Frenchy

Joined

• started 88 topics
• posted 1,731 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Frenchy

• 
  30

  Defining Christianity

  by Carmel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it seems i constantly am confronted with those who are trying to make a "christian" out of me.

  in various threads on this forum the term is used as if everyone understands what it means and there is no fuzzy edges.. i wonder if all here assume that only those that follow "jesus" are to be considered "christian"?.

  consider that the title "christ" was not the name of the nazarene, only a title!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  Carmel:

  My point was that when a "christian" tells me that I am not a "christian" because I accept the spiritual station of other "christs" I find that exclusivity distasteful and frankly incorrect.

  
  You are not a Christian if you do not meet the criteria that was first established by those first century followers of Jesus Christ. It's that simple. They did not accept any other Christ but Jesus. I think Paul made a good argument for this in his letter to the Ephesians, particularly the fourth chapter.
  Now you can re-define the term 'Christian' to mean anything that you want it to but when you do that you end up with a 'customized' definition and must realize that no one else is obligated to accept this 'personal' definition of the term. I might add that you are not the only one that is doing this. The great majority of so-called 'Christians' do the very same thing. So when someone tells you that you are not a Christian perhaps the two of you should decide on a common definition of the term before arguing about who's what and who's not.
  For instance, JW's consider not only consider themselves Christians but 'The Only True Christians'. Many other faiths do not consider them Christians at all. Why is that? There is no agreement on the definition of what 'Christianity' is between the parties involved. Catholics consider themselves Christians but not all faiths agree with their assesment. Why? Same reason. The problem lies in terminology and labels and defintions.
  If you subscribe to what Jesus Christ taught and live your life accordingly, then you are a follower of Christ. That much should be clear. but then by so doing are you a 'Christian? I would think that would be the touchstone for the evaluation.
  Here is another problem. Not everyone is in agreement as to what he actually taught. For example, some say he taught that he and his father were one and the same. Others say he taught the opposite. Now who is the Christian?
  It's pointless to argue whether or not you are a Christian unless an agreement is reached by all parties involved as to what constitutes a Christian.

  So my point is that I consider my self a "christian" in that...

  Do you see what you are doing here? That you are a Christian is YOUR consideration based on your own defintion which follows your statement above. No one else is obligated to accept that defintion so that should not anger you.

  Now a show of hands from all of you here, how many of you are Christians?

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-

  Edited by - Frenchy on 1 July 2000 12:24:10
• 
  67

  Purgatory, Limbo or the Twilight Comfort Zone

  by SolidSender in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  no offence meant but is this place some kind of waystation inhabited by beings neither in nor out of the lie?

  this is not a criticism just an observation.

  i know it can take time to make up your mind-solidsender

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  Speaking generally now I don't see how one person remaining within the mindcontrolcult is going to be able to help either themselves or those they love within it by continuing to remain under it's influence. While ever everyones in it no one stands a chance of freedom.

  
  Knowledge is freedom. You mistake not DA’ing oneself with remaining in the cult. It’s not. When you write that letter or tell the elders that you no longer want to be a JW, you are still playing by their rules. You are deliberately limiting any influence you may have on your friends and family for the rest of your life. You are giving them license to exclude a goodly portion of your friends and family from your life. MY question is why would you want to do that?
  You evidently don’t know the JW’s very well.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 
  9

  Call 911-Fire-Fire -don't do it!

  by spectromize in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  for all of you who are thinking about da or df, my advice is don't do it.

  you are falling into a trap that the wt has set for any who disagree with them.

  wouldn't it be much more productive if everyone who left, held on to their status even if they didn't go to the hall and exposed some of the bull****t ?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  A word of caution: The announcement does not have to be made from the platform for the DF'ing or DA'ing to take place. Individuals within the congregation are informed and then they 'choose' not to speak to the one that has DA'd himself. The end result is the same.
  I understand the 'closure' bit but remember that when you do this you are following THEIR procedure. You are still going along with the whole routine and you are giving them exactly what they want: They will punish you by ignoring you for the rest of your life. They will feel smug that your destruction is assured. Realizing this may not be the closure you had in mind.
  However, remaining 'in good standing' gives you many advantages. It keeps all (elders and the rank and file) rather confused as to your condition. Remember that it is their tendency to categorize everything. You become and remain an anomaly. Sooner of later SOMEONE will ask questions of you. You then tread carefully and take advantage of the opportunity. You should know how to do this, you've done it hundreds of times with 'Christendom's flock' haven't you???

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 
  30

  Defining Christianity

  by Carmel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  it seems i constantly am confronted with those who are trying to make a "christian" out of me.

  in various threads on this forum the term is used as if everyone understands what it means and there is no fuzzy edges.. i wonder if all here assume that only those that follow "jesus" are to be considered "christian"?.

  consider that the title "christ" was not the name of the nazarene, only a title!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  However, if I beleive that there are other "annointed ones" (Christs) although I still honor and accept Jesus as the "son", am I no longer a Christian? I have enlarged the definition of "Christ" to be inclusive rather than exclusive.

  There is no question but that there have been other ‘anointed’ ones, David for one. And it’s true that the title ‘Christ’ means ‘anointed one’ . But when this term is applied to Jesus the term becomes a title. Please note Matt 16:16

  Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

  Some translations use the Hebrew equivalent ‘messiah’ here. But do you see where this becomes a title for Jesus? Please note:“THE Christ”. He is never referred to as: “Jesus, A Christ”. When one uses the term “Christian” it is not understood to mean that he is a follower of Moses or Aaron or David, or Cyrus, or any of the others in the Bible that have had that term applied to them. None of those individuals were ever referred to as ‘the Christ’ or ‘the messiah’.
  I don’t know what you mean by ‘the exclusiveness of Jesus’. As far as being called a “a Jesusian.” That would merely be an obfuscation. In Jesus’ time the name ‘Jesus’ was not an uncommon one. ‘Jesus Christ ‘ or simply ‘Christ’ was another matter. It was his first century followers that named themselves ‘Christians’ (Acts 11:26). They defined that term by being the first to apply it to themselves. To try to re-define that term is ‘muddying up the waters’ in my opinion. Why would we want to do that? We have plenty of words in our languages, let’s use another one or we can make one up if we like. But to re-define what was first established 2000 years ago is a whole lot like someone else we know that likes to play with words.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-

  Edited by - Frenchy on 30 June 2000 8:15:9
• 
  7

  Where's Spec?

  by Frenchy in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i can't keep up with all the posts now but i don't seem to be able to find spectromize anywhere?

  has anyone 'seen' him lately?.

  hey, old buddy, where are ya?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  Hey, Spec, glad you're okay! It's good to hear from you....
• 
  18

  If You See Me Cry

  by Frenchy in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  if you see me cry .

  if you see me cry, just walk away, .

  leave me be and don't ask me why.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  I think I come here, sometimes, to see in words, what I am thinking or the thoughts swirling in my mind.

  I think most if not all of us do this. And you are also right about revealing only parts of ourselves. Sometimes we do this deliberately sometimes subconsciously. I wish that I could 'edit' my life. There are many things I would like to remove and a few things I would like to add. Perhaps what you said here is a way of doing this.
  In many ways life is like the hard drive on our machines, only we can never re-format it. All we can do is keep writing to it.
• 
  25

  LOVE THIS QUOTE

  by Zep in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "if you find that you are stumbled or are offended about something being taught in god's.

  organization, or some adjustments being made, keep this in mind: god has put enough in the.

  bible to provide a complete foundation for faith.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  Zep: Yes, I understand the intent of the article. The phrase 'wait on Jehovah' is used to mean, 'wait on us' and is understood that way by the rank and file. Every now and then there are statements suggesting that if you 'don't understand' (WTS language for: 'Don't agree') then don't leave but just hand around and perhaps later a 'clarification' (WTS language for: 'Hey, we may change our minds on this later and agree with YOU although we will never put it that way!)will be made on the matter. IMHO, to suggest such a thing is to admit that there are things which are very 'hazy' at best but yet these things are presented as 'gospel'. It's like saying 'stay with us even if you know we're wrong' and my reply to that is: "Why?"
  I used that phrase (I don't know) quite a bit when I was an elder. Most of the friends didn't like to hear that. They wanted a quick, clean answer. I stopped giving those a while back.
• 
  67

  Purgatory, Limbo or the Twilight Comfort Zone

  by SolidSender in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  no offence meant but is this place some kind of waystation inhabited by beings neither in nor out of the lie?

  this is not a criticism just an observation.

  i know it can take time to make up your mind-solidsender

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  Seven:

  Is it possible to feel spiritual satisfaction when missing much of what a congregation would call the joy of Christian living? I think it possible even though the Bible could prove me wrong.

  If you have that 'spiritual satisfaction' then you have it and I don't think that point can be argued. I'm happy for you that you do have it.
  As I have stated before, I feel a need for something beyond just believing. I feel a need to reach out to others, not so much to convince them of a particular fancy of mine but to interact with them. I was wondering if anyone else here feels that need, the need to be with others, the group.
  There is a part of me that just does not want to be swept along with the masses and yet a part of me wants to belong.
• 
  25

  LOVE THIS QUOTE

  by Zep in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "if you find that you are stumbled or are offended about something being taught in god's.

  organization, or some adjustments being made, keep this in mind: god has put enough in the.

  bible to provide a complete foundation for faith.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  There is a truth hidden in that portion of the article you quoted here. I am of the firm conviction that a person will find exactly what it is that he wants in the Bible. If a person wants to find God he will find Him there. If he wants confirmation of his disbelief in God, he shall find it there also. We don't go to the Bible to find the truth for nowhere within its pages is it laid out for humans to find. We first decide on what is true and then we go to the Bible and pick up the fragments that in our estimation lead credence to our convictions and we hold these things up high and shout to the world: "See, it says right here what I have said all along!" Then we go about quietly explaining away all the fragments that cast doubt on our self made faith.
  The Bible is not a dictionary of faith. It is not a listing of doctrine. It is rather a medium through which we pass, going into the places that appeal to us and avoiding those that do not. In the end, it serves to show what we truly are as a result of the choices that we made.
  The book of Job is a clue to its nature. Job (representing the good man) is tested beyond belief and all the while he is unaware that it is even a test. Job is allowed to believe that it is God bringing this upon him and in a way it is because it was and is in God's power to prevent the cruelties inflicted upon mankind. The test would not have worked had Job known what was happening.
  Whatever the issue that was really raised in Eden has been carefully hidden from us. We are in a test about which we know nothing because our knowing would not allow our true natures to be revealed.
  The Bible is a collection of puzzles with all the pieces mixed up and with us not knowing which picture it is that we are supposed to put together. The picture we choose, I believe, is more important than our ever getting all the pieces into it.
• 
  67

  Purgatory, Limbo or the Twilight Comfort Zone

  by SolidSender in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  no offence meant but is this place some kind of waystation inhabited by beings neither in nor out of the lie?

  this is not a criticism just an observation.

  i know it can take time to make up your mind-solidsender

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Frenchy

  Okay, let's pursue this, then. What do you suppose Jesus was after, individuals each going off his way and 'obeying his words' or do you suppose that he intended for them to congregate? If congregations are wrong then we will have to criticize Paul, James, John, Peter, etc. These men spent their lives forming and tending to congregations. So what are we to do today?