What is the One Project and its true purpose.

[Unity]

12 hours ago, CoAspen said:

Interesting idea, we are not to emulate Jesus, that is, use His methods for teaching. We can only use the stories He told. Any parable(story) told today will be unholy/error/bad/etc?

Wonder where you got the idea that truth is stagnant or the methods of explaining it are set in stone.....rather limiting of the Holy Spirit.

What I said doesn't necessarily mean we are not to emulate Jesus, or use His methods for teaching, or that truth is stagnant, or that methods of explaining it are set in stone. We are not to emulate Jesus in the sense of writing new stories into The Bible. Jesus has some abilities, such as being a prophet, that we do not so some of His methods of teaching are out of our reach. And truth isn't stagnant in the sense that we don't find new truths in our personal lives, and perhaps every once in awhile someone digs up a new truth that doesn't contradict the old truths in any way. I would say that truths are unmovable, as stagnant has negative connotations.

All I am saying that stories are bad in the sense that they teach members to rely on stories that aren't necessarily inspired. When we encounter Satan we are going to need a "It is written", not a "speaker and story teller Josephine Cunnington Edwards said in a story".

I understand that stories can be used to memorize Bible truths, but The Bible already has countless stories. Stories that are necessarily inspired, upon which we can know without a doubt that we can trust and to use to thoroughly explain truth to ourselves and others. Plus we will understand those Biblical stories much more deeply by being taught them more often and matching up other truths from future sermons, bible studies, and conversations.  It is rather limiting on the Holy Spirit to say that there isn't enough in The Holy Bible to do a thoroughly good work.

[Gregory Matthews]

Unity:  Not once have I attributed a motive to you.  The idea that I have is false.  Sorry if you thought that I was attributing a motive to you.

However, since you have brought it   up, I will make the leap and attribute a motive to you.  I  suspect that your motive was one, or more, of the following:

1) To share  with us how you typically experience the Sabbath when you attend traditional SDA services.

2) To suggest to us that the experience that you have in attending a traditiaonal SDA service is lacking, on the part ot the people attending of the spirituality that you want andneed.

3) To share with us the struggle that you have in keeping your thoughts on the spiritual level that you desire on the Sabbath.

Unity, I could list more potential motives that you may have had.  I do not know if any of the above is accurate.  They may not be.  In any case,  Not once did I attribute a motive to you.

Further, not once did I judge you.  That idea is simply false.  Again, I am sorry if you  thought that I was judging you.

Any of the above could be a valid motive for your post.  But, for me to say that you  indeed did  have a valid motive for your post would, as you have said, be judging you.   You object to my judging you, so I will not.  But, I will simply say that judging another can clearly be in a positive manner.

However, even after attributing, if I were to do so, a very positive motive for your sharing with us, I would still say exactly what I have posted.  You came across exactly as I posted.

I will suggest to you that you need to focus your life, when you attend Sabbath services, on something other than the "idle talk" that you have mentioned.  You can do that and I do not buy your defensive comments to the point that you cannot.

Further, for the past several years, I have attended a SDA congregation that has had non-members attending.  I cannot expect those people to have the level of spiritual talk that you seem to expect.

Personally, I regularly visit non-SDAs, on Sabbath afternoon, whom I am working to build a positive spiritual relationship with.  In those visits, the conversation may stray outside of the spiritual boundaries that you seem to have.   I do not expect to hold them to my personal standard.

I would suggest that the Sabbath is a good time for such visits for you.  But, I do have some concern as to your ability to interact with people on the Sabbath who are seemingly outside of your boundaries.

 

 

 

 

 

[Tom Wetmore]

Why argue that point so vigorously?  The point CoAspen made was a serious flaw of one of the points in the article that was criticizing the supposed prefererence of story telling over preaching as apparently a problem of the emergent church movement.  Really!?!?  That is a problem or evidence of the error of the emergent church movement!?!? 

Face it, that is pretty lame, scraping the bottom of the barrel, so to speak, if that is a supposed bad thing about any movement.  It seems to reveal a pretty sad lack of understanding of the best of preaching itself which includes a healthy dose of story telling, not to mention the ages old value of teaching serious moral lessons by that very method.  

When someone trying to warn of supposed evils and errors of some movement has to resort to sketchy arguments like that it is just very hard to take them seriously.  And defending silly stuff makes one look equally silly.  

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

sometimes the stories in the Bible can only be understood if the culture of the times is known...  For example, if a non-Christian who has no knowledge of ancient times was to read about Ruth going in to Boaz and laying at his feet, what might that person conclude?  That women should lie at the feet of men?

Stories with spiritual meanings need to be applicable to the target audience and understood by the same.  

[CoAspen]

Quote

All I am saying that stories are bad in the sense that they teach members to rely on stories that aren't necessarily inspired. When we encounter Satan we are going to need a "It is written", not a "speaker and story teller Josephine Cunnington Edwards said in a story".

I understand that stories can be used to memorize Bible truths, but The Bible already has countless stories. Stories that are necessarily inspired, upon which we can know without a doubt that we can trust and to use to thoroughly explain truth to ourselves and others. Plus we will understand those Biblical stories much more deeply by being taught them more often and matching up other truths from future sermons, bible studies, and conversations.  It is rather limiting on the Holy Spirit to say that there isn't enough in The Holy Bible to do a thoroughly good work.

Do you understand what a "contradiction" is? You are going in circles. The stories, parables, that Christ told were not always 'true stories'. Inspired, do you know the meaning of the word? Does the Holy Spirit inspire or not? The H*S only can only use what is already in the Bible? That is limiting!!!

[JoeMo]

1 hour ago, CoAspen said:

Do you understand what a "contradiction" is? You are going in circles. The stories, parables, that Christ told were not always 'true stories'. Inspired, do you know the meaning of the word? Does the Holy Spirit inspire or not? The H*S only can only use what is already in the Bible? That is limiting!!!

Right on, CoA! A prime example of one of those stories in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus.  In the story, Lazarus is lying in the bosum of Abraham listening to the rich man burning in hell across a chasm.  I have to conclude that this is fiction rather than truth because:

1. The rest of the Bible says people don't suffer forever in hell, they burn up and perish.

2.  Abraham's bosum can't POSSIBLY be that big.

A fictional story to illustrate Biblical Truth!  Sounds like there is Godly precedent for telling stories.

[Unity]

On 1/13/2016 at 5:21 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

Unity, I could list more potential motives that you may have had.  I do not know if any of the above is accurate.  They may not be.  In any case,  Not once did I attribute a motive to you.

You surmise evil. Your previous post posited my motivation. Overall you are just using ad hominem attacks through adroit questioning. Your statements are contradictory, because at the one moment they state something as fact and then briefly suggest doubt, but followed by more statements that contradict those statements of doubt. You backtrack, and then you go and do exactly what you backtracked on and give poor excuses. I am finished with this conversation as your methods will just drag me down and lead to never ending debate. I will not respond to anymore posts. Anyone who can see will see.

[Gregory Matthews]

O. K. Brian, you have informed us that you will not participate in this conversation.  I can accept that.  I note that you have not said that you will not read what I post, so, I will comment on your last post.

I have commented on how you present yourself.  As I  said, I do not know your motive.   I can suggest some motives that are not negative, as I did in a later post.  Of course, it is not a sin to overhear a conversation.  I never said it  was.

I find it interesting that you tell us that other SDA clergy and members have made suggestions to you that were similar to what I said.  My advice:  Listen to them.  The unified advice of  many may be better than the advice of one.

In any case, even if you reject it, it should give you cause to consider how you relate to people in a manner that results in this common thread.

My friend, Brian Fort:  That is the focus of my posts to you.

As I tell people:  You may not rob banks for a living.  But, if your friends think that you do, you need to consider why they think you do and what you are doing to cause them to think that you rob banks for a living.

I do apologize for whatever role I had in your misunderstanding my posts.   It appears that you have not understood even one element of them.  At least your responses have clearly misrepresented them.  But, that is life,  I can not control how you chose to evaluate them.

By the way:  You state that I surmise evil of you.  Sorry.  I have never thought that of you or your actions.  If you area evil, you have kept it well hidden from me.  If you believe that the actions I have attributed to you are evil, you have a choice as to whether or not you will continue them.  In any case  I do not believe that they are evil.  Perhaps you have a more strictly defined sense of evil than I have?  I do not know.  If so, that is simply you.

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Brian, if you think that I have only negative things to say about you, please allow me to make some positive comments:

1)  You are clearly active in your local SDA Church.

2)  You provide your local SDA Church IT advice and skills.

3)  As an IT person you could be of value to people here in CA, if you were willing.

You have something to contribute.