducing it elsewhere.” Thus Gulliver: “Under such sublime inspirations it is easy to see that a communism, impossible to ordinary human nature, might temporarily flourish. But it is as easy to see that it would gradually settle to the level of ordinary motive, and would be subjected to the disturbances of inevitable inequalities in capacity and industry, as well as in piety.
The Plymouth Pilgrims were, perhaps, the most single-minded men of modern times. Yet it was not till the community of lands and goods which obtained in the early years of their settlement gave place to farms in severalty, and to private property protected by law, that the annually recurring danger of absolute starvation in their colony disappeared. The lesson of such a history is, therefore, not solely the lesson of Christian consecration. It includes the utility and the sacredness of the personal control of property. It places before us the problem of combining the largest Christian benevolence with the strict maintenance of proprietary rights.”
7. It was not modern communism. Says Gerok: “That holy community of goods proceeded from love to the poor; but that which is now proclaimed is the result of a hatred to the rich.” And Van [lesbian]: “Of late years the communistic doctrine has begun to present itself in another shape. It has laid aside the red cap and put on the white cravat. It invites serious and polite inquiry. It quotes Scripture and claims to be the friend, the near relative, of Christianity. So altered is its aspect that preachers of religion are discovering that it has good points, and patting it on the back somewhat timidly, as one might pat a converted wolf who had offered his services as watch-dog.” There is a fundamental and absolute difference between the doctrine of the Bible and the doctrine of the communiser.
For the Bible tells me that I must deal my bread to the hungry; while the communiser tells the hungry that he may take it for himself, and if he begins with bread there is no reason why he should draw the line at cake. The Bible teaches that envy is a sin; the communiser declares that it is the new virtue which is to regenerate society.
The communiser maintains that every man who is born has a right to live; but the Bible says that if a man will not work neither shall he eat; and without eating life is difficult.
The communiser holds up equality of condition as the ideal of Christianity; but Christ never mentions it. He tells us that we shall have the poor always with us, and charges us never to forget, despise, or neglect them. Christianity requires two things from every man that believes in it: first, to acquire his property by just and righteous means; and, secondly, to look not only on his own things, but also on the things of others. (W. F. McDowell.
Christians can fall prey to bad teachings regarding Luke 14:26-35 and Matthew 10:32-40 as well as Acts 2:44-47 and become exploited, which sadly does happen.We are called to rightly divide the word of truth in the bible and in the case of the examples in Luke 14 and Matthew 10 without realizing Deut 13:6-9 even exists then one can be lead into error.
The same goes along with Acts 2:44-48 teachings that without the facts from John 9:22, and John 12:42 one may miss the reason the Lord moved these people to do what they did and why collections were taken in the early church located outside of Israel for them in Jerusalem. Without balancing the bible with other verses that also are verified by historical records from the times on matters such as this, people can twist the bible for exploitation purposes.
2 Peter 2:1-3, ...and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep
So a word of advice, be wise and pray for the spiritual gift of wisdom, knowledge, and discernment to be granted you...
Next Regarding forsaking all scriptures:
In Luke 14:26-35 Jesus is clarifying a principle from the Law mentioned in Deut 13:6,7,8. Luke 14:26-35 correlates directly to Matthew 10:32,33,34,35,36,37-40 which also points to the Law mentioned in Deut 13:6,7,8 as the criteria why to leave family behind. They entice one to serve other things and deny Christ.
Therefore, forsaking all involves leaving behind persecutors who will do anything to sway a person to come back and live according the wiles of the world' system. The ones that have the most influence come from family members and Jesus is clarifying the reality of Deut 13:6,7,8 in Luke 14:26-35 and Matthew 10:32-40.
Now compare to these verses
1 Tim 3:4,5 He must be one who manages his own household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity 5 (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?)
1 Tim 5:8 But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
Note also - Proverbs 13:22, Proverbs 19:14...
What do these verse imply according to the truth of context and truth of application?
I am granting Windy and Rain one last opportunity to identify their group as it is clear to me why they are really here. If Not, I will personally ban both you on the spot for Forum rule Violation for Proselytizing...
This is the job of the Moderators on this forum, to protect readers and forum members from being exploited and to confront erroneous doctrines. We do take our position here seriously...
Rain, Windy and cultist such as the Christadelphians in Kenya, Nairobi - may not like it but that is the way it is...