Merie relished the word “militant.” Perhaps she was militant, but I think in all the wrong ways. She wasn’t afraid to refuse mentoring from older and wiser Christians her entire life, for instance. She fearlessly split churches (the only legitimate reason for Biblical withdrawal). She was even withdrawn from for her divisiveness in 1958 and never “made herself right” (Stanton’s lingo).
She attacked the elders and preachers of her day relentlessly in her open letters, militantly and publicly. This is also something the modern SCOC withdraws for. She attacked and separated herself from friends and family, dividing marriages (including her own) and separating fathers and mothers from each other and from their kids. All this was in pursuit of her little experiment in “militancy.”
As a result of that “militant” legacy, Stanton fancies themselves as “militant Christians.” They use that phrase to make themselves feel like the “fearless warriors” out fighting God’s battles in the popular culture. They are, after all, the “militant ones,” while the rest of the Christian world is just “playing church” on Sunday morning. Or so they would have you believe.
What a bunch of complete and utter nonsense. Like so many other false narratives Stanton loves to spin, their “militant” persona is nothing more than fan fiction.
In reality, neither their leaders nor their members are willing to drop anything to follow Jesus, much less sacrifice everything. They’re not even willing to put themselves in harm’s way—professionally, socially, or physically—to be a light in this dark world.
Let your light so shine before men? Hardly. When you’re recruiting people into an abusive and authoritarian man-made sect, it’s much easier to keep that hidden under a bushel. They have no advertising, no public signage, and only invite new members through a carefully presented “nonmember class,” not the public assembly. That is grooming, not evangelism.
In fact, they don’t take public and vocal stances on anything to counter the culture, like abortion, or adoption, or home schooling, or caring for the fatherless in foster care. They just hide in the shadows. What cowardice.
My dad used to sit in his study reading the Bible and various books of history. The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was one. Another was Fox’s Book of Martyrs. That is a particularly eye-opening book, telling the stories of believers in the last 2,000 years who suffered greatly for the cause of Christ.
Burned at the stake, tortured for their faith, and ostracized or killed for speaking out against their oppressors; those people had a faith that wouldn’t die. They truly understood the meaning of the phrase “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul.” (Matthew 10:28). They lived out their Christian faith fearlessly, and paid the ultimate price for it.
Did you know there are millions of believers around the world right now, at this very moment, suffering imprisonment, torture, rape, and bloody execution for the cause of Christ? Not to convert someone to some particular sect, mind you, but simply to share the love of Jesus with them so their lives can be changed.
Some are suffering at the hands of Islamist captors. Others are persecuted and oppressed by the pagan population around them, like in some radical Hindu provinces of India. And did you know that Christians in modern communist countries like China, Vietnam, and Cuba suffer daily persecution and imprisonment from the government, just as in the first century? Do you think Christians during the rise of communism in the 20th century, and the subsequent Cold War, didn’t suffer for the cause of Christ?
One of the greatest testimonies of the truth of Jesus’ resurrection is that his closest followers—the Twelve—gave their lives affirming their testimony. If the resurrection was a lie, would they all have gone to their graves with such fearlessness? Of course not. If based on a lie, Christianity would have just been a blip on the radar screen of history. But it’s not.
Where are the radical followers of Jesus in Stanton? What impact have they made, locally, regionally, or globally? Does anyone even in their own communities know they exist besides the few who attend, and their families and extended families? Why don’t they stake out public positions and advocate for the fatherless or the unborn in today’s culture? Do they even care about the “orphans and widows” in this world? Why do they hide behind a shroud of secrecy and seek to deflect public attention, rather than invite it, as the first century church did?
The more you pull this thread, the more their militancy propaganda unravels. Where are all the Stanton members running into danger to share the Good News with people living under oppressive regimes? Do those people not need God as much as they do? Do they care enough to even pray for today’s persecuted believers they’ve never met? The first century church did. The wider Christian church does. Stanton doesn’t. Because, of course, there are no other Christians according to them. What arrogance.
Where are all the Stanton missionaries working to learn a foreign language so they can share Jesus with those populations? The rest of the Christian world does this. Are Stanton evangelists even talking about the need to share the joy of knowing Jesus with the world, much less actually doing anything about it? Of course not. They should be overflowing with the joy of the Lord, running into persecution in order to share it. Non-SCOC Christians are. Where is Stanton?
I have a book on my shelf called Jesus Freaks. It is published by a Christian ministry called Voice of the Martyrs, an organization that tells the modern stories of today’s Christians living and evangelizing in the underground church in many parts of the world. The book is a modern version of Fox’s Book of Martyrs.
What’s eye-opening about Jesus Freaks is the vibrant faith of modern Christians who really are putting it all on the line to share the love and hope found in God with a dark and cruel world. Does Stanton do any of this? I hear nothing but the deafening sound of silence.
One of the coolest things about today’s persecuted church is its positive message. It’s not about playing the victim card, or the woe-is-me drama. It’s about the mission of sharing hope and love at all cost. There are very few people even talking about the persecuted church, outside of Voice of the Martyrs organization. But when the stories of the persecuted church do get told, they are uplifting and encouraging, because they are not focused on self, but on others.
In 50 years time, the first century church had turned the world upside down with a revolutionary message in a largely pagan world. In the 50 years of Stanton’s existence, have they turned a single neighborhood upside down, much less the world? Stanton’s fruit (whether you measure it by impact or by radical discipleship) is conspicuously absent. Unbelievably, they don’t even have elders appointed yet, something the first century church did very early in its history.
The idea that evangelical Christians in America and abroad are just sipping lattes and only pretending to follow Jesus is just plain wrong. You’ve been sold another lie. It’s much easier to put others down than to radically follow Jesus yourself.
Rather than slam the Christian community doing the heavy lifting of sharing the gospel with a lost world, maybe try looking a little more inward. Perhaps the problem is that Stanton is better at producing spiritual cowards than leaders.
Boom!!
And there it is!!
Stanton's leaders are burrowing in holes, and hiding their lights under a bushel.
When the world is crying out for Biblical Christianity, Stanton is busy playing holier than thou.
Well said, Kevin. This is definitely one of the main things that really bothered my conscience while in the group. I never was fully convinced that there were no other Christians in the world. Their lie that they are the only ones going to heaven is so harmful to themselves, especially their own children. And they aren't the only group that thinks this.
I just watched the movie APOSTASY on Amazon Prime. It intrigued me because the trailer already sounded so much like the SCOC. The movie is a little slow but there is so much to it if you've had a disfellowshipped experience. It's basically a JW family and some of their challenges. It is SO similar to the SCOC in their militancy. I even wondered aloud to my husband if Merie had any experience with JWs because their tactics are so similar.
Kevin I see that you have added a "Patron" button. Count me in as soon as I get onto my PC as the mobile version for sign-up is not too user friendly. I hope others consider signing on. This blog is very valuable and it is many times the FIRST stop for those leaving Merie's cult. As long as Merie's cult hurts relationships and divides families, there will be a need for action here, whether it's from any of us who can help. While some of the pain is going away, we should remember that there are others who are searching, contemplating leaving, and having to start over, many without much emotional support.
Well said Kevin!
Just to add a little more to what you were saying about the way that Merie's group evangelizes….
When a member goes "out" to another congregation or to a place where no "church" is located, they are on their own. And I mean that. If you need money to rent a truck to move your things, you have to "ask" for it, which is not an easy process. When the congregation was started in Lakeland, FL, we had used song books in poor condition, chairs that were ill used and broken down. We slept on the floor of a screened in patio of a Christian who had moved to Lakeland, until we could find a house to rent. And for every deposit that we needed, for the house, electric, gas, etc we had to call to different congregations to "ask" for money.
And there was only three of us doing everything. Since I was a nurse, I was required to find a job immediately so that I wouldn't be a financial drain on the church. This made it difficult because we needed to "map" and learn where everything was located, etc.
The group is not organized at all when it comes to missionary work (starting up a congregation). Sure, I could have flown to Florida (from Portland, OR) on my own dime and found a place to live first. That would have been the ideal-but I didn't have the money to do all of that. And the group wasn't about to pay for me to do that.
And the fact that they sent us with broken down equipment just shows you how unprepared they are for evangelizing.
I'm not saying that those who "go out" should get a free ride, but they should be given the necessary tools in order to do what they need to do. It felt like the group commanded us to go and then said GOOD LUCK! And that was it. Your are on your own.
I was amazed at how organized the "worldly religions" were with their evangelizing. The preparation and organization is impressive-people organizing and coordinating everything, learning the language if necessary, preparing for the way of life in that culture, etc.
And it wasn't just Lakeland, it was the same with all of the new start-ups. To me it would have been better if there were a couple of people in charge of coordinating everything. To send someone to find housing for them. Give them a couple of weeks of support so they can find jobs, sign up their children at schools, do mapping, learn the city, even to just simply unpack and prepare the home for classes and worship.
For a group that says its focus is to go out into all the world and to add more congregations, their words don't match up to their actions. Their fruits are showing them for what they really are.
M Long – I'll have to check out "Apostasy" on Amazon Prime. Sounds interesting.
And yes, I just started a Patreon account for those who want to partner to build this into something bigger. I've been brainstorming about various upgrades I might make to the platform, look and feel, commenting technology, features, etc. Still in research mode on that.
I could see at some point maybe producing a hardcopy book that people could hand to SCOC members. We'll see what comes of it. Even if only a couple of people donate only $5/mo., it's still a nice encouragement to grab a cup of coffee and write some more. 🙂
Debby – Thanks for your insight into how those trips work for those "getting sent out" by SCOC. Yes, it is phenomenal the investment of time and resources mainstream Christian missionary organizations put into bringing the Gospel to the darkest corners of the world—including the strip clubs of America, BTW.
A friend of mine was inspired about three years ago to leave his nice paying job and move his family to Thailand to rescue girls from the thriving sex trade over there. He and his wife stayed in the trenches for two years, and moved back to start a ministry to mentor girls rescued from sex slavery here in America. You don't find lives on fire to share the love of Jesus like that in Stanton.
Kevin, for those of us who are still a little ignorant when it comes to some of the computer stuff today, what is Patreon? Thank you!
Debby, it's where you can agree to send the recipient of the holder of the Patreon account a certain amount of money each month, like a dollar or so. Unlike crowd funding, it is a monthly draw.
Debby, yes Lynn is correct. It's simply a way for people to contribute financially to a creative project. A lot of blogs, podcasts, YouTube channels, and music artists use it.
I promise to keep writing and producing content here no matter what. But if someone wants to buy my wife a latte every now and then, I don't think she'll mind. 🙂
Also, I'm still poking around the back end of Patreon to learn all the features and how to utilize it to the fullest potential. I'll try to make a really cool experience, but bear with me. Lol
This post was needed Kevin!!
Well said!!
I like the idea of a podcast too..saw a while back someone brought it up. I'll be sure to donate!!
This makes me think of how we had to give up friends and family. How can you show them the way if you're not around them?
Hi Ronita can you tell us a little about yourself and how you came to leaving the SCOC? THANKS
Hello Ronita! It's been a very long time! How are you doing??? I'd love to hear more from you-my contact information is with Kevin, and he has my permission to give it to you if you should want to contact me!
I, too, would love to hear your story and what made you decide to leave Merie's Group. Please share if you feel up to it! Welcome to 🙂 Just made my day!
Ronita, you are right. When I was in in the 80's they taught to cut ties and I was left with no one, except for the church. That may have been by design. After I cam back around 1999 I gained a better understanding of that and didn't burn any bridges. Friends, family, and work knew I was a Christian and stood my ground, but they also got to know me AS a Christian and the relationships got stronger, yet no be unequally yoked.
These scriptures summed it up for me in how this servant made sure he was in good standing with those around him in case he needed help and believe me they helped me a lot more than the church was willing to do.
Luke 16:7-9 Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore.
8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.
9 And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.
SCOC plan is to keep members isolated from the outside world. It appears the goal is to make you completely dependant on them.
That is why this site is so helpful because when you choose to leave, your on your own.
Ronita and anon 2:57 very true. How can you let your light shine to the world as they’d preach, yet, you keep yourself isolated. Makes no sense.
The word narcissist comes to mind… and Craig, you know what I've been dealing with.
Ronita, yes I do. Excellent point.
I will be supporting Kevin. I have a few that I watch on Patreon. Kevin's tier titles made me giggle! If everyone can support him this would be awesome! This blog is amazing! It alone has kept my family away from the church!
Thank you! I had the first subscriber sign up on Patreon, so thank you to that person as well. I will keep names private unless that person posts publicly, because I know there could be privacy issues for some of you with family in the sect.
Just know that it's a real encouragement to keep building this site into something bigger and better.
Things I'm thinking about:
1) A new website with a better user interface.
2) Easier to use commenting system, easier to follow threads, and easier to find threads.
3) A way to add polls again (Blogger's tool for this is gone).
4) Possibly turning some of the content into a book form on Amazon so people can read it offline or hand a copy to someone.
5) Possibly a podcast series.
I will do what I can to support, however, too often in the religious world contributions are not without strings. Those who give the most think they have the most control. This is true with churches and politics.
FYI, I don't answer to anyone but God. The money is not a *need* so much as a way for others to partner with me to take the site to the next level.
This blog can be called the 'Decline and Fall of the Stanton Church of Christ'. If things continue as they are going, that's what will happen.
If anyone else attended today and would like to give an update, that would be nice.
As for me, today I learned that GP said in the May Trip that to maintain unity we need to put away our rights.
Last I checked, our rights were given us by God, and weren't negotiable. I sure am happy the Founders of America did not take GP's advice, and gave us the Bill of Rights.
The right to form ones own reasoning is a right God gave all.
Also, it was said that the value of talking with others is listening. That's true. And wouldn't Stanton be far better if they listened more to the Bible and to those who echo it?
Due to a lot of the recent comments on here, it seems appropriate to discuss reasoning.
Reasoning: the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way.
To find truth one must distinguish between subjective and objective. The former is true only in my own mind, the latter is true for all time in all circumstances. However, it is far more difficult to ascertain objective truth, because it's easy to believe one's life experiences are all there is to truth. To second guess one's own beliefs, thoughts, and habits, is the crucible ideas have to pass through before one can reach objective truth.
Lazy thinkers do not learn this, and these are the ones who will constantly emotionally attack ideas they don't agree with, or which they take issue with.
Also, there are many logical fallacies, but 3 that have been common on this blog, in the news, in the Democrat party, and in Stanton are as follows:
Appeal to popular: Believing something is true because a lot of people believe it or agree on it.
Appeal to expert: Believing something is true because some expert figure says it.
Appeal to anecdote: Believing something is true because of a personal experience of either one, or someone else.
Of course, the truth can be popular, it can be promoted by an expert, and it can be contained in an anecdote, however, these are not absolute assurances that an idea is true.
About Tattoos….
There has been a lot of feedback after my video where I mentioned having tattoos, so I would like to address this subject.
Most choose Leviticus 19:29 to try to prove Christians should not have tattoos.
Leviticus 19:28 reads: Ye shall not make any cuttings on your flesh for the dead, nor print any marks upon you: I am the Lord.
From the context of the verses around this scripture this was instructions given to the Jews on how to not become as the heathen/idol worshippers in the lands around them. Other commands in adjacent scriptures were “ ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.”
Leviticus is Old Testament law- not New Testament. This law does not apply to Christians today (unless you abide by Stanton’s rule). Are we going to pick and choose which scriptures we will use to prove truth by?? Are we going to selectively use the Old Testament to prove a law for Christians even though we know we are not living by the Old Testament?
I used to be a terrible one to judge people for things like tattoos- that is how it was as a believer in Merie’s ‘church’. When God broke my chains that freed me from the man-made teachings of Merie’s cult- I got a tattoo! BECAUSE I COULD!
My very first tattoo said “His Grace Is Enough”, in beautiful script lettering. I also have a medical alert on my wrist due to my severe allergy to all NSAIDS.
My youngest child (18) asked me to get matching mother/daughter tattoos when she turned 18. I was rather flattered, so I did. I also have angel wings for our son, Nathan, who we had to remove from life support the day after he was born. ( He is the baby some of you remember from the May week in Chino at the Grange, where Bill & I were called murderers for removing his life support, even though his lack of organs could never have sustained his life.).
I also have cosmetically tattooed eyebrows, which I LOVE.
BTW- not one of these tattoos are sacrilegious. They are all is very good taste. None are vulgar, spew profanity or nudity or any such things.
I understand that tattoos are just NOT some people’s thing. I get that. We all have different tastes, likes, and dislikes. But if this blog is to educate people to the truth of the scriptures- let’s make sure not to twist them to our agenda.
I will say that since getting tattoos, they have actually broken down invisible walls between myself and some of the general public who may have thought that someone my age would judge them to be heathens because they have a ‘sleeve’. This broken down barrier has opened doors to form relationships I would have missed out on BEFORE tattoos. I have friends in my church who I partner with to host Bible based recovery classes. I can be very confident in saying that our recovery classes would not be as effective in reaching those who need it most if it were run by little old straight-laced women like me (minus the tats and experience).
Now show me SCRIPTURE in the New Testament that proves anything different. Not necessary inference.
Liberty was not to allow anything anyone feels like doing. This is a major flaw of the majority of churches outside Stanton. Also, as a mother and a wife, you are dealing with the dumbest generation in American history, and relying upon them for guidance is an almost surefire way to fail.
https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/301089/the-dumbest-generation-by-mark-bauerlein/9781585427123/
While emotions are powerful for mothers, the way of reason and logic should not be neglected for a childs whims. I've talked with one of your children, and she is very strong willed. While she says she has been damaged by Stanton, she has made decisions on her own that are far worse than anything Stanton ever did to anyone. I can relate, personally, and with others. While it would be nice to make Stanton a scapegoat, the truth is, we all have to meet our destiny.
Tattoos have ever been associated with evil. From Herman Melville's 'Moby Dick' where the tattooed Harpooner was a superstitious heathen, to the Indians of the Aztecs who were heavily into tattoos and cutting of bodies, including human sacrifice, tattoos have never been something that God's people engage in. As for people feeling more comfortable around you, well, Jesus said people were supposed to hate you, as they hated him, for telling the truth. They aren't supposed to feel comfortable around the truth, its there to correct and reform, not to comfort those who need correcting.
While the sentimental reasons to get one may be powerful, reason should guide decisions. In America, tattoos were virtually non existent 100 years ago. They are a recent phenomenon, spread by our morally bankrupt media, tech companies, and schools, which are all Marxist indoctrination stations. I have plenty of friends with tattoos, who know I don't approve, and never will.
There are also health considerations.
https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils%20in%20America/Apostasy/tattoos.htm
Also, the husband is the leader of the home, and I'm pretty sure your husband is not a fan of tattoos. Rebelling against his authority isn't anything a Godly woman would do. Doing so also reduces you in the eyes of your children, as loving one's spouse, in the case of a wife to a husband, obeying his wishes in regards to tattoos, is the best way to love ones children.
Montesquieu, wow what a comment from GP. Give up your rights? I wonder where he was going with that. More craziness from the control freak. If you Montesquieu or anyone else gets access to the talks or discussions please forward them to me.
Yes, incredible, isn't it, Craig?
I'm with you, trying to get copies of the May Trip discussions and talks as well.
They are guarded better than Smaug guarded his jewels and gold in the awesome tale 'The Hobbit'. Smaug didn't want to share his jewels with anyone. Stanton doesn't want to share their 'truth's' with anyone. At least Smaug's jewels were 100% legitimate. The same can't be said of Stanton's 'truth's'. Funny because Smaug appropriated his hoard from the rightful owners, the dwarves, and Stanton appropriated their 'truth's' from the rightful owner as well, Jesus Christ and God. Both stagnate. Smaug sat in his lair for years, before the dwarves came to reclaim their treasure. Stanton has been stagnating for decades, with the only real growth coming from children who are really too young to even critically evaluate Stanton. I once was a child there too. It was full of beautiful memories, and feelings, but as far as the hard work of critically evaluating Stanton by the Bible, that is normally not ever done by a Child, because they barely know it. The schools and media have an allergy to the Bible, and Stanton, despite children spending 15-20 hours a week around Christians, and nearly all their time but school time around Stanton family and Christians, for the first 18 years of their life, rarely can quote you 10 scriptures they've memorized by 18. I wasn't the dullest tool in the shed, and I couldn't quote 1 scripture by age 18, but when I joined the Navy, I was soon quoting vast amounts of memorized information about nuclear power. Apparently, the Navy found it more important to instruct me on Nuclear Submarines then Stanton did to instruct me on the Bible. Not good, because the men who invented Submarines knew the Bible very well. The father of the United States Nuclear Navy was Hyman Rickover, a Jew.
Wow!!! That's insane!! And the sad part is many will agree and chose to give up their rights…so sad. Might as well become a terrorist!!
What rights?
Lynn – Montesqueiu said above "As for me, today I learned that GP said in the May Trip that to maintain unity we need to put away our rights."
This is true only if we have an unbiblical understanding of unity. Unity is not unanimity. Unity is oneness of purpose, in the face of our imperfect human knowledge.
This is what was said when it was questioned about taking away rights. I pasted the text below from a family member who is very much in denial:
"He said “to maintain unity, we have to put something away from us… We can call it our “rights”, for instance, I have a right to think the way that I want to, NO ONE SAYS YOU CAN’T, but I don’t need to necessarily share my opinion if it’s going to cause division & strife”
For example, if I like Trump & you like Hillary, then we should keep our opinions to ourselves because otherwise we’ll cause division & strife that’s not necessary.
He DID NOT SAY that you aren’t allowed to have your own opinions or that you can’t share them ever. He’s just saying that SOMETIMES it’s not necessary to share them so we can keep the peace.
That principle applies to a lot of circumstances, even outside of the Church. For example, if I disagree with my boss, I’m gonna keep my opinion to myself so I don’t start a “fight” with him & loose my job.
Again, I’m going to emphasize just so it’s clear:
He says that NO ONE SAYS YOU CAN’T THINK HOWEVER YOU WANT TO!
Don’t get the wrong idea, because whoever told you that didn’t tell you all of what he said. Whoever told you that was trying to give you the idea the church teaches you can't have your own opinions."
He immediately went into defense mode wanting to know where it came from & didn't want to admit it was said when we questioned him. He said "Don't be stupid & believe that someone is going to say that if you're in the church then you have to give up your right of free speech or anything else." He is very much in denial & young 🙁
I personally will reserve judgement until I hear the full context of what was said and what they mean for myself. That being said though, based on that comment you pasted, it still sounds like they aren't being honest about what is really going on.
This blog isn't about subjective matters of opinion like politics. People know to keep those things to themselves and only want to discuss the specific teachings of the SCOC that they believe are false. One of the main problems, and one of the reasons why this blog even exists, is that they don't allow an environment for honest inquiry or honest discussion about these topics. (refer to the many stories on here that detail what happens when you disagree with them)
This blog is about people relating their experiences with one another and seeking answers to the contradictions and teachings of this group that we don't agree with. Again not subjective everyday things, but questions that strike at their very foundations and reason for existence. (not the believers around the world but them alone since they separate themselves). Merie's "one true church" teachings, Merie's "paid preacher" teachings, no elders/biblical structure, etc. Telling people to suspend their thinking and give up talking about these things is dishonest since as Christians they are very important to understand for the sake of our own souls. It's not about freedom of speech but freedom of conscience. It's not about subjective opinions but understanding which teachings are from God and which are from man. And if a teaching is indeed from God, then we discuss what is the right way God wants us to follow it so that we can all know and understand the truth. The leaders only seem to want others to follow THEIR truth and teach things not found in scripture, or are twists of scripture.
Admittedly there has been discourse, strife, pettiness, and personal attacks on this blog a few times since it's been started which myself and many others don't agree with. It's a public forum that everyone and anyone can leave comments on, so that's to be expected sometimes, but we all try our best to keep things on topic.
Those are not my words…that's what was said when asked about GP's comments on giving up your rights. He didn't want to talk about it at 1st & kept beating around the bush. I think deep down he knows theybare wrong but has pressure to stay bc he still lives at home with our parents..
The group also maintains you can't talk about church related issues/disagreements with your spouse. If you do, you could be withdrawn from for murmuring/discord. If they go as far to violate the rights of what God has but together(marriage), I have no doubt GP means what he says about general members rights.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I meant the leaders weren't being honest when talking about what's going on with the blog and what it's about, not that person you heard this from wasn't being honest.
It's well known that the leaders and teachers say one thing but don't really mean it. They may SAY you're free to think for yourself, or make your own decisions but in practice it's often the opposite. As it's been said before with the different "judgements" they make (which are often based on opinions too). If you don't agree with it or follow it they treat you like you sinned, or like you're not good enough, or "spiritual" enough. Even for simple things like advice or suggestions I've seen teachers get upset when someone did what was best for them instead of doing what THEY want or think you should do. People who are still members should pay attention to the teacher's actions to see for themselves if they truly mean this or not.
Yes I agree. I told him to let me know how it goes when he speaks out on what he doesn't agree on or feels a scripture is meant a different way. He will be shut down immediately & the "rights" he thinks he still has will become more clear that they are non-existent.
Agree AFP! Excellent point about look at what they do and not at how they word it.
The SCOC leaders make a habit of making suggestions, yet if you go against it, you get rebuked and lose church responsibilities.
For Example,the leadership suggested all the leaders of a folded church( Stanton speak for closed) go to DV's church and become indoctrinated in the KS way. It is crucial to understand the reason KS wanted them to go and be under DV is because the folded church leaders learned under DWC.
However, one of the preachers and his wife choose to go to Dothan, AL and be with his family members who attended there. At the next NOV. meeting this person was rebuked openly by TC for his sins of stubbornness and pride. The ones that listened were praised and one led in prayer. -It is also important to note that Stanton uses church responsibilities as punishment or reward for following "suggestions"-
I digress. In conclusion, does that look like a suggestion to you? It appears they get away with saying things are suggestions because they have created their own lexicon. A suggestion in their dictionary is a comandment of the lord( a thou shalt not if you will). This word and deffinition play is brilant because it allows the leaders to control the movements, minds and hearts of the members; but, can maintain they didn't COMMAND them to do anything or violate their rights or freedoms in Christ.
AnonymousMarch 24, 2019 at 7:53 PM
Fascinating, thank you for sharing.
'For example, if I like Trump & you like Hillary, then we should keep our opinions to ourselves because otherwise we’ll cause division & strife that’s not necessary.'
Well, then there can be no debates, and we are told to contend for the truth. There are too many who are emotionally involved with ideas, and they are unable to discuss ideas they don't like, but which are in the Bible, without blowing up. So, they get rid of the person dissenting.
It's not always necessary to share ones opinions, but if it is the truth, and can help others, or correct falsehood, it's wise to share the truth. Staying quiet about it isn't helping anyone. GP has long stayed quiet about truth's he knew, and said unity was more important then truth.
Can someone show me in the Bible where God commended anyone for this attitude? I can't find it anywhere. I see God commending those with the courage to speak the truth even though they got fiercely criticized for doing so. This is the example that Jesus set.
If he thinks he can have his own opinion, or anyone is allowed to have their own opinion, then ask when was the last time someone spoke up at a withdrawal?! Are we supposed to believe that every single withdrawal in church history was a unanimous decision? Is anyone foolish enough to believe this? I know for a fact I didn't agree with all withdrawals I was present at (certainly including my own, LOL), but with the exception of mine, I knew what was what and kept my mouth shut and my hand down. When I asked a question about one withdrawal to the preacher, as I didn't think it was fair, I was promptly told to not ask questions like that, or I would perhaps be getting rebuked or withdrawn from. It was when a sister, with 6 children, and no husband, was withdrawn from for the serious sin of smoking weed. That was the end of her. She never came back. Personally, I thought warning her publicly, which had not been done, was a better strategy. Give her a chance, and if she did it again, then withdraw from her. But, there was no mercy.
Further, to be clear, I'm a big fan of young people joining Stanton. Compared to the lukewarm churches which dominate the landscape, and the heathen lifestyles that those outside the church lead, Stanton is paradise, let's be clear. A friend of mine, on a blog I frequent, Writerbeat.com, named Marty Koval, recently wrote a fabulous article on the issues that America is full of. They make Stanton's issues look like child's play. http://www.writerbeat.com/articles/30172-Highly-Controversial-Facts-and-Statistics-About-America
I'm certainly not writing on here to get people to leave Stanton, I'm writing here to reform Stanton. After all, isn't God's attitude towards us to reform us, and didn't Christ tell his disciples to avoid the Gentiles and go to the Lost Sheep of Israel (The Jews)? If we expect God to be merciful to us, should we not, rebukes notwithstanding, be merciful to others? Were we not told, 'blessed are the merciful, for they shall find mercy'?
I don't at all regret joining Stanton at age 20. I learned more about virtue, morality, Christianity, and the KJV Bible than I did anywhere else, and in a very short amount of time. I also met some of the most biblically upright and virtuous people (though these alone aren't enough for salvation) that I've ever met. However, if leading a good life is evidence of grace, than many in Stanton have quite a bit of grace.
Wow!! It's very clear plenty feel free to express their ideas on here, which is how it ought to be and there were some very good points made. Would like to respond to all, especially Donna's points on tattoos, but haven't the time.
That said, what I said about GP was what I directly wrote down, as a verbatim quote from a teacher who attended the San Antonio May Trip. This teacher was reading directly from his note book. So, I'm pretty sure of the credibility. Said teacher has a habit of telling the truth, and has had this reputation for 40 years.
The discussion was on the theme of the May Trip, which was unity. This is a recurring idea in Stanton, and isn't at all about ensuring they have truth, but rather about ensuring their is a chain of command that is followed.
As Kevin said above, Unity is not unanimity, and as a friend of mine recently told me, Unity is not conformity. Stanton is talking more about conformity. Members are expected to conform with teachers ideas. While the teachers have some very profound wisdom, the church was designed to be a body, where all members wisdom was utilized. Interestingly, it was when Moses brought the law down from Mt. Sinai, that for the first time in recorded human history all members of a society had access to the law, for them to utilize it in their own lives. Prior to this, only elites had the law, as Moses learned when in the royalty in Egypt. When Napoleon smashed armies all over the world, it was because in his army, you could get promoted no matter where you came from, if you had merit and performed. So he routinely destroyed the armies of the elites in Europe, who had the corrupt elites in the leadership who were often incompetent and inept. Eventually his luck ran out, though his own libertine habits played a part. The man had many mistresses.
Great points by all above, and AOP especially. Also, freedom of speech, in politics and the church isn't about having the freedom to say things that others will like, because Stalin and Hitler allowed that too, it's about the freedom to say things people don't like to hear. That's freedom of speech. I'm not talking about promoting sin, using profanity, lying, or vulgarity either. As Protestants, we all had our start October 31st, 1517, when Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door at Wittenburg. These were his disagreements with the Catholic pope. He could have been burned at the stake back then for disagreeing with the Catholic leaders. But he did it anyway. By GP's reasoning, it's a sin to state something that your teacher or an older one will disagree with. As a matter of fact, that is precisely why I'm in the Stanton version of solitary confinement, which is the worst punishment they give Prisoner's of War, or prisoners in jail. For the crime of disagreeing with teachers, I was suddenly cut off from a young woman I was speaking with (she's now married with kids), cut off from my family, cut off from everyone in Stanton, and left on my own. I'm convinced no one is a victim, and that with God, we can all do anything, but the fact stands, I got into sins I never dreamed of doing while a member of Stanton when I was alone.
The very first time God said something was not good was when he saw Adam alone. "It is not good for man to be alone", and he created women. Of course, with some women today, it is very good for a man to be alone, since being with them would be even worse.
While I don't have a television, and stopped watching movies long ago, there was one remarkable movie, "Fiddler on the Roof" which was a beautiful tale. It told of a Russian Jewish father, raising his family in long ago Russia. He had 3 daughters who he loved dearly, and had the usual adversities we deal with today. He was poor, his wife sometimes rebelled, the village had political problems, everyone knew everyone's business, and the suitors he selected for his 3 daughters, weren't who they actually loved. But, when he was questioned on anything, what did he fall back on? TRADITION! This is so true of Stanton, the Democrat party, many religions, and many on here as well, though there are a few enlightened ones. The entire title of the movie, and the opening song was a Fiddler jumping from roof to roof playing his fiddle. If any of us tried that, we'd likely fall and break out neck, and that was the very point. Tradition is about doing things, that are often quite dangerous, simply because this is the way it's always been done. When it comes to the moral law, tradition is quite good, as to violate it carries tremendous dangers. But, when it comes to man made doctrines, and simply obeying teachers as a 3 year old would their parents, that is another matter altogether. This breeds slavish concurrence, which stifles innovation, growth, enlightenment, and reaching one's potential. Examples already shared on here are breaking the bread more than once, women wearing nylons, and bringing food in the building. This is straining at gnats, and really has nothing to do with salvation and redemption at all.
For, the whole purpose of the gospel is for us to be free of our sins AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES. If we cannot do this, and Stanton is in the habit of claiming many cannot, THEN WHAT WAS THE POINT OF CHRIST'S DEATH ON THE CROSS? There was no point, and there is no point in overcoming, we may as well go on sinning, as there is no hope. It is this attitude that Stanton unintentionally spreads, and that is why there is so little growth, the little growth they do have comes from their own children, who frequently fall away within a few years.
That said, 'Nil desperandum'. Never despair.
It is always darkest before morning.
Dum Spiro, Dum spero
While I breath, I hope
'In your patience ye possess your souls'.
As Jacob said, when wrestling with an angel, while wounded badly, and asked, in the middle of the night, was he willing to end the match.
'I will not let thee go, except thou bless me'.
Montesqueiu – Amen. We've had our share of differences, but this is right on and deserves to be thought about deeply in the context of Stanton's legalistic manner of approaching God.
You said: "[T]he whole purpose of the gospel is for us to be free of our sins AND THEIR CONSEQUENCES."
Yes, yes, yes. There are often consequences in this life that God doesn't remove. But the ultimate consequences can be wiped away, no matter how egregious. That is called grace. We don't earn grace; by definition it is "unmerited favor."
We sang about it a lot as kids in the SCOC:
"Jesus died and paid it…on the cross of Calvary…"
"Jesus paid it all…all to him I owe…"
But Stanton doesn't believe it. They don't believe Jesus paid it all—at all. Stanton believes they pay the "debt," only if you follow all the rules perfectly. Then maybe, just maybe, God will throw in a little grace to make up the difference. That's the essence of legalism—approaching God is only possible once you've perfected your behavior.
In a grace-centered theology (or more accurately, soteriology), our "good" behavior is the result of God's forgiveness, not the cause of it.
So, yes. Jesus really did pay it all.
Thank you, Kevin. Certainly, there are consequences in this life that God won't be able to remove. Examples are going to jail for murder, theft, sedition (we should be seeing the entire Democrat party leadership along with Comey, Hillary, Obama, McCabe, Rosenstein, Schiff, and key members of the Russian Collusion Delusion media and tech companies there as well, for the high crime of sedition and plotting against the lawfully elected government of America -article in full on Messanonews.com). However, there is nothing that God cannot heal, and there is no depth he cannot deliver from. Stanton, relying on their subjective reasoning and appeal to anecdote, logical fallacies, simply cannot comprehend this. They think if something happened outside of Merie's, KS's, TC's, or GP's experience, it simply cannot be true, and must be a heresy, which is exactly why I'm withdrawn from and excommunicated at the moment.
However, God is in the habit of healing, and his power is magnified when he heals those who all of society looks upon as lost causes. The entire New Testament is full of examples of Christ healing those with spiritual and physical maladies (including casting out devils), which were thought to be incurable. He also said his Word would be capable of doing every bit as much in the lives of those who learn it and obey it. Stanton simply cannot accept this. In their works based legalism, the idea that God could make a person who was a prostitute until she was 35 into a saint who can be an asset to the church simply does not exist, and if you say it does, you will be shown the door promptly, and taught about 'unity'.
Was just reading a fabulous book this morning written by a Jewish man, Dovber Halevi, who I met 4 years ago on Linked In, before I was given a permanent Linked In ban by the leftist Jewish owners of it (They didn't like my criticism of the Communist Democrats, or my saying the Jews killed Jesus. To them this is anti-Semitic, though I am a huge fan of Israel, and think it's an oasis in the midst of the Saracen hordes of the Middle East). It's called 'Sex, Religion, and the Middle East'. It has some profound insight into what is wrong with the Middle East, America, even in Stanton. He details that the sex energy, when not harnessed, can destroy individuals, nations, and the world. He also showed how the three great faiths, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, all agree on this, yet all three have a hard time living up to it. I hate that the only place online that I can find it is Amazon, which I avoid like the plague, but the book is simply full of fabulous insight. Stanton believes they are the only ones on earth teaching that all sex outside of marriage is wrong, including porn and masturbation, but they are wrong, Judaism and Islam (largely not completely, as Islam allows rape and sex slaves) do as well. https://www.amazon.com/Sex-Religion-Middle-East-Exploiting/dp/0615599117
The book details that one of the greatest Jewish Rabbi's of all time was 40, and had been visiting harlots all his life, before he went on to dramatically change his life and devote, dedicate, and consecrate it to God. That would be quite impossible in Stanton. It has some very interesting biblical anecdotes, however, not all of them are 100% accurate. There was one which said the bearer of Goliath's shield was a man David should have killed, and did not, and because of that, that man, Uriah the Hittite, went on to marry the woman who was supposed to be David's wife, Bathsheba. Had to pick my jaw up off the floor after reading that one. Makes sense somewhat, but can't find any legitimate proof of that in scripture.
And while none of us deserve Grace, it is like a feast, that God has spread for us all to attend, but only those who do come will be able to profit from the feast. So, it does take effort on our part, though all the good works on earth will not earn us salvation.
While the term 'legalism' is used a lot by today's Christian community, the fact is, it is far too often used to excuse lax teaching, and puts a smokescreen over the churches failure to exercise church discipline. This requires judgement, but if two people in the church are openly living in fornication, there is a need for church discipline, for their souls and the church.
Stanton's rules, and they were discussing traffic laws last night, and were – amazingly enough- admitting that this was straining at gnats and swallowing camels, will never save anyone. No one is going to heaven for breaking the unleavened bread once instead of in quarters. You can not bring food in the building, and not chew gum in the building for 80 years, and you can still go to hell.
It is law and love combining, and to avoid the extremes present on both sides is what is required for the Gospel and love to prevail.
For anyone that has to deal with members of the sect who claim they have freedom to speak openly about their opinions, but choose not to for the sake of unity, you can remind them of Merie's quotes (in the sidebar of the blog, but here for easy reference).
"We begin this letter by saying that every Christian has a right and a responsibility to express as well as to teach those things which they honestly believe to be scriptural without being called a false teacher, or one who perverts the word of God." (Moyer Letter, 1967)
Let's break that down.
EVERY Christian has not only the RIGHT, but the RESPONSIBILITY to express what they honestly believe WITHOUT being called a false teacher.
Here's another one:
"The members of the church have a right to question and ask for Bible answers from those who are doing the preaching. But this is considered almost tantamount to heresy by the preachers of today; and if a member persists in such he is usually slandered and called a trouble-maker… We should know our Bible and we should be ready and willing to take a stand for the truth. We are commanded to 'contend for the truth.' But this can hardly be done seeing that the church is ignorant and the preachers are content to have it so. Individually and collectively we should take scriptural stands upon all subjects…" (Brethren Letter, 1967)
Can't say I disagree with her, generally speaking. But it sounds like Stanton now disagrees vehemently with her. 🙂
If anyone today did what Merie did back in the 60's, they'd be withdrawn from for murmuring at least, among other things (as Merie was, by the way).
I will have to send this to him. Like I said he's very young & naive. When I ask him anything about the cult he's reply to me very arrogantly :I believe what's in black, white & red". I wholeheartedly believe he joined under pressure. You know when you get to a certain age they start to bager you. I can remember it started for me when I became a senior in high school the "when are you getting baptized?" or "have you thought about your baptism?" I blatantly said thanks but no thanks it just wasn't for me..he caved & quickly.
I'd like to create some business cards, flyers, and other printed material to help each of us reach family and friends still in the sect. I've tried leaving a note on a car door once or twice, and maybe that planted a seed, maybe it didn't. But I'd like feedback on what you all think would be helpful in reaching your family members.
I tend to think personal notes and relational kinds of communication are the most effective. But Stanton is really good at shutting down challenges coming from family members.
Yes they certainly are..I'm the 'black sheep" so they warn to not spend a lot of time with me.
I think truth can prevail, but we'd be wise to figure out the best ways to communicate. Anyone who has creative ideas, whether traditional ideas or out of the box, feel free to private message me.
Kevin just a couple quick thoughts on your idea to create flyers or some sort of communication. Right off the bat, if it's ANYTHING about the cult, it's gonna get shut down. HOW? Well they will mark and avoid. Simple as that. We have seen what they do when someone sends out something in writing, like they did to Tracy G. They were all told they could not read it and should throw it away (though I would bet at least half of them read it.
I think it is a very good idea. I would hand some out.
Speaking of radical Jesus followers, it was a dominant church that was heavily involved in some of the greatest events in American history. From the Revolutionary War, to the Civil War, to the Civil Rights movement, the American Christian church prominently played a part in all.
Remember the Old North Church from Paul Revere's ride, in the Revolutionary War? The placing of lanterns would tell if the British were coming by land or by sea. This led to the Battle of Lexington, the first shots fired in the Revolutionary War. https://oldnorth.com/historic-site/the-events-of-april-18-1775/
Remember Beecher's Bible's from Bloody Kansas, before the Civil War, where Henry Ward Beecher sent rifles to the anti-slavery forces, to protect them from pro-slavery raiders, and these rifles were called 'Beecher's Bibles'?
Remember the SCLC (Southern Leadership Christian Conference), which counted Martin Luther King Jr. as a member, and which was instrumental in the Civil Rights movement?
If the church isn't relevant to the culture, is starts to wither and die. The church is always relevant to the culture, because it's always relevant to human nature, and human nature never changes. So, why isn't the church relevant, and why is it shrinking, even in the case of Stanton? Two reasons. One, there are churches like Stanton and JW's who believe the church has no place in politics. No church believed that nonsense in 1776, and it's good they didn't, because we never would have had a Revolutionary War if they did. This idea comes from Merie, and she was totally mistaken about it. Of course, she's correct to say that women have no business in politics, and she had no business in politics, as women belong at home having children, and tending to the home, husband, and children, not teaching men.
To see how absurd this idea is, simply examine what Alexander Campbell, the founder of the Church of Christ in 1809, had to say about the death penalty. His views there certainly suggest he thought politics, war, and self defense were acceptable, using….wait for it…necessary inference. http://victimsfamiliesforthedeathpenalty.blogspot.com/2014/03/is-capital-punishment-sanctioned-by.html
The second reason is the church refuses to learn their Bible and history, and to stand out in public and say their opinion. Many Christian husbands will be sleeping on the couch if they said in public what a few of us firebrand conservatives say, and that's very unfortunate, because women's feelings are disabling the Lions that God intended to spread the truth.
There are two incidents that just happened, that the church should have something to say about, but many in the church are kind of quiet, and sadly, there are millions of Christians on the wrong side of these issues. The First is the Mueller report. First of all, there never should have been a Mueller Report, as the Democrat party is evil and wicked, and as Dennis Prager said, if you simply understand they are constantly lying, it makes it easy to understand them. Why would any Christian support a party that stands for abortion, homosexuality, pornography, contraception, transgenders in the bathroom, Islam, high taxes (which is legalized theft), and high regulations (interferes with a man's ability to earn his living)? The answer is, no sane Christian would, but we apparently have many Christians who aren't sane, because tens of millions, possibly the majority of those supporting Democrats attend Christian churches. Sin does interfere with sanity, this is true, which is why we see Christ casting out devils.
Since the media and schools have been brainwashing and indoctrinating millions, it's necessary to look at events from a Christian perspective, and that's why I created my website, (Messanonews.com) to enable those who have been blind all their lives, to see things through the eyes of the Bible and history for the first time. I know from personal experience, as I was snowed by the media in 2008, and, by watching television, going on youtube, listening to Hollyweird, reading the local newspapers, listening to NPR, and the local radio, I was in an echo chamber of groupthink, where everyone believed Obama was the Messiah. In reality, he was closer to Satan than any other President in American history, with no close seconds. The Mueller investigation was a blatant seditious attempt to dethrone the lawfully elected President of America, by the media, compromised justice department, Hollyweird, and Democrats. It nearly succeeded, and even when they are caught, they are still spinning lies. It's unbelievable. This was the biggest political scandal in American history, but, since the media has been allying with schools to keep historical knowledge away from the public for decades, few Americans care, because few have a reference point. If you never studied American history, this doesn't bother you much, because ignorance is bliss. Having nothing to compare current events with, you don't want to be bothered with them, and you kind of get irritated with folks like me and others, who force you to think about uncomfortable truths. “I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long …arousing and persuading and reproaching…You will not easily find another like me.”
https://wallbuilders.com/americas-biblically-hostile-u-s-president/
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/trump-russia-investigation-mueller-report/
The second event was the Jussie Smollett case. Even the white Democrat Mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emmanuel, and the black police chief, Eddie Johnson said he was guilty and this was a travesty of justice. He lied and said white, MAGA hat wearing men beat him, when he totally paid two Nigerians to do this to him, because he wanted a publicity event, due to his unhappiness over his current salary. It's despicable, this is allowed, yet, do you think the pulpits in America will resound with denunciations of that wicked and degenerate sodomite Smollett and his bold faced lies? No, I don't think so? Why? Well, many of the congregation are deceived by the lamestream media, and if the preacher started telling the truth, they'd no longer put an offering in the basket, and the preacher would be in the unemployment line, so money talks in America, and the church has been bought off too.
It's time for people to stop playing church, and that goes for Stanton too, and to start acting as Christians ought to act. That means saying what needs to be said, when it needs to be said, whether one feels like it or not. It means having a backbone, and not worrying about what other people will say, but worrying about what God will say if we don't say what we know his Will is.
Matt 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell
Monte – I'll just say that you threw a lot of politics in here—much of which I totally agree with, BTW. But that's an easy way to cut down on word count. I know there's not a topic in existence you're not passionate about—I have that problem as well! 🙂
I truly do, just ask my wife and kids! Lol But I have to choose the right topics for the right audience and slow dow to be a good conversation partner. Otherwise, it turns into a sermon and we have people falling out of windows. We don't want that!
Also, you said "Of course, she's correct to say that women [Merie] have no business in politics, and she had no business in politics, as women belong at home having children, and tending to the home, husband, and children, not teaching men."
I am NOT a leftist women's lib emasculated male. I'm the leader of my home through and through. But I also love and respect my wife deeply, and that comment is just plain wrong and offensive, Biblically. I'm not saying unmarried people have no right to offer their thoughts on marriage, or people without kids have no right to comment on child-rearing. But it's really important to have some humility when you haven't had the kinds of relationships yet that you want to write so authoritatively about.
To give a quick counterpoint from history…Margaret Thatcher. I have no knowledge of her marriage. I don't know if her husband felt emasculated or not. But I'd have taken her any day as a president above Obama if given the choice.
Just my two cents.
God bless.
P.s. – The new site is coming along. I think everyone will like it. The text is larger and there's only one sidebar, so space is at more of a premium. But I'll be doing some things to make important articles and comments rise to the top so they are much easier to find. Articles now have a way of getting lost in the pile over time, but I'll make sure that content gets brought to the top somehow over time. This should help engage newer readers with older content.
What's wrong with sermons and people falling out of windows, Kevin? Eutychus led to a revival of faith:).
God bless conservative women, which I'm pretty sure your wife is one, but I hope they can take one for the team and give up the right to vote, because 70% of single women vote Democrat and the majority of married women do too. It's a fact, when you look at the statistics for women's comprehension of history, it's vastly inferior to men's, and without that reference point to make voting decisions on, their analysis is badly flawed. This, in turn, is destroying our nation. There are many women who agree with me on this, and the Transformed Wife blog is one place.
I'm convinced one can love and deeply respect their wife, and love and respect God's design for the sphere of the genders, and advocate for women staying out of politics. Their advice is necessary, and a woman's intuition is quite sound, particularly when she obeys God, but she isn't fit to lead a marriage or a nation. We Christian men lost sight of that, and, abracadabra, we ended up with Hillary, possibly the most corrupt candidate in U.S. history for president. What a nightmare it would have been if she were elected. We never would have found out Russian collusion was a hoax. It's not good enough to see these modern political scandals are wrong, we need to get to the roots of this dysfunction, and quick too. Or the window of opportunity will close, and we too will join the ruins of Greece and Rome. Many in the church think Jesus is coming back in our lifetimes, 100% guarantee, which the Bible never says this, so they've given up bothering about upholding Christian values in the public square. It doesn't really matter to them.
I'm not certain where the idea comes from that one must have a personal experience before they can understand Christian concepts. Did not God and Christ say the Holy Spirit will guide us into ALL truth? He didn't say we need to have experience in ALL things to understand them. There are many areas that I'm not practiced in, and I don't discuss them often. But, what I'm discussing is not of importance to me alone, but to the entire nation, and so, while I would like to stay quiet, I simply cannot.
I'd have taken Thatcher above Obama and Clinton as well. However, if Thatcher being a leader led to many women going to college and getting jobs, neglecting raising their families, as England's vastly reduced birthrate suggests happens, then her leadership was a stumblingblock. Meanwhile, the Islamic birth rate is at 3.1 per woman. Islam is winning the war of wombfare, and if the west doesn't get hot, the time for actually being able to be fruitful and multiply as a Christian nation may soon be gone forever. California has 40 million people, and 1 million Muslims. That's 1 Muslim for every 40 Californians, and they are rapidly multiplying and networking. If anyone thinks they are going to assimilate into America, they are dead wrong. We are headed for a reckoning, and the children that are not being had now, while women are getting worthless educations and working at jobs that don't need them, will come back to haunt our nation when it is too late.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/americas_233yearold_shock_at_jihad.html
Glad to hear about the new site.
Best,
Monte
I hope and pray all those that have left this cult vote. This is your country. Our freedom depends on it! Quit keeping your head in the sand and vote.
That makes two of us, Concerned Outsider, but most were trained to never learn history, and have no idea what principles to vote on. When I first considered voting, in 2007-2008, I was suckered by Google, television, newspapers, Hollyweird, YouTube, and others who were similarly indoctrinated into supporting that fraud Obama, though I didn't vote for him. I was a quick learner though, and learned how mistaken that was. I speedily repented of my Obamadolatry.
Monte- the only thing you are proving to me by all your negative posts about women, and your carrying on about your political views, and your historical information, is that you are a product of Stanton’s abusive upbringing and influence. Like so many of us that spent years in Stanton- we were damaged, often not aware of the peculiarities it creates in us. It would do you good to listen to Kevin (since the words of women mean less than nothing to you) and let this blog be focused on the intended topic. I pray for you Monte. I hope you pray for me as well.
Yes! Thank you Donna & thank you Kevin!! I'm not sure how many times Kevin has to repeat his request. I couldn't imagine after the damage we all endure to come on here & belittle or degrade anyone much less & gender. Thank you Kevin for pointing out how offensive that can be. Let us all pray for each other.
Donna, you can think what you wish, however mistaken you are. There are millions who agree with me who never heard of Stanton. I can't tell you how many times I have to hear people disagree with me and peg my beliefs on Stanton. The vast majority of these haven't read 10 history books in their entire lives and don't realize that there are some good things that Stanton teaches that it wouldn't be wise to let go.
I said nothing negative about women at all. Simply said that America functioned a lot better when women were at home, taking care of the home, having children, and loving their husbands and children. Our children and marriages are in shambles today, and with women initiating divorce 80% of the time, the numbers simply don't agree with you. But, we see, your ideas are largely subjective and fact free.
I'm pretty sure I know who were the ones complaining to Kevin, but it's interesting to see the women ran and complained to Kevin, but wouldn't try to defend themselves. This is a tactic that has long been used in Stanton. Use the evangelists as front men. Many of the women on here are here for no other reason other then they lost the sweepstakes to be the lead woman. They could care less about what is right or wrong, they simply wanted to be dominant.
I Cor 10:13 says there is nothing that God allowed us to endure that he did not fit us to bear. So, while you may think Stanton harmed me, I believe Stanton helped me and taught me a lot. Everyone teaches us something, some people's example teach us what to do, some people teach us what not to do, and we ought to be grateful to both.
I do pray that everyone in Stanton and without can find salvation, but being silenced by those who disagree with my facts, though they never use any facts of their own, isn't going to be something I consent to.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 5:34 AM
You are not a victim of anything but your own attitudes.
Let us pray that we can learn God's role for men and women, and assent to that, and we will all find peace a lot sooner than otherwise.
No one was belittled, degraded, abused, or talked about negatively. Not one fact I posted has been objectively refuted, and people's not liking the truth does not change the truth.
It's sad there are many on here, who insist on imitating Stanton, and trying to silence opinions they don't like. I have not done that to you, it would be nice if you can return the courtesy.
Monte – You said "It's sad there are many on here, who insist on imitating Stanton, and trying to silence opinions they don't like."
I wish you could see how deeply Stanton's "know it all," "my way or the highway" approach (which is the very intellectual tyranny I speak out against on this blog) is embedded into your own thinking and efforts to convince people of your views. Please, friend, have some humility, not to mention respect for the mission I've taken on here.
I don't answer your every point because (a) I don't have time…if I did that, I would literally get nothing else done, either on this site or otherwise; (b) I've answered many of your points repeatedly, and have no desire to beat my head against a wall when my best strategy is to simply wait for you to mature and gain some wisdom from life experience; and (c) I just have no desire to engage in endless debates that just go in circles. I have a bigger, more important agenda here than solving all the world's socio/religious/political problems in one fell swoop.
To answer your assertion that women should not be allowed the right to vote, you are the perfect caricature the left wants to paint of conservatives. I don't know if you've noticed, but the fairer sex is about 50% of the population. The surest way to turn the country over to the leftists who want to destroy it is to take half of our votes and throw them into the fire to maintain some sort of twisted and unbiblical ideological purity.
Kevin pretty sure you took the words out of the majority of your viewers. You've repeated yourself many times..it's like beating a dead horse! Montesqueiu seems very damaged & is choosing to hang on to Stanton for only reasons he knows but the general the consensus seems to be the rest want to move forward & away from Stanton & their teachings..which is the purpose of your blog, correct?
Yes, the left loves to paint conservatives with their identity politics, Kevin, however, why? Because they use code words to get around the truths that terrify them.
It's not humble to be browbeaten by those who really could care less about what is right, and care more about who is right. Moses was the meekest man on earth, but I don't see him backing down to emotional appeals that he be 'humble and meek' from people who showed clear evidence that their ideals and God's are two totally different things. We ideologically differ on a few items, and that's fine. Your points on war and guns were taken studied and changed, but when it comes to television, the worst communication medium in human history (even some atheists agree on this point), and tattoos (no godly person ever assented to them), we will never agree.
I haven't really seen many on here disagree with you or others, but I do see that those of us who do, myself included, are given many encouragements to learn 'humility'.
If you don't have time to individually find facts you disagree with, then how is it that you have time to disagree with the message? The devil is in the details, and it is reason alone that leads to truth.
It's easy to cast aspersions on what I say by smearing it as a 'know it all' or 'my way or the highway' approach (which could have easily have been done with any major figure in the Bible. Jesus' saying 'No man cometh to the Father, but by me' sounds pretty 'my way or the highway' to me, what say you?), but if you disagree with any conclusion, you can factually lay out your opinions, which is only fair as I did this with mine, disagree, and the readers can decide for themselves. Instead we have blog tattletales who constantly get their feathers ruffled, and imitate Stanton. Funny, they complain about Stanton's tactics, come here, and engage in them all over again.
I've laid out the facts on why women should not be allowed to vote, you haven't differed or refuted a single one, and you certainly can't get around 70% of single women vote Democrat and the majority of married women do too. If women had the vote taken from them, and if men asserted this vocally, we would get our way, as women are far more subject to words then men are, the Democrat party would be toast. So, it's not time to hunker down and be afraid, it's time to be bold and courageous.
If you have evidence that women understand history as well as men or better, statistically, not anecdotally, and that they have ever voted for a small government and morality in large numbers, I'm all ears. But otherwise, the naked statistics point to the solution being to end women voting.
'When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truth'.
Sherlock Holmes
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 11:38 AM
Lefou, is that you?
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 11:38 AM
Since when do you think the majority constitutes the truth on anything?
Your entire argument was a fact free ad hominem logical fallacy.
The wise reader will ignore everything you have to say. The foolish will be deceived by you.
Stanton and you have a hard time understanding that if someone has an idea you don't like, you don't get to intimidate them into silence.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 11:38 AM
Reading comprehension does not seem to be a strength of yours, as there are few others on here who have criticized Stanton as much as I have.
It seemed the purpose of the blog was to note the issues Stanton had, and to advocate for them to correct them and reform. Wasn't that the purpose of the Gospel? Why would our approach to Stanton be any different?
How does your approach to me differ from the wrong treatment Stanton instituted towards everyone on here? It seems to differ not at all.
Stanton: You don't agree with us, we all agree you are a problem, you must leave.
You: You don't agree with us, we all agree you are a problem, you must leave.
Yet, you say that I am the one holding onto Stanton's ways. Amusing.
You want objective fact? You are a "know it all" who is more interested in speaking than hearing. I say that with love in my heart, bro, I really do.
One thing you'll learn as you get older and deeper in your faith (please Lord…) is that the percentage of objectively accurate doctrines we hold (or we think we hold) is not how we are measured by God, nor is it how we are to measure our brother. That is legalism through and through. That is Stanton's legalistic thinking.
Amen Kevin!
Monte – I fixed it for you…
STANTON: "You don't agree with us, the Main Teachers agree you're a problem, we must silence you and punish you until you see it our way."
WHAT YOU SAY I'M SAYING: "Kevin doesn't agree with me and is stifling my freedom of speech by kicking me off the blog."
WHAT I'M ACTUALLY SAYING: "No one's censoring you or kicking you off. I sometimes agree with kernels of truth you have to say, but you insist on coming off as an arrogant, argumentative person, which makes any reasonable points you may have to say get lost in your word count. Please tone it down, show some love and respect for the purpose of the blog, and be more concise."
That is your subjective opinion. Calling someone a ‘know it all’ is a cliche. I listen critically, evaluating what I hear via the Bible, and history, and do not apologize for doing so, nor should I be expected to. What is so hard about free speech and the First Amendment? There were just people on here lying, using vulgarity, and waging personal attacks, and these same types who are hot and bothered by me, silently sat and said nothing.
I note you do not ‘prove all things, and hold fast to that which is true’. How about you don’t love me, but, you love the truth and don’t try to silence ideas you don’t like? If love isn’t based on truth, it’s not worth preserving, since charity rejoices in truth.
You may say you love me, but as Emerson said, ‘Your actions speak so loudly, I cannot year what you are saying’.
Are you not using the same approach as Stanton did?
Didn’t they say, ‘If you were older, and deeper in the faith you’d understand’? They’d then say, ‘Put it on the shelf.’.
I did, and the shelf broke from the weight. I’d prefer to avoid putting things on the shelf now, as there is no longer a shelf to put them on.
Proving all things was to be a lifelong pursuit. Objective truth is never to be regretted, and must be accompanied by courage, because it certainly nearly always comes under fierce, and unreasoning attack.
Isn’t legalism giving commands not substantiated by reason, logic, or facts?
The churches outside of Stanton are full of those who loudly protest against ‘legalism’, yet, they rarely have any idea what the moral law is, and don’t understand that the law actually leads to joy. While we cannot keep the law on our own power, ignoring it definitely leads to destruction. The legalism of the Pharisees has nothing to do with their stating the moral law, or with the severity of their punishments, combined with their trying to enforce the ceremonial law, which did nothing for anyone.
You can be sure Stanton is rejoicing at the constant infighting on here. They don’t have to do anything, while those who address unscriptural teachings are soundly rebuked. Pretty interesting that this site is to address Stanton’s misdeeds, they attack me the most, and I’m getting the most friendly fire from those who profess to share my goals.
I’ve stated the strengths and weaknesses of Stanton on here, so I’m not sure what the problem is.
The truth isn’t a popularity contest. The ones ratting to you are nearly all anonymous, for all we know, they could be with Stanton, not one of them has given any substantive argument for their complaints, but they will not be satisfied until I’m silenced. I was never in the habit of yielding to tyrants, and this is tyranny, and believe that rebellion to tyranny is obedience to God.
Please…and comparing oneself to the righteous in the bible is rather grand!
Also,being obnoxious has it's reward.
That being said, "Concerned" seems to traffic in ad hominem attacks on Monte.
First two sentences are an ad hominem logical fallacy, and your last one is a straw man, as Concerned hasn’t launched any ad hominem attacks on me. Shouldn’t you be squawking to Kevin about ‘Make the bad, mean man go away’?
Montesquieu what you are not comprehending or listening to anyone that tells you is this blog isn't intended to be for debating, politics, the founders of America, voting, your issue with women, whether you think someone is a "straw man" or fallacy etc. We have seen Kevin request more than a handful of times openly for all to see: "Please tone it down, show some love and respect for the purpose of the blog, and be more concise.". Your purpose of this blog & Kevin's seem to be quite different as everyone can see.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 1:12 PM
Listen, I know you were probably in Stanton, and probably come from a Democrat state, two environments where you are taught to unquestioningly listen to what experts or the majority tell you to do.
You don't speak for everyone, no one appointed you blog spokesman, you certainly don't speak for me, and if you don't like what I have to say and can't factually disprove it, no one is forcing you to read and respond to it. You have yourself to blame for being vexed by it.
What free speech means, and it was what America was designed under, was for those who value virtue and wisdom (it's doubtful you do), would have the right to speak their minds without being silenced by rabble rousers like you.
No one has to personally answer to you on this blog about anything. Do you understand that, busybody? It seems like you are having a hard time with this issue. Same with Stanton. 'Ummm, that seems like off topic, can we get back on the topic', and in that manner any idea the teachers didn't agree with was disregarded and discarded.
Everything connects, if you like to think, and you've shown serious evidence you hate to think.
As for politics, the Founders of America, voting, the spheres for women, and logical fallacies, there is no ban on discussing them when relevant. All of them are issues that directly relate to Stanton, even if you don't want to take the time to figure out how they do.
Also, for the domineering types like you on here, I don't take your attacks personal, because you've likely been treating people who disagree with you this way all your life. You constantly harass them, bully, intimidate, and gang up on ideas you don't like. You aren't used to having someone not give into your antics, and this causes you to become shrill and hysterical, as you are doing now. It's not healthy for you, and it's not healthy for a group where ideas leading to truth and reform are valued. The last thing we need on here is someone who imitates Stanton and tries to establish pecking orders for what can and cannot be said based on their own arbitrary opinions.
Stop tattling to Kevin, if you have ideas, state them, and if you factually disagree with me, I'd be happy to hear your reasons.
Other than that, please take your constant personal harassment, and take a long walk on a short pier. Your badgering will be missed just as much as I missed the last cold I had.
"You can be sure Stanton is rejoicing at the constant infighting on here."
Irony much? Lol
Seriously…and all the "evil surmising". Bless!
Kevin's words under Motivation for HIS blog:
'The purpose is simply to shine some light on the historical facts of the beginnings of this church, which I believe is responsible for a lot of needless suffering, broken families, and anger with God. Laying out factual history and presenting reasoned scriptural commentary is not an attack. I'm not making assertions, or lying. These are facts, communicated as accurately as I understand them, and are my feeble attempt to speak the truth in love.'
Pretty clear to me the purpose of his blog. He's stated it there & commented many many times.
Never argue with a fool..onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.
'The purpose is simply to shine some light on the historical facts of the beginnings of this church, which I believe is responsible for a lot of needless suffering, broken families, and anger with God. Laying out factual history and presenting reasoned scriptural commentary is not an attack. I'm not making assertions, or lying. These are facts, communicated as accurately as I understand them, and are my feeble attempt to speak the truth in love.'
Well, to be technical, the beginnings of the true Church of Christ happened 2,000 years ago, and there has been a lot that has happened since. Since you don't openly oppose television, it's likely you've been spending considerable amounts of time being indoctrinated with sheer nonsense, since the average American blows 9 years of their lives watching it, and don't have much of an interest in what has actually happened in 2000 years, since you've been too busy amusing yourself to death. Telling the truth is plenty loving. Flattery is pretty hateful.
That's another topic we'd do well to study and Stanton rarely studied. I notice flattery hasn't been addressed on here much, and isn't addressed in Stanton much, and as a result there are plenty of people who tell people nice things to get what they want from them. Then, when these people get criticized, they fall to pieces, because their entire existence is involved with what others think of them. That's why the leaders of Stanton can't be corrected, because they care less what God thinks of them, and more what men think of them. I would hope we don't have that same problem here. If I cared what others thought of me, half of what I write on here wouldn't be here, and much of what people see and read about me on the internet wouldn't be there either. Telling the truth may make you enemies, but at least my conscience is still my friend.
Let us emphasize 'Laying out factual history and presenting reasoned scriptural commentary is not an attack.' I completely agree with Kevin, and have endeavored to do this, however, you and others think that only facts you like are tolerated.
Like Kevin, "I'm not making assertions or lying".
Also, like Kevin, 'These are facts, communicated as accurately as I understand them, and are my feeble attempt to speak the truth in love.'
Dear Mark Twain,
You died an atheist and pretty miserable, and didn't learn much,
'But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.'
Jesus
Thank you Mark Twain..wisest words I've seen yet..just keep scrolling..it's that simple!
M – you know good and well this blog was started to point out the history of the Merie Weiss version of the Church of Christ and the timeline of her influence on the SCOC, not to discuss the history of Christianity. You are disrespectful to Kevin and the other readers of this blog who are here for the purpose which you fail to acknowledge. I don’t understand why you insist on hijacking this blog,
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 3:58 PM
How can you discuss the Merie Weiss church and not discuss Christianity and what the church should be at the same time? Simply pointing out mistakes does nothing if you don't understand the solution, and if one doesn't understand the past, the chances of finding a solution are radically decreased.
And why are you and many other instigators on here constantly trying to stir up strife between me and Kevin by tattling to him about me, and trying to get us to fight?
I find it amusing that you find all my opinions nearly to be 'disrespectful to Kevin'. LOL.
The truth doesn't 'disrespect' anyone, and maybe you should learn to respect it more. You'd save yourself a lot of stress if you did.
No one is hijacking this blog. No one has been attacked more on here than me, and I have a right to defend myself against harangues from you and others who haven't really shown you have any ideas about how to reform Stanton at all, but insist on silencing those who do.
Instead of constantly attacking me, how about you start putting forth your own solutions for how to make Stanton a better place?
We did..we LEFT & made our own life s better place!!
These appear to be the ramblings of a madman. Monte appears to hate women and SCOC for his lot in life, and is using Pauline teachings to self medicate some deaper issue. It is clear from his plethora of posts he is a lost ball in high weeds…rolling from one argument to the next,and his all out blog hijacking ,long and rambling post. Monte has even attached folks who agreed with some of his moanings.
He will continue to post as long as he has an internet connection and computer.The degree of his self importance cannot be overstated. Let state his obvious rebuttal…fallacy this fallacy that! Monte, I know this is my opinion, but it has been educated by all your POST. Exhibit A will soon commence again below.
LOL nailed it….waiting for it in 3…2…1….
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 1:54 PM
Ad hominem, logical fallacy. LOL.
And you lie.
For those who object to what I write, where are they to call out your obvious lies? I'm pretty happy with where I am, because my choices, despite the adversity I faced elsewhere, got me here. If one doesn't like their output, they only need change their input.
No one knows who you are, like Stanton, you call people you disagree with 'crazy'. You lack judgement and understanding, but then, Stanton lacks the same thing.
What in the world is 'Pauline teachings' supposed to mean? The New Testament is all considered the Word of God. Take your new age nonsense somewhere else. I'd worry less about 'Pauline teachings' and more about 'Hooked on Phonics', if I were you.
Your entire post is filled with spelling errors, unsurprising. Since your ideas are error-filled, it's no surprise your post is littered with misspellings. I get people misspell things due to speed, but your post has quite a few.
When you learn how to spell and write, maybe then we can take your opinion seriously. It makes little sense to publicly disagree with others and your own writing is hard to make heads or tails out of.
In case anyone needs a good laugh today..aside from this blog this shows the type of person Mr. Montesqueiu is. You're welcome!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN9dzY-HZRc
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 2:11 PM
Yes, I know this is a foreign concept to you, and many others on here, but getting up in public and speaking on topics of local, moral, and national interest is what Christians do.
BTW, the homosexuals have not been back since, and we are going on a year. They used to terrorize the City Council for the five years prior, so I'm pretty happy I did that.
Still waiting for anyone to show me why homosexuality is not illegal still, as SCOTUS (doubtful you can even name the 9 SCOTUS justices, but you bleat about topics you don't understand) had no right to legalize it in 2003 with 'Lawrence Vs. Texas'.
Also, watch the video with my friend, the leader of California Mass Resistance, Arthur Schaper, exposing homosexual bullying. But, where are you at in this war? Doubtful you've ever given a public speech at a city council meeting in your life. I may not be the greatest orator, but I'm not really caring. Right makes might. 'If God be for us, who can be against us'?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcMsPDa6PkE
Evil surmising again lol
I don't believe you, I think you are being deceitful.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 2:27 PM
City council meeting videos are public. You saw mine, where is a video of you at one?
If you can't post one, it's likely you didn't give one.
If you know the 9 SCOTUS justices, then list them, without going to Google. I'll wait, but I'm not crossing my fingers. People like you love to talk, but when questioned are often MIA.
LOL…and he has the nerve to point out grammatical and spelling errors. This guys public speaking chops leaves much to be desired. I agree with his message but the messenger is doing more damage than good. His self importance is quite unreal. Thought it was hard to deal with on this blog….this guy is even worse in living color. I'm done commenting on this character.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 2:34 PM
Ah, the critic. You get up in front of a homosexual crowd and call them out in a Democrat city.
When you do, please send me a video so I can learn how it's done.
It's easy to criticize the doer when you are a critic in the shadows.
I was plenty nervous, but I don't regret saying it and doing it at all.
Further, I have to say, belting out 'No you stand down' to the Mayor, unprompted, and totally unprepared for, was a moment that left me feeling no regrets at all about.
It was completely impromptu by the way. No preparation. I came to the City Hall meeting, noted what was happening, resolved to speak about it, and went from memory. Had no real notes.
I suppose you want a Hollyweird video, carefully scripted, with 100 takes, would that make you happy? That's not how real life works.
Besides, what have you ever done in life? Have you even tried public speaking? If you know how it's done, please demonstrate, I'd like to learn.
Wooooowwwww!!! So I had to go to your favorite site & saw this comment in an article: "In February, Messano got into a verbal spat with Sampayan regarding whether the mayor or anyone in attendance had read biographies about the nation’s Founding Fathers."
Sound familiar? Man you need a hobby..go drink a beer or something!
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 2:44 PM
Hahaha, after having 10,000 conversations with liberals on fakebook, I started realizing what the problem with them was. They had no clue about history, and so nothing to compare the lies too. Seems like a problem you can relate too.
What is so strange about being expected to read biographies of the Founders? You've blown at least 2 years of your life in front of the television if you are 20, on average, so please don't tell me you haven't read those biographies and didn't have the time.
Never used alcohol, and have no intentions of starting. I like to use my mind, and when I think good thoughts, I feel really good. You should try it sometime.
We already pay $740 billion a year for drug, tobacco, and alcohol issues, I'm not trying to possibly add to these costs, either from my actions, or from the actions of people who followed my example.
Are you even 30 years old yet? You sure have a lot to say for someone who hasn't seriously studied topics.
*to
*to
For the Grammar Nazis. Want to keep them happy. Besides, can't be a hypocrite about others spelling, and not correct my own.
It is unreal how a person with poor speaking skills can excuse their shortcomings but the same mouth condemns people with less than perfect writing skills.
If you took this sample as representative of my public speaking skills, you aren't doing me justice.
There is no pressure here. When you get up and publicly speak with 30 homosexuals in the audience who have been terrorizing the city for the past five years, then get back to me.
LOL, I completely admit this wasn't my finest speaking performance. Didn't really care, as I knew what needed to be said. I had written out a brief overview in the minutes preceding, but when passion got involved, I went way off script. The part about 'our city is infected with a Hive of Homosexuals' was totally spontaneous. The majority of the city agreed with me too.
What's unreal is the 1 or 2 sentence attacks coming from nobodies on here, who have no problem condemning another, but have absolutely no experience or inclination in the areas they criticize another in. Having experience in the area isn't important, but have you even attempted or thought about doing it?
It's kind of unreal that you probably have no videos of yourself online at all, but can critique those of us who at least try, imperfect as we may be.
Most of us who speak out aren't doing it for personal glory, we are doing it because it needs to be done, and it is the right thing to do, at the right time, for the right cause, that of upholding God and godliness.
I have zero regrets, and will happily remember every last word of what I said in public when I breath my last breath.
Did I belittle what you said because of your less than great delivery? Did i say I won’t take you seriously because of your delivery? I only said you were less than perfect because you made excuses for your delivery. The point I am making is to stop criticizing the content of a comment and belittling the writer just because the grammar and spelling are less than perfect.
A good message can be imperfectly delivered, and a bad message can be as well. I remarked on the latter, you compared it to the former.
Every circus has a clown…we have, Monte.
So, Kevin, this nonsense is acceptable?
Where are the people tattling to you about me when we have people lobbing ad hominem attacks from the shadows?
I never engaged in this behavior, and would think this site is above this.
This isn't an arbitrary disagreement as nearly all those with me are, it's simply asking those who disagree to state their ideas.
But we see, ad hominem and unsubstantiated attacks on me are acceptable, but my responding is not.
Have we really learned much from Stanton when this nonsense is tolerated?
This commenter is simply an immature version of KS, TC, or GP.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 3:52 PM
How respectable can this site hope to be when random, anonymous commenters are allowed who can't comment with any substance, have no real ideas of their own, but simply, like the liberal mindless drones, come on and name-call?
Is that tolerated?
How is what this commenter and the hordes of others like them doing, any different from what Ernst Rohm and the brown shirts did in Nazi Germany? Didn't they intimidate, name call, and attempt to bully those they disagreed with into silence? They largely succeeded too, didn't they?
Why is it that any of us cannot feel free to comment as we wish, and be free of the random stone throwers, who demonstrate very little understanding of anything written on this site, but believe that if you disagree with others loudly enough and belligerently enough, you win.
To be honest, those attacking me could easily be a group of 5 18 year olds, who simply come on and alternate juvenile insults.
The ADULTS on here, are strangely silent, but they come to life when it's time to call me out.
'Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people'.
The random attacks follow no logical pattern, there is no clear rhyme or reason to them, no one wants to put a name to their attacks, yet the continuously come.
I respond because it seems likely that to not respond encourages copycats.
Besides, such impudence and impertinence should never be tolerated.
I urge everyone to lookup the word GADFLY. After becoming familiar with the term, you will know how to deal with this character. The term perfectly captures Monte's behavior.
There was a man who called himself a gadfly in the 4th century B.C. You may have heard of him. Funny, you are using a word that was in the very article you just looked up. I thanked the writer for using it to describe me.
Men of Athens, do not interrupt, but hear me; there was an understanding between us that you should hear me to the end: I have something more to say, at which you may be inclined to cry out; but I believe that to hear me will be good for you, and therefore I beg that you will not cry out. I would have you know, that if you kill such an one as I am, you will injure yourselves more than you will injure me. Nothing will injure me, not Meletus nor yet Anytus—they cannot, for a bad man is not permitted to injure a better than himself. I do not deny that Anytus may, perhaps, kill him, or drive him into exile, or deprive him of civil rights; and he may imagine, and others may imagine, that he is inflicting a great injury upon him: but there I do not agree. For the evil of doing as he is doing—the evil of unjustly taking away the life of another—is greater far.
'I am the gadfly of the Athenian people, given to them by God, and they will never have another, if they kill me. And now, Athenians, I am not going to argue for my own sake, as you may think, but for yours, that you may not sin against the God by condemning me, who am his gift to you. For if you kill me you will not easily find a successor to me, who, if I may use such a ludicrous figure of speech, am a sort of gadfly, given to the state by God; and the state is a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which God has attached to the state, and all day long 1and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you. You will not easily find another like me, and therefore I would advise you to spare me. I dare say that you may feel out of temper (like a person who is suddenly awakened from sleep), and you think that you might easily strike me dead as Anytus advises, and then you would sleep on for the remainder of your lives, unless God in his care of you sent you another gadfly. When I say that I am given to you by God, the proof of my mission is this:—if I had been like other men, I should not have neglected all my own concerns or patiently seen the neglect of them during all these years, and have been doing yours, coming to you individually like a father or elder brother, exhorting you to regard virtue; such conduct, I say, would be unlike human nature. If I had gained anything, or if my exhortations had been paid, there would have been some sense in my doing so; but now, as you will perceive, not even the impudence of my accusers dares to say that I have ever exacted or sought pay of any one; of that they have no witness. And I have a sufficient witness to the truth of what I say—my poverty.'
His name was Socrates.
Please don't go running to Google to go looking for negative information on Socrates. It never fails with ahistorical types, they often use Google as a brain.
Kevin, judging by the comments many of the commenters are making on here, It appears the purpose of the blog needs to be revisited.
They are apparently reading it as 'Attack every comment of Montesqueiu, call him crazy, disagree with him constantly, tell Kevin whenever he comments, secretly, don't use your real name when attacking him, attack him in bands. Try to instigate a fight between Kevin and him. When Kevin disagrees with him publicly, encourage and applaud Kevin, and don't applaud Monte. Don't address what he says, only lob ad-hominems at him, don't address Stanton, Montesquieu is the real problem, until he goes away no one can have any peace, and when he does we will have peace, joy, harmony, and we can all sing Kumbaya again'
There are a couple of commenters on here, who are following that imaginary blog mission purpose very well. Have to give credit where it's due.
Also, it would be interesting to note the agendas of some of those attacking me. They are all anonymous, so who knows. Some could be porn addicts, some could be drug users, some could be atheists who hate Christianity, some could be Anti-American Communists. Who really knows? People who don't feel comfortable speaking in public using their real name, or making sure those on a site know who they are, often have things to hide.
Says the one who uses the name of Montesqueiu instead of your real name lol you do exactly what you rant about. There's a difference between you & Kevin is just as Kevin states. Maturity. You lack discipline & respect. You can not agree to disagree. Kevin does not come on here to debate or argue with his viewers.
Yes, I'm kind of done with the conversation until "Montesqieu" grows up a bit. More important things to deal with, like making this site better.
God bless.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 4:59 PM
As stated before, everyone on this site who knows much of Stanton knows who I am. Who knows who you are? Can you do criticize me without an ad-hominem attack? It doesn't seem likely, given your recent history.
As for your subjective view of maturity, and your constant instigating, it gets old.
You sound like a very angry Termagant. Could be wrong, but your style is quite like one.
What is a termagant, you ask?
A quarrelsome, scolding woman; a shrew.
That about sums up your style. God help us if you are a man, because then you are emasculated. But, you sure do attack relentlessly like a man. Kind of like many of the female teachers in Stanton.
Making the site better is a noble purpose, Kevin, and it would be a lot better if the virago's and Xantippe's of the site would exercise some self control.
Ad hominem fallacy 😀
Funny how he completely ignore Kevin's comment to grow up lol like subjective hearing..sees what he wants too.
Not an ad hominem, Kevin, the style is exactly like that of a quarrelsome, scolding woman.
Besides, she said nothing that was an actual argument, her entire argument was an ad hominem. Her argument is I lack discipline and respect. Yet, can give no evidence except her subjective assessment of my comments. Thinks that just saying something makes it so. Meanwhile, anyone who understands English can tell she is definitely a termagant. There are a few others on here, but most avoid listing their names, because they prefer to avoid scrutiny. They don't even have to use their real names, they can use handles and pseudonyms, but they won't even do that.
Then along comes a member of the Rohm brown shirts, advises me to grow up, and starts instigating again. LOL.
Guess we should get used to this, since the 40 and under crowd is the dumbest in American history, and that's not an ad hominem, that's a fact, and they are extremely argumentative.
If we got rid of all the unreasonable attacks on me, only about five would be left on this site.
Monte, do you think there is only one person writing as anonymous? You’re mistaken. You have no idea who you’re addressing so guessing their gender, political views, sexual sins, television watching staus, etc are a huge waste of space and make you sound ridiculous.
Monte- before you start whining about how persecuted you are, let me call the Waaaaambulence.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 5:38 PM
Sure could have fooled me. The attackers usually ignore all facts, totally ignore the historical aspects addressed, typically use one or two sentences, state their subjective opinion, appoint themselves blog spokespeople, and proceed to badger and harass me for ideas they disagree with. I've got plenty of experience with this, so I can handle it, just would be nice to know motives.
Plato talked about this over 2,000 years ago,
'No man is hated more than he who tells the truth'.
So, despite the fact that you think massive opposition has any bearing on whether something is true or not, it really doesn't. As a matter of fact, Jesus flat out said if you tell the truth, people, like you, will hate the one telling it.
'I have always been of the opinion that unpopularity earned by doing what is right, is not unpopularity at all, but rather, Glory'.
Cicero
'And ye shall be hated by all men'.
Jesus
Quite a bit of unreasonable hatred coming from you and your anonymous friends, but that's because the truth often excites massive hatred.
You think you are only giving back in kind, since, 'Truth sounds like hate to those who hate truth'.
Ya'll are brutal to this poor fella!!
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 5:50 PM
Do you English much?
Can you show a single credible argument aimed at me?
Let me help you, you can't.
Anyone who takes these attacks seriously has an opinion that is seriously suspect.
AnonymousMarch 27, 2019 at 5:50 PM
They sure are, it's because they are mad they have no arguments.
I think they were trying to defend you…
He mouths off to the one who defends him LOL I love this soapbox!
Kevin, do you have any idea who these anonymous, seeming teenagers are who are attacking Montesquieu?
Are we back in high school?
I looked up the term Monte–I mean Gadfly. A gadfly will gadfly folks.
Kevin, are these juvenile comments reflective of the serious pursuit of truth your website purports to support?
It looks like random thugs are allowed to disrupt this website.
If they don't like the tone of comments, they hijack the site and name-call.
Disgraceful
Anon 6:28 – Haha of course not. This is the nature of the platform we're on right now and I don't have time right now to babysit. Others are welcome to, or simply don't respond.
But I can tell you the new site should be light years better for commenting and rational conversation.
Great, glad to hear.
Problem with the internet is people feel emboldened to say things they’d never say in public.
Also, they are such pests, that no one wants to deal with them, because they throw logic and reason out the window.
Anon 6:05 – No idea who any anon posters are. Seems that way. Lol
Trolls have a way of finding each other. This isn't Reddit, ppl. Ha
I’m hoping to change the topic. Been studying through the book of James where I attend. TC favorite scripture needs to be covered. I know how he teaches. Any thoughts? I’ll share mine
I would love to hear your thoughts Craig! I'm listening….
Oops, James 4:17!!
James 4:17 New International Version (NIV)
17 If anyone, then, knows the good they ought to do and doesn’t do it, it is sin for them.
This would appear to condemn the very existence of SCOC, would it not? Even a rudimentary exegesis of this scripture highlights that SCOC has sequestered themselves from "The World," and apart from their less-than-anemic "outreach," they are content to go in circles amongst themselves only, and consequently have fallen into the proverbial ditch that awaits the (spiritually)blind leading the blind.
Yes, to know to do good and do it not is a sin.
Very relevant topic, thank you for that, Craig.
Excellent insight, An Mous 7:09. Stanton gets no insight from any but their leaders, and since their leaders have no direct line to heaven, though if you listen, you'd think some of them have God on speed dial, they are relying on their own human guidance.
'Trust in the Lord with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding' reads Proverbs 3:5, and Stanton has been relying on Merie's obviously flawed understanding and the flawed understanding of the current leaders for quite a long time. While they have quite a bit right, the little they don't have right is enough to destroy all the good of their endeavors.
'Except the Lord build the house, they that build, build in vain. Except the Lord keep the city, the watchman watcheth but in vain'.
God obviously is not keeping Stanton. Their growth is abysmal, and they stubbornly hold on to their unscriptural teachings. That's not to say they can't reform, they can, but they are immensely proud, and cannot find it in themselves to admit they are wrong. Meanwhile, common sinners, who they despise, admit they are wrong and change all the time, but Stanton is stuck. Thinking that salvation means you never sin, they pass their time on earth trapped in the very sin that cast Lucifer down from heaven, pride. Yet, they project the most. They don't understand it was the pride of the Pharisees that kept them blind. Stanton thinks the Pharisees secret sins is what got them in trouble. It obviously wasn't, because the Publican admitted he had sins and was wretched, and he was accepted. But, the Pharisee who prayed with him, prayed just like Stanton.
Pharisee: I thank you Lord, that I am not like other men. Fornicators, adulterers, drunkards, drug users, porn users, masturbators, liars, cheaters, thieves, covetous, homosexuals. Thank you so much that I'm not like these people.
Stanton: I thank you Lord, that I am not like other men. Fornicators, adulterers, drunkards, drug users, porn users, masturbators, liars, cheaters, thieves, covetous, homosexuals. Thank you so much that I'm not like these people. Thank you also God, that we aren't like the world, and we are better than them.
Of course, virtue is it's own reward, and there are moral standards. Doing the right thing makes one happy and often leads to success, though not always. Standing up for moral standards is never wrong, however, despising those who want to do better and who are suffering in sin is a huge sin, and that is what Stanton does quite often.
Montesquieu March 28, 2019 at 10:20 AM:
No hyperbole intended, but that is the best sermon I've heard all year, because it so precisely encapsulates Stanton's paradox, their hypocrisy, their willful and blinding pride, their dilemma, their challenge, and ultimately, their own self-made Catch-22 and imprisonment in error, and all flowing from the top down, from KS, GP, and TC, and initially from their founder, Merie, all those years ago.
A useful analogy might be the Israelites, who were liberated from enslavement and their Egyptian captors, but who ended up wandering in the desert for 40 years because of their sinfulness, stubbornness, and pride, before a completely new generation was allowed to cross the River Jordan and enter the Promised Land. How long will Stanton wander in the desert of pride, sin, and arrogance, before they repent, change, and accept the grace and freedom that the Lord want them to have?
I agree, Anon@4:11. Monte, delivered a masterful and succinct post highlighting the main reason Stanton continues to miss the point of what true religion means.
Thank you kindly, AnonymousMarch 28, 2019 at 4:11 PM, I am far more accustomed to criticism then praise, and have learned that only the latter from God can be relied upon always, but your kind words are appreciated.
Yes, the Israelites are great example. Like them, Stanton is in the wilderness of Sin (That was the physical place they were in, and Stanton is in the wilderness of the Sin of Pride). It would be wonderful if Stanton would just submit to God, and repent, but that hardly appears to be likely in the near future. Praying for them is the best way. Lord knows all of us have needed prayer at some point, and will need it in the future.
It's hard to be mean and hate people when you are praying for them. And it's very healthy to pray for enemies, because the bitterness is quite damaging to one's health.
It's easy to think of all the damage they have done to us, but, if we see them as God sees them, we see all the damage they are doing to themselves. After all, they are the ones who are forsaking the magnificent blessings God has prepared for the penitent and humble. Of course, they are convinced we are the ones who need to submit to them, admitting they are 100% right, and we are 100% wrong. I never claimed to be 100% right, and am quite aware of my failings. Stanton is not aware of their failings, and for a fallible man to think themselves infallible rarely ends well.
On their current path, prostitutes, liars, and fornicators have more hope then them. Because at least these three groups often admit they are wrong and need to change. King David had no problem admitting he was wrong, and was called a man after God's own heart. Alas, Stanton, why do you neglect the penitence that would bring you to your own greatest potential?
TC, like many others, is far from this. In my study this evening, I run across this passage, again.
1 Corinthians 12:25 That there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another.
Not only does TC like to do talks on unity, they are far from it. They are divided in one way of how they treat each other. I have seen for years older and/or more popular members getting more attention than others and in a lot of cases the ignored needs attention.
Some examples are that even though in TC's congregation they set up a class for those who miss a lot and/or are behind, TC admitted that he doesn't have the mindset to consider others. Another name for this is indifference. JS said in a talk where he noticed that during breaks at huge meetings that he sees people with gather around the preacher/teachers with more status, but he realized a new member left by himself at another table. GP brought out in a talk that a younger member in the faith brought to him that he noticed how that older/popular ones favor more attention to each other, like in salutations, than to the younger/less status members.
All of these things fall under that they should know better. They are no better or greater than anybody else, in God's eyes. They just have greater responsibilities.
Matthew 23:8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
They have no problem calling people to the mat in doing the right thing, but how much do they really do it to themselves? Can you imagine if this was the was it is to be in heaven, where people think themselves at a higher status than others?
I have tried to bring this up many times, but has been considered nit picking, but if you really look at it, we will be judged by how we were there for each other and how we treated each other. This is NOT unity, NOR love, and IS a sin to live this way.
One thing I try to keep in mind is this –
Hebrews 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.
You're right, Lynn. Stanton has a big issue with favoritism and preferring and the leaders do little to nothing to discourage it. They enjoy the adulation, but don't realize power is to empower others, not yourself at the expense of others.
'Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely'
Lord Acton
Was thinking this morning on all the people Stanton's tyranny has driven away. Pretty sure God is not happy about this.
For instance, when I was unscripturally withdrawn from there were at least 9 of my siblings either coming or open to coming. Since then, despite my never telling them not to come, NOT ONE WANTS TO COME TO STANTON. They clearly see what happened to me, and they think if they have problems, it's pretty clear what Stanton does. Most of them look at me and think if this can happen to me, when I never drank, smoked, did drugs, or partied, and was a virgin until 33, they don't have a prayer in Stanton. Of course, God's grace can descend to the lowest depths, but you'd never guess that from Stanton. When Stanton responded to me the way they did, they terrified off a lot of their own children, who now clearly saw that if you disagree with a teacher, your entire life history will be brought out in public, the good you have done will be nearly completely ignored, the bad will be sensationalized, and you'll be humiliated.
It's very sad to think of the many seeking, lost, searching souls, who have no where to turn because of Stanton's totalitarian ways and pride. Going to the churches in the world is often not much better, and often worse, as they may not 'judge', but then again, they tolerate anything, and church is a big 'get along gang'. The church is supposed to be a hospital for the sinners, not a museum for the saints. Stanton currently is a museum for the saints, but no one comes to visit, and the only one's impressed with their self-righteous pride is themselves. God certainly isn't.
There is a price for this as well, and woe to the leaders of Stanton, because the blood of many sinners is on their head. When you deliberately distort the message of salvation for the purpose of gratifying your own selfish ego, and turn away wounded sinners, you get God really angry.
Many of my siblings, before my withdrawal lived pretty moral lives. However, when the incident with the church happened, they were repulsed by Stanton, and many went into drugs, partying, promiscuity, drinking, and the rest of the habits the world uses to lure in the unsuspecting. When the place you looked at as the House of God clearly has things wrong, it disappoints, and discourages many. Of course, we are all responsible for our own actions, but those who are leaders are judged far more severely.
Stanton's leaders have persevered for decades in their harsh totalitarianism, and the day is soon coming when there will be a day of reckoning. It will not be pretty. They've been given plenty of chances, but when God strikes, they will pay severely for the sins they have inflicted on others. Many of the Stanton leaders have already been paying the price through various afflictions. But, like Pharaoh in his pride, they are stubborn and rebellious, and refuse to be corrected.
All of the unmercifulness, harshness, severity, and draconian treatment of others they have instituted upon others, will come unto them, and I suspect they won't like it much. Jesus said, 'Blessed are the merciful, for they shall find mercy'. Which means also, 'Cursed are the unmerciful for they shall not find mercy'.
Montesqueiu,
I agree. My wife was on the fence, but with all that she saw she almost despised them. When I brought that to CS, preacher from the south, he said that is untrue and it was up to me to be the example to her, so, basically I'm the one keeping her away.
It is taught in Tacoma that those who are out for infirmities need to be the ones to reach out to the other members and not expect the congregation to reach out to you. CS's son said in a sermon that when his wife was out during one of her pregnancies that nobody in the congregation reached out to her to see how she was doing.
It's interesting how that we all have the same bibles and have access to its' teachings, yet it seems so much is dismissed and/or not followed.
If you look at oppression, it is almost the same as the indifference to being there for your brethren and their preferring some above others. It takes time, effort, and patience to go to another member and offer your time to them. It seems to be either members are dealt with through indifference or oppression to keep themselves from being there for them. If I don't have time for my brethren then how will God have time to me?
I agree that people will be held responsible for chasing people out of the church.
It really helped me when I was taught outside of Stanton that James was written to Jewish converts of Christianity. They seemed to be holding on to vestiges of Judaism yet, believed in Christ.
From what I understand they were killing and warring amongst brethren and, James, appears to be appealing to old law arguments to make his points. Furthermore, the author builds on his old law teachings using Christian centered obedience.
James 4:17 I see in context James is letting the Christians know the good to do and the sin not to do when you read above. It’s certainly not as TC and others would teach in the cult such as we have a midweek class you can’t miss it next to nothing. For myself I’d heed my conscience and the good it is telling me to do not a counselor, preacher or teacher from a cult such as Merie’s cult. I would not miss a child being born, a funeral of a loved one or a friend. Miss an opportunity to visit a sick family member or friend. I would not miss my child graduating from HS or college. If I’m called into work I’d work. For a Merie cult midweek class, nonmember class, personal work or meeting. None commanded by God. Just extra Merie creations. What’s so ever is bound on earth is bound in heaven. They’ll throw that verse out which should be disregarded. What the cult members are used to doing is binding their consciences on one another and they follow the example of the leaders, preachers and teachers. Even when they are wrong.
Good insights, Craig. It figures that Stanton would use that verse for such a low purpose as forcing obedience to a set of rules. In reality, that one statement, that if we know to do good and don't, we're sinning, clarifies amazingly deep matters of the heart. In fact, those matters, as you've alluded to, can turn the table on the external rule-following.
For instance, if your Main Teacher forbids you from attending your daughter's graduation, and you know that attending would mean a lot to her as her dad and help her enter the next phase of her life as an adult, than yes, I think it could be sin to *not* do that. The verse is certainly not about following the rules of a fallible human.
Here is an excellent background on James' letter to the Christians. It's worth reading.
https://www.insight.org/resources/bible/the-general-epistles/james
Kevin, thank you for the information.
Anon 5:47 I did share my thoughts yesterday. Though I gave more consideration to this scripture today. This is a huge scripture that the cult leaders use to control their members to adhere to their rules they put in place. From the attire they teach to wear, to activities they say is okay to do, to the cult schedule they put in place. Unless it’s clear in scripture, it’s an opinion. Or the conscience of that one who is teaching. Or an unbiblical rule they love to make. Control, control, control.
Craig- another scripture I would like to have discussed here is Hebrews 10:25 NIV nNot giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing,but encouraging one another,-and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
As we know the KJV reads: not forsaking the assembling ….
Stanton uses this verse to prove this is Sunday and to prove we are not to ‘forsake’ the day.
What I’m going to say will rock some boats… but is that REALLY the meaning here? Is it a SIN if we don’t attend ‘worship’ for WHATEVER reason. Or is this Stanton’s twisting of scripture to back up their manditory schedule????
When the scripture says,,as we SEE the day approaching…- couldn’t that mean as we ANTICIPATE the coming of THE DAY of the Lord- or judgement day.???
And considering the audience- is it possible that recent Hebrew converts did not want o be found in company with Jesus disciples?
Now don’t get me wrong. I love to gather with my fellow Christians to worship, praise, sing praises, listen to preaching, and so on.
BTW- my current church’s preacher taught his sermon about masterbation ,fornication, adultery, porn homosexuality, and other sexual sins.
—but my point about Hebrews 10:25 does it really teach manditory attendance at Sunday worship? When this was taught to the early church- did they have the ability to keep this IF it was a commandment (every single Sunday)?
This is just a start, but before anyone responds I would suggest looking at this verse with ‘new’ eyes.
The book of Hebrews is obviously written to Jewish Christians in the first century. More importantly, it was written prior to 72 A.D., when the Romans would persecute Jews and Christians, and destroy Jerusalem. I believe this is the "day approaching" that the writer of Hebrews is talking about, not a future spiritual judgment day.
I would paraphrase it like this:
And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, and make sure you don't give up meeting together as believers in your local towns, as some are in the habit of doing. Instead, use every opportunity to encourage one another—and all the more as you see the coming persecution from the Romans approaching.
Read it in that light, and I think it will make much more sense:
Hebrews 10:24-26 – And let us consider how we may spur one another on toward love and good deeds, not giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
So Donna, you're exactly right that it has nothing to do with missing a gathering for your daughter's graduation or whatever.
Kevin- so the Day is not referring to the day of judgement??? But rather a day when Jerusalem would be destroyed? Interesting thought. Never heard that before, probably because if anyone had raised their hand to undo the current Stanton exegesis, they wouldn’t be called on in class again!
Yes, that's my opinion, and the opinion of a lot of people. In fact, many references in the NT to the coming "judgment day," if you look carefully, might be better interpreted as the coming "judgment" God was going to rain down upon Jerusalem at the hand of the Romans in response to their rejection of the Messiah. It makes a fascinating re-read of the NT to go back and read it with that in mind.
If God saw fit to rest on the 7th day of Creation, it seems pretty sensible, Donna, to think Christians would think the same way. While some of the reasons why missing worship are legitimate, meeting together for Sunday to worship God worked just fine for America, long before Alexander Campbell, Merie Weis, or Stanton came along. Have you experienced or are you familiar with Blue Laws, where no businesses were open on Sunday? We had a far greater moral nation now. But, for the love of money,the worship of God was forsaken, and look at the devastation that has made in America!!
Besides a sick or dying family member, what are some good reasons for missing Sunday worship? I can't think of too many valid ones. Matthew Henry's commentary essentially says meeting together is good,and forsaking it can lead to apostasy. He never heard of Stanton,and wrote over 3 centuries ago. https://www.christianity.com/bible/commentary.php?com=mh&b=58&c=10.
It's great that your preacher taught against masturbation, fornication, adultery, porn, and homosexuality, Donna. Highly unusual. Would estimate that fewer than 5% of churches in America have preachers bold enough to tell the truth on that.
Does your pastor teach against contraception?
http://www.thebabywarfilm.com/index.html
Monte, I really doubt your 5% estimate is anywhere near correct. I was raised assembly of God and all those topics were taught. Not as excessively as Stanton, but I think that is a good thing because Stanton and its followers do it so much my opinion is that the excessiveness can actually lead to those things, particularly in children /teens. When instead we spend more time on things like the beatitudes, we get a better result ("think on these things"). Garbage in/garbage out is the same when the message is not tempered. Temperance in so many areas is so lacking in Stanton. Also, I sometimes listen to the local Christian radio station with a different preacher by different churches, and I have heard these topics. I am curious if you have made a considerable effort to seek a place of worship outside of Stanton. And I do mean considerable.
The issue with Sunday worship shouldn't be a huge issue in this country where there are so many congregations anywhere you go. It's a big issue for Stanton because it goes back to their "one true church" teaching. It's that false teaching that their locations are the only ones in which you can worship God that is the major problem. Much of the issue is resolved if we just throw that idea out. And I don't think anyone should have to explain reasons for missing to anyone else. God knows your reasons and your conscience.
Most of your comment I agree with you, M Long, but, if you look at the state of America, that is a direct reflection of the church and it's leadership. Our sexual debauchery is directly due to a lack of leadership and discipline in the church. Listen to the radio and television preachers. They rarely talk about sexual sin, and even if they did, it would do little good, as the church needs relationships, which both Stanton and mega-churches have a hard time forming.
You are right, Stanton has done it excessively, and they neglect compassion, mercy, and forgiveness. In their mind, they can determine how far God's grace and mercy can go, and so they have cut off many pleading souls. I saw them tell one woman on medications, that she could no longer come to Bible class and could not be baptized, as they deemed her incapable of receiving salvation. Not sure all the details, but wow, just wow! Remember when Jesus said his word could not heal the sick, even those with devils? Yeah, neither do I.
Pharisees gonna Pharisee.
Yes, I've visited at least 30 churches in my area. It's hard to visit, because I'm tired of giving money to massive buildings and preachers salaries, when they aren't preaching the Bible. The more money they get, the more emboldened they become. Further, they look askance at you, if you come and give sparingly, or not at all. I prefer to come and ensure they are teaching the Bible, and to figure out where the money is going before I give them one penny of my money. I remember when I was making nearly $500k a year, and I wanted to give money to the church, but I would not because I knew it was probably being misused. I preferred to give it directly to those in need.
Also, there is a huge advantage to going someplace continuously, and not being a church hummingbird. The relationships that were formed in my first 18 years of attending church in Stanton were very healthy ones. Sadly, while we didn't know how to have deep and lasting relationships, as most of what we saw was artificial, we children did the best we could. Real relationships mean seeing the best and worst of a person, and loving them still. When humans don't form close godly relationships with others, they tragically often fall into perverse sins. Learned this from a friend who was recently arrested for some heinous sins involving children. Seeing a man at his best in his childhood, and at his worst in manhood is a very heart wrenching experience. But, our society, and Stanton, which isolates and encourages the pursuit of money and pleasure, at the expense of the pursuit of righteousness and Godliness, is particularly susceptible to the evils of hedonism. For if there is no hope in God, let us rise up and play is the general consensus, as the Jews said when Moses denied his return from Mt. Sinai, and they were worshiping a golden calf upon his return.
It matters little about the one location, what matters is 'Does the preacher live and teach the Gospel as it was taught in the First Century church', or even for that matter, the church in America just 250 years ago, back when little kids were schooled in memorizing Bible verses in school, as Tom Sawyer was:).
It's important not to compromise, but it's a serious business, as the school board meeting I'm attending on Wednesday will be addressing teaching 10 year olds about 'trigger warning' anal sex. I'm sorry to get graphic. But, when the little children of America are taught this perversion, it's time it's called out for the vile filth it is, and that's exactly what I intend to do. Stanton can't be bothered, as they think they are so much better than everyone else, that fighting for the children of their nation is beneath them. Well, their failure to fight for others children, will result in the ruthless indoctrination of their own children worsening. Stanton has the same elitist attitude the Jewish Christians once had. Paul had to correct Peter to his face, and to tell him that he needed to treat all equally. The Jewish Christians thought only Jews could be saved, and Stanton thinks only they and their children will be saved, and can't be bothered with the rest of the world. They knock on doors, but they expect to rejected, and when they are, as they fail to see sinners as God sees them, they think it's because Stanton is so much better than everyone else. This spiritual pride is one of the most dangerous sins of all.
Monte, sorry you are attending places that are asking for your money. Where we go there is a collection but there's no pressure. I do wonder if part of the issue of seeing so many liberal churches is that you're in California? Here in TX we seem to have more options and are still able to see sin being taught without the crazy persecution that might be more present in other states. Not always or everywhere, but there are large pockets of religious conservatives.
It's true about the preachers living and teaching the gospel. It is just as true to have elders who do the same.
I know that after leaving Stanton, I picked apart every church I visited using my list of hot button topics. I came to view these as "baggage."
Later, when doing home church with several close families, we would joke about leaving our baggage at the door. Meeting with a few close friends in our homes, and learning to "be" the church instead of "going" to church was very helpful in recognizing how much baggage we'd been carrying around that the scriptures never asked us to carry. It was kind of like detox from men's teachings. 🙂
Kevin, are you familiar with a brother of old Carl Ketcherside?
Searcher – Yes, his writings (after reforming his views from his sectarian days) were instrumental in helping me reexamine my legalistic view of fellowship and the scriptures. I have taken the time to reproduce his uncopyrighted books into PDF download form for easy reading.
http://www.harpertribe.com/files/ketcherside/
Searcher – one of my favorites is According to the Pattern.
He happens to have been from the small sect that my dad took me to when he was withdrawn from when I was 6 1/2. I never met him, and only heard negatives about him until, out of curiosity, I decided to look his writings up as a young adult.
Mind. Blown.
I had already started down the road he had traveled, and his work was so encouraging to me and to my wife. We were able to (thankfully) disengage with the sectarian mindset without dividing from our church family who didn't yet "get it."
One of the reasons this blog is here today is that Carl Ketcherside's words reproved me and shook me to the core. It's his writings that spurred me to do what I now call the clean Bible challenge. And it's not because I hang on his every word—I haven't read his works in years. He just pushed me back to Jesus, without the doctrines of men obscuring the message of the gospel.
Searcher, may I ask why you brought up Ketcherside?
Kevin, perhaps I shall answer with a question for you to define for me. What is legalistic teaching? I am only interested in Kevin's answer.
searcher – I've been trying to figure out the best way to explain that to people like me from legalistic backgrounds ever since I learned not to be a legalist.
The best short answer would be that legalistic teaching is teaching that expects performance according to an externally measurable set of rules in order to obtain God's favor. Grace, by contrast, is "unmerited" or unearned favor.
I've written more extensively on this subject here, but I confess that there would be no end of words if I were to try to accurately describe what it's like to live within an economy of grace. It is joy immeasurable, pressed down, overflowing.
https://www.stantonblog.com/2013/08/the-paradigm-shift-from-law-to-love.html
https://www.stantonblog.com/2013/09/reclaiming-doctrine-of-christ.html
https://www.stantonblog.com/2013/09/turning-tables-on-legalism.html
https://www.stantonblog.com/2013/08/the-paradigm-shift-from-law-to-love.html
I think this difficulty in putting it into words is why the writer of the old hymn said if the love of God were to be written with ink and quill, with the entire sky the scroll, there wouldn't be enough room to describe it.
You met with families to worship with and left your baggage outside and just loved one another. I have been trying to figure out what items were in the baggage?.
searcher – Teachings of men. All of them. I've been writing about them on this blog since the beginning, but a good place to start to get an idea are the links in the sidebar under the heading "The Book of Rules."
With Hebrews 10:25 consider the definition of FORSAKE.
Forsake: to reject, abandone altogether, renounce, to turn your back on.
Could this be a warning not to commit apostasy????
I personally think the writer is trying to pump up his people to stand the fiery trial that was coming. Basically, he's saying don't abandon meeting altogether, because that's how you will be able to encourage one another "as you see the day approaching." He's not saying don't miss a church service. That would have been ludicrously incongruent with his message, I think.
Wow! Thanks for that insight Kevin!
Donna, our preacher explained the word Forsake also to us. It means to TURN YOUR BACK ON. Christians were afraid of persecution at that time and were avoiding meeting altogether out of fear. If you FORSAKE something, it means something much more permanent than missing a day of it. Also seeing the other versions helps us to look at that scripture more clearly.
Once again, it's just another example of Stanton trying to control people. And they need to. If the few people they have start missing the occasional worship, they could have very low attendance. Instead of working in a positive way to grow their group, they scare and control the ones they have out of fear that their group won't survive.
M Long – Spot on.
Wow! Did you hear my brain exploding?? Love it! Thank you all for your insight, it now makes perfect sense!
It makes a real difference when we understand what is going on at the time that the writer was writing. Taking things in context make a huge difference!! Thanks again
Imagine a cold snowy day, and a little child in tattered clothing. The child is hungry, and is an orphan. Separated from it's parents, it has had a hard life in early 1800 London. If you read Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens you can learn more about this child.
Poor Oliver went to a poor house, where they commonly stuck orphans in those days. Once, when they had served their usual rations of gruel, Oliver, starving and desperate for more, asked for MORE! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbdNgbCOq_s
You know what happened if you read it, and if you haven't, reading Charles Dickens will give you some wonderful new friends in life. From David Copperfield, to Pip, to Mr. Micawber, to Scrooge, to Uriah Heep, to Bob Cratchit, to Dr. Manette, to Sidney Carton, to Jaggers, to Charles Darney, reading Dickens gives one an education on human nature that is quite profound. Since Dickens wrote from a Biblical perspective, unlike the vast majority of books, movies, television shows, and tech companies today, it's extremely insightful.
But, in a spiritual sense, doesn't this happen with Stanton?
Don't they see sinners in their sins, and don't they get thunderstruck with awe at a sinners temerity for asking for MORE!! Because Stanton doesn't offer all of salvation, they offer their version of it, which is incomplete and wanting. God promised freedom from sin and it's consequences, (not the consequences of harming other men via theft, murder, rape, etc), but Stanton offers freedom to obey the teachers, and to have your sins be used against you for the rest of your life.
So, a miserable sinner who was an alcoholic, was a prostitute, was a whoremonger, was a drug addict, was a liar, was a gossiper, was a fornicator, was unclean, was a homosexual, when they ask for MORE of the grace God freely promised from sin and it's slavery, will find themselves in very tortured territory in Stanton.
The Stanton Inquisition.
About 6 years ago or so, more or less, I met with the teachers of my church to review possibly returning. When I sat down, I was queried on what a Christian in the church said I was guilty of before I was even withdrawn from.
Now, the court systems of America are pretty bad, but they at least let the accused have their say. In Stanton, they don't even do that. I didn't even wait to hear what the sister, who I had always been rather fond of, had to say about me, I simply exploded why was I hearing this nearly five years after the fact, when I couldn't even respond to her in person as I was withdrawn from? I had never done anything wrong towards this sister at all, and was crestfallen to find that one that I held in such high esteem returned the favor by maligning me when I was incapable of responding.
This let me know, as I'm sure many others already know, that if you weren't guilty of anything, Stanton would make stuff up, and go to issues that happened long before your withdrawal, that no one even brought to your attention, to ensure you were 'taken care of'.
'Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime'. Stalin's chief of police, Beria. It was very discouraging to learn Stanton would not even allow a fair proceeding. You were simply guilty because someone accused you, and had no opportunity to confront your accuser.
Stanton believed they could do this, and get away with it. They believed their sins against the innocent would be hidden, and never come to the light of day. But, God has ensured that their deeds will find them out. While they ignore their sins against God's children, they sensationalize the sins committed against God alone.
They lack reason, and while God says to forgive 70 X 7, Stanton has a sin forgiveness threshold that does not exceed 10. Meanwhile, you'll notice the teachers furiously spend massive energy in hushing up and suppressing the sins of their own families, but have no problem publicizing the sins of other families. I'm not going to mention specifics, because I don't want to re-open old wounds, but there was one preacher who spoke often of another families adventures with law enforcement when there were things going on in his own home that would make any Christian blush with shame, as it was later revealed. This same preacher was instrumental in my withdrawal.
The Bible commanded to judge righteous judgement, not to favor the powerful, and not to oppress the weak. Stanton has a very difficult time with this, and so they are judged by God.
What sane human being would ever consent to be judged on 'transgressions', long after they happened, and when they can no longer defend themselves? No sane Christian that's for sure.
But, Stanton stubbornly insists you must answer for every charge against you, no matter how long ago, no matter if you can't defend yourself. As they are harsh and tyrannical with others, may God mirror to them how they treat others. It's one thing when you are dealing with a rebellious impenitent who scoffs at God's standards, another entirely when you are dealing with a penitent sinner who is simply seeking God's will, understanding they have flaws and faults. Stanton treats them all the same. Have to keep the church 'pure'.
Monte, they want you to sit there an take what they are accusing you of. If you do attempt to the set the record straight they will accuse you of "defending yourself" and/or "being standoffish". It was said by TC that if you try to get help for what is going on against you that you are "selfish". Another sister pointed out in a question that if there really is something wrong that others will speak up.
A lot of times there is no justice. You have to take what is being dished out and can't say anything in your defense. A long time ago an example was given how that another member was rebuked in class for something she didn't do. After class she was asked if she did those things and responded that she did not. It was taught that if this happens to you and you are truly innocent to just put it on the back shelf and apply it later. What isn't being realized is that when you paint a negative light on someone that it will steer some to see that person that way and especially in Tacoma you will be ignored. You will be in a type of withdrawl.
After while people won't include nor trust you. This was said by one of the preacher/teachers in Tacoma, in front of TC. Asking if people keep painting someone in a certain way will others start seeing them that way and it was basically ignored.
You are absolutely correct in that God is going to judge those who are hurting his people. Christians are God's people and how dare anyone purposely hurt any of them. Yet, this has been going on for decades and keeps getting squashed when brought up. How come this topic never gets discussed at March/May week? This was touched on at the ending for the 70's at a May Week concerning CT. Out of all of the May weeks, classes, talks, meetings, etc. I have never heard this topic except the exposure of DC. It seems that if it is one member, or members, it gets brought out, but never seen it as a topic of study that all may learn and keep it in the forefronts of our minds.
Remember, that what I do and/or don't do to another member it is done to one of God's people.
Yes, Lynn, that is quite true. Very hard to defend yourself. That's further evidence of 'pride'. We are to be 'umble', and to accept all charges against us, and to not dare dream of anything Stanton does that is wrong. For that is 'thoughtcrime'. Honestly, if you have thoughts pondering some of the unscriptural teachings of Stanton, that's worse in their book than lustful thoughts. If you commit fornication, or lie, steal, or whatever, there is hope in Stanton for you, as long as you don't disagree with the teacher. But, if you are Jesus Christ himself, and you disagree with the teacher, that's the end of the road for you. You have quenched the Spirit, and it will be a long and lonely road for you. I respect authority, and Hebrews 13 says to obey those who have the rule over you….IN THE LORD. Never told to blindly and unquestioningly obey orders from those who give two hoots about God's orders to them.
Yes. God will judge. In the meantime, I am happy in my lesson in contentment. I am alive, healthy, have a job, a roof over my head, food, and if I die tonight, my conscience is my friend. What more can I ask for? Cannot stop talking about this amazing book on contentment. https://www.amazon.com/Rare-Jewel-Christian-Contentment/dp/1494424797.
Also, need to be clear, that despite their departures from scriptures, which are quite rare, but substantial, Stanton has many things right. They have very powerful teachers. Despite my differences with them, there were some very powerful life lessons taught by the words and lives of GP, TC, MG. Booker T. Washington said that he would allow no man to belittle his soul by making him hate them, and for the sake of my own physical and mental health, I refuse to hate Stanton. As humans we have the choice of remembering the good or he bad of others. To hold fast to the former, and to be merciful with the latter is wise. While they may say much bad of us, and nothing good, yet by speaking well of them, and abstaining from disdain and contempt, ( a difficult task that I am still learning), we actually work to promote truth more then the most vicious diatribes.
Monte- Your recent posts are much more interesting and along the purpose this blog was intended for. Thank you!
Thank you Donna, and you're welcome.
In keeping with that, went to a bible study last night, and the church, which had about 15 members in attendance, down from 700 in the 1970's, in a beautiful building, was giving away books. Felt that was a wonderful gift, to remedy the entire evening class being for me on 'legalism'. LOL. Because I told a few members there what I say here. Some real gems. Among them, I picked up one book, along with the entire Little House Series, (all of which they gave me for free, Amazing!!, so blessed!) which contained the story of Jimmy Valentine – A retrieved reformation, by O'Henry. It beautifully illustrates how love can change a person's life. Laws didn't change Jimmy Valentine, love did. The love of God is more powerful than that of a woman, though the latter is among the most beautiful forms one can know on earth, and it's capacity to reform men and women is incomprehensible to mankind. That said, Jude truthfully said some save with love, some with fear.
I'll post it in it's entirety, and hope I can be pardoned, for taking up so much space. But it is so emotionally touching, as are many of O'Henry's tales, that I hope others are touched, as I was.
A Retrieved Reformation – by O. Henry
A guard came to the prison shoe-shop, where Jimmy Valentine was assiduously stitching uppers, and escorted him to the front office. There the warden handed Jimmy his pardon, which had been signed that morning by the governor. Jimmy took it in a tired kind of way. He had served nearly ten months of a four-year sentence. He had expected to stay only about three months, at the longest. When a man with as many friends on the outside as Jimmy Valentine had is received in the "stir" it is hardly worth while to cut his hair.
"Now, Valentine," said the warden, "you'll go out in the morning. Brace up, and make a man of yourself. You're not a bad fellow at heart. Stop cracking safes, and live straight."
"Me?" said Jimmy in surprise. "Why, I never cracked a safe in my life."
"Oh, no," laughed the warden. "Of course not. Let's see, now. How was it you happened to get sent up on that Springfield job? Was it because you wouldn't prove an alibi for fear of compromising somebody in extremely high-toned society? Or was it simply a case of a mean old jury that had it in for you? It's always one or the other with you innocent victims."
"Me?" said Jimmy, still blackly virtuous. "Why, warden, I never was in Springfield in my life!"
"Take him back, Cronin," smiled the warden, "and fix him up with out-going clothes. Unlock him at seven in the morning, and let him come to the bull-pen. Better think over my advice, Valentine."
At a quarter past seven on the next morning Jimmy stood in the warden's outer office. He had on a suit of the villainously fitting, readymade clothes and a pair of the stiff, squeaky shoes that the state furnishes to its discharged compulsory guests.
The clerk handed him a railroad ticket and the five-dollar bill with which the law expected him to rehabilitate himself into good citizenship and prosperity. The warden gave him a cigar, and shook hands. Valentine, 9762, was chronicled on the books "Pardoned by Governor," and Mr. James Valentine walked out into the sunshine.
Disregarding the song of the birds, the waving green trees, and the smell of the flowers, Jimmy headed straight for a restaurant. There he tasted the first sweet joys of liberty in the shapes of a broiled chicken and a bottle of white wine-followed by a cigar a grade better than the one the warden had given him. From there he proceeded leisurely to the depot. He tossed a quarter into the hat of a blind man sitting by the door, and boarded his train. Three hours set him down in a little town near the state line. He went to the café of one Mike Dolan and shook hands with Mike, who was alone behind the bar.
"Sorry we couldn't make it sooner, Jimmy, me boy," said Mike. "But we had that protest from Springfield to buck against, and the governor nearly balked. Feeling all right?"
"Fine," said Jimmy. "Got my key?"
He got his key and went upstairs, unlocking the door of a room at the rear. Everything was just as he had left it. There on the floor was still Ben Price's collar-button that had been torn from that eminent detective's shirt-band when they had overpowered Jimmy to arrest him.
Pulling out from the wall a folding-bed, Jimmy slid back a panel in the wall and dragged out a dust-covered suit-case. He opened this and gazed fondly at the finest set of burglar's tools in the East. It was a complete set, made of specially tempered steel, the latest designs in drills, punches, braces and bits, jimmies, clamps, and augers, with two or three novelties invented by Jimmy himself, in which he took pride. Over nine hundred dollars they had cost him to have made at-, a place where they make such things for the profession.
In half an hour Jimmy went downstairs and through the café. He was now dressed in tasteful and well-fitting clothes, and carried his dusted and cleaned suit-case in his hand.
"God anything on?" asked Mike Dolan, genially. "Me?" said Jimmy, in a puzzled tone. "I don't understand. I'm representing the New York Amalgamated Short Snap Biscuit Cracker and Frazzled Wheat Company."
This statement delighted Mike to such an extent that Jimmy had to take a seltzer-and-milk on the spot. He never touched "hard" drinks.
A week after the release of Valentine, 9762, there was a neat job of safe-burglary done in Richmond, Indiana, with no clue to the author. A scant eight hundred dollars was all that was secured. Two weeks after that a patented, improved, burglar-proof safe in Logansport was opened like a cheese to the tune of fifteen hundred dollars, currency; securities and silver untouched. That began to interest the rogue catchers. Then an old-fashioned bank-safe in Jefferson City became active and threw out of its crater an eruption of bank-notes amounting to five thousand dollars. The losses were now high enough to bring the matter up into Ben Price's class of work. By comparing notes, a remarkable similarity in the methods of the burglaries was noticed. Ben Price investigated the scenes of the robberies, and was heard to remark:
"That's Dandy Jim Valentine's autograph, He's resumed business. Look at that combination knob – jerked out as easy as pulling up a radish in wet weather. He's got the only clamps that can do it. And look how clean those tumblers were punched out! Jimmy never has to drill but one hole. Yes, I guess I want Mr. Valentine. He'll do his bit next time without any short-time or clemency foolishness."
Ben Price knew Jimmy's habits. He had learned them while working up the Springfield case. Long jumps, quick get-aways, no confederates, and a taste for good society – these ways had helped Mr. Valentine to become noted as a successful dodger of retribution. It was given out that Ben Price had taken up the trail of the elusive cracksman, and other people with burglar-proof safes felt more at ease.
One afternoon Jimmy Valentine and his suit-case climbed out of the mail-hack in Elmore, a little town five miles off the railroad down in the black-jack country of Arkansas. Jimmy, looking like an athletic young senior just home from college, went down the board sidewalk toward the hotel.
A young lady crossed the street, passed him at the corner and entered a door over which was the sign "The Elmore Bank." Jimmy Valentine looked into her eyes, forgot what he was, and became another man. She lowered her eyes and coloured slightly. Young men of Jimmy's style and looks were scarce in Elmore.
Jimmy collared a boy that was loafing on the steps of the bank as if he were one of the stock-holders, and began to ask him questions about the town, feeding him dimes at intervals. By and by the young lady came out, looking royally unconscious of the young man with the suit-case, and went her way.
"Isn't that young lady Miss Polly Simpson?" asked Jimmy, with specious guile.
"Naw," said the boy. "She's Annabel Adams. Her pa owns this bank. What'd you come to Elmore for? Is that a gold watch-chain? I'm going to get a bulldog. Got any more dimes?"
Jimmy went to the Planters' Hotel, registered as Ralph D. Spencer, and engaged a room. He leaned on the desk and declared his platform to the clerk. He said he had come to Elmore to look for a location to go into business. How was the shoe business, now, in the town? He had thought of the shoe business. Was there an opening?
The clerk was impressed by the clothes and manner of Jimmy. He, himself, was something of a pattern of fashion to the thinly gilded youth of Elmore, but he now perceived his shortcomings. While trying to figure out Jimmy's manner of tying his four-in-hand he cordially gave information.
Yes, there ought to be a good opening in the shoe line. There wasn't an exclusive shoe-store in the place. The dry-goods and general stores handled them. Business in all lines was fairly good. Hoped Mr. Spencer would decide to locate in Elmore. He would find it a pleasant town to live in, and the people very sociable.
Mr. Spencer thought he would stop over in the town a few days and look over the situation. No, the clerk needn't call the boy. He would carry up his suit-case himself; it was rather heavy.
Mr. Ralph Spencer, the phœnix that arose from Jimmy Valentine's ashes – ashes left by the flame of a sudden and alterative attack of love – remained in Elmore, and prospered. He opened a shoe-store and secured a good run of trade.
Socially he was also a success, and made many friends. And he accomplished the wish of his heart. He met Miss Annabel Adams, and became more and more captivated by her charms.
At the end of a year the situation of Mr. Ralph Spencer was this: he had won the respect of the community, his shoe-store was flourishing, and he and Annabel were engaged to be married in two weeks. Mr. Adams, the typical, plodding, country banker, approved of Spencer. Annabel's pride in him almost equaled her affection. He was as much at home in the family of Mr. Adams and that of Annabel's married sister as if he were already a member.
One day Jimmy sat down in his room and wrote this letter, which he mailed to the safe address of one of his old friends in St. Louis:
Dear Old Pal,-
I want you to be at Sullivan's place, in Little Rock, next Wednesday night, at nine o'clock. I want you to wind up some little matters for me. And, also, I want to make you a present of my kit of tools. I know you'll be glad to get them – you couldn't duplicate the lot for a thousand dollars. Say, Billy, I've quit the old business – a year ago. I've got a nice store. I'm making an honest living, and I'm going to marry the finest girl on earth two weeks from now. It's the only life, Billy – the straight one. I wouldn't touch a dollar of another man's money now for a million. After I get married I'm going to sell out and go West, where there won't be so much danger of having old scores brought up against me. I tell you, Billy, she's an angel. She believes in me; and I wouldn't do another crooked thing for the whole world. Be sure to be at Sully's, for I must see you. I'll bring along the tools with me.
Your old friend,
Jimmy.
On the Monday night after Jimmy wrote this letter, Ben Price jogged unobtrusively into Elmore in a livery buggy. He lounged about town in his quiet way until he found out what he wanted to know. From the drug-store across the street from Spencer's shoe-store he got a good look at Ralph D. Spencer.
"Going to marry the banker's daughter, are you, Jimmy?" said Ben to himself, softly. "Well, I don't know!"
The next morning Jimmy took breakfast at the Adamses. He was going to Little Rock that day to order his wedding-suit and buy something nice for Annabel. That would be the first time he had left town since he came to Elmore. It had been more than a year now since those last professional "jobs," and he thought he could safely venture out.
After breakfast quite a family party went down-town together – Mr. Adams, Annabel, Jimmy, and Annabel's married sister with her two little girls, aged five and nine. They came by the hotel where Jimmy still boarded, and he ran up to his room and brought along his suit-case. Then they went on to the bank. There stood Jimmy's horse and buggy and Dolph Gibson, who was going to drive him over to the railroad station.
All went inside the high, carved oak railings into the banking-room – Jimmy included, for Mr. Adam's future son-in-law was welcome anywhere. The clerks were pleased to be greeted by the good-looking, agreeable young man who was going to marry Miss Amabel. Jimmy set her suit-case down. Annabel, whose heart was bubbling with happiness and lively youth, put on Jimmy's hat, and picked up the suit-case. "Wouldn't I make a nice drummer?" said Annabel. "My! Ralph, how heavy it is? Feels like it was full of gold bricks."
"Lot of nickel-plated shoe-horns in there," said Jimmy coolly, "that I'm going to return. Thought I'd save express charges by taking them up. I'm getting awfully economical."
The Elmore Bank had just put in a new safe and vault. Mr. Adams was very proud of it, and insisted on an inspection by every one. The vault was a small one, but it had a new, patented door. It fastened with three solid steel bolts thrown simultaneously with a single handle, and had a time-lock. Mr. Adams beamingly explained its workings to Mr. Spencer, who showed a courteous but not too intelligent interest. The two children, May and Agatha, were delighted by the shinning metal and funny clock and knobs.
While they were thus engaged Ben Price sauntered in and leaned on his elbow, looking casually inside between the railings. He told the teller that he didn't want anything; he was just waiting for a man he knew.
Suddenly there was a scream or two from the women, and a commotion. Unperceived by the elders, May, the nine-year-old girl, in a spirit of play, had shut Agatha in the vault. She had then shot the bolts and turned the knob of the combination as she had seen Mr. Adams do.
The old banker sprang to the handle and tugged at it for a moment. "The door can't be opened," he groaned. "The clock hasn't been wound nor the combination set."
Agatha's mother screamed again, hysterically.
"Hush!" said Mr. Adams, raising his trembling hand. "All be quiet for a moment. Agatha!" he called as loudly as he could. "Listen to me." During the following silence they could just hear the faint sound of the child wildly shrieking in the dark vault in a panic of terror.
"My precious darling!" wailed the mother. "She will die of fright! Open the door! Oh, break it open! Can't you men do something?"
"There isn't a man nearer than Little Rock who can open that door," said Mr. Adams, in a shaky voice. "My God! Spencer, what shall we do? That child – she can't stand it long in there. There isn't enough air, and, besides, she'll go into convulsions from fright."
Agatha's mother, frantic now, beat the door of the vault with her hands. Somebody wildly suggested dynamite. Annabel turned to Jimmy, her large eyes full of anguish, but not yet despairing. To a woman nothing seems quite impossible to the powers of the man she worships.
"Can't you do something, Ralph – try, won't you?"
He looked at her with a queer, soft smile on his lips and in his keen eyes.
"Annabel," he said, "give me that rose you are wearing, will you?"
Hardly believing that she heard him aright, she unpinned the bud from the bosom of her dress, and placed it in his hand. Jimmy stuffed it into his vest-pocket, threw off his coat and pulled up his shirt-sleeves. With that act Ralph D. Spencer passed away and Jimmy Valentine took his place.
"Get away from the door, all of you," he commanded, shortly.
He set his suit-case on the table, and opened it out flat. From that time on he seemed to be unconscious of the presence of anyone else. He laid out the shining, queer implements swiftly and orderly, whistling softly to himself as he always did when at work. In a deep silence and immovable, the others watched him as if under a spell.
In a minute Jimmy's pet drill was biting smoothly into the steel door. In ten minutes – breaking his own burglarious record – he threw back the bolts and opened the door.
Agatha, almost collapsed, but safe, was gathered into her mother's arms.
Jimmy Valentine put on his coat, and walked outside the railings toward the front door. As he went he thought he heard a far-away voice that he once knew call "Ralph!" But he never hesitated.
At the door a big man stood somewhat in his way.
"Hello, Ben!" said Jimmy, still with his strange smile. "Got around at last, have you? Well, let's go. I don't know that it makes much difference, now."
And then Ben Price acted rather strangely.
"Guess you're mistaken, Mr. Spencer," he said. "Don't believe I recognize you. Your buggy's waiting for you, ain't it?"
And Ben Price turned and strolled down the street.
Monte – You'll be forgiven, but next time maybe post a link to long form prose, that way you don't push other conversations off the page and people can choose what to read. 😉
No problem, problem is too many are too lazy to click on a link.
Years ago, I regularly posted on Breitbart.
Commonly posted on the damaging effects of Islam. It got little attention. Finally, I posted the complete words of John Quincy Adams, our 6th President, on Islam, which was at least 8 paragraphs, in one comment. The response was overwhelming. It got far more reads and likes then simply posting a link. I don't care about likes and reads, but people understanding basic ideas on important issues is rather important. Further, since our schools did a horrible job of promoting literature, many Americans, including those in the churches, have little to no appreciation of good writing.
At times, on here, when I'm criticized for my writing, I remember Caesar, who asked his pirate captors to evaluate his poetry. When they responded it was garbage, LOL, he responded that they weren't bright enough to know good poetry. LOL.
He was probably right, because his writing on the Gallic Wars is a masterpiece that we still read to this day.
Monte- If one is too lazy to click on a link what makes you think such a lazy person would read your lengthy posts? Above, you stated you once posted 8 paragraphs in one post on another blog. Yesterday you posted FIFTY-SEVEN paragraphs in SIX consecutive posts and pushed all other recent comments off of the page.
Anon 11:44AM..Agreed..I haven't been on in a couple of weeks & hopped on today..scroll after scroll is one commenter. I guess if it was something interesting I'd enjoy the read..wouldn't call it being lazy it's just too much & seems to steer away from the topic on the blog etc. Will probably catch hell for commenting & will be another 13 paragraphs for you. Apologizing in advance lol
AnonymousApril 2, 2019 at 11:44 AM
AnonymousApril 2, 2019 at 1:15 PM
Since the Marxists have been deliberately subverting basic reading and math skills in the public schools, your apathy is understandable.
The average person is too dull to appreciate intellectual splendor. A pity.
They also get indignant at being put out, and exposed to ideas that the lamestream media, Hollyweird, hellivision, Google, or their similarly indoctrinated friends and family didn't introduce them to first.
If you can't appreciate fine literate, that's a personal issue you need to work on.
The nerve! 100 years ago we put a dunce cap on your types' heads, and laughed at you. Now, there are too many of you, you are the majority, and you actually try to intimidate those who do value the pursuit of the intellect.
The intellect and the spiritual are very closely related. The strategy Proverbs advises is not to comment on matters without understanding them.
May you both profit from Solomon's wisdom, and may it cure you both of your folly.
Then we have to hear the sermons about 'off topic'. LOL, just because you don't understand the relevance doesn't mean it isn't relevant. It's astonishing!!!
Were you both trying out to be the hyenas from 'The Lion King'? You are doing a pretty good imitation.
Normally, reproving the foolish invites the scorners and scoffers.
Then, this will lead to a commotion, the tattletales will run to Kevin, and I'll be lectured that I need to 'stay on topic'.
Or, someone will come on with one sentence driblets to harass and harry ideas they don't like, in guerilla hit and run tactics. Though these types are truly the ones destroying the purpose of the site, the usual scolds are strangely silent about this, experiencing schadenfreude.
Monte – your last tirade was utterly uncalled for. I was simply reiterating what Kevin had pointed out; that the number of posts were unnecessary when you could have used a link for those interested in reading the story you referenced. Nowhere in my comment did I say I wouldn't be interested in reading an O'Henry story, I simply stated that, because of your numerous posts, the previous comments from other people disappeared; and Kevin said the same thing.
I hope someday you realize how unkind you are when you get into attack/defense mode. Your personal attacks are extremely disturbing and they are downright mean. You accused me of being apathetic, nonintellectual, unappreciative of fine literature, foolish, a hyena from 'The Lion King' all because I encouraged you to leave some space on the page for other comments by posting a link instead of numerous posts.
You sir are a true hypocrite.
Goes straight to name calling & assumptions while having not having a clue who I am or knowing me personally.
I just simply do not care to read what you post. It does not interest me the way it intrest you. It doesn't make you any better than anyone on this blog. Not everyone shares the same interest believe it or not. That doesn't result in your constant negative judgments. Not one other commenter on this blog results to name calling, assumptions or bashing. Seems many can agree to disagree and move on to the next topic.
AnonymousApril 2, 2019 at 5:09 PM
I read the aforementioned Carl Ketcherside, and he mentioned 3 instances of note. First, a church read that the First Century Church broke bread in the 'Upper Room'. So, they made a two story building, and made sure to always take the Lord Supper in the Upper Room. Shhhh, don't tell Stanton about that, or the next May Trip will be on how all churches need to have a second floor.
In the second, a devout sister read that the Lord was baptized in the River Jordan. The habit of the church was to always baptize in the river, and so when they discussed building a baptistry, she was adamant she would leave, for if the Lord was baptized in the river, so must everyone else be.
The third was when a preacher was set to preach and announced he would be preaching after the Lord's Supper. So, he was rather amazed, when the Lord's supper had been served, the congregation began singing a hymn and all marched out. Thinking he misunderstood, he hurriedly got his hat and went out, only to meet them all coming back in, for they had read, 'when they had sung a hymn, they went out.' The preacher didn't have the nerve to tell them that they went out to the Mount of Olives.
All of these are instances of straining at gnats and following patterns. People do it on here too. 'Too long', 'off topic', 'not relevant or pertinent'. Yet, in nearly all cases, it is a failure of understanding on the part of the reader, and not a case of error on the part of the writer.
No one is forcing you to read and respond, yet you do. You feel it is your bounden duty to express your displeasure with what you don't like. Well, you aren't alone. People rarely like hearing the truth about anything, and when most recognize an unpleasant truth, the sincere openly object, but the subtle wait for an opportunity to vent their spleen. This is what most of the objections to me are, make no mistake. It's childish, petty, immature, juvenile, and yet its been going on for 5 years, and I fully expect it to continue until I die. Part of life. 'No man is hated more than he who tells the truth', as Plato truthfully said. 'The only people who hate you for telling the truth are those who are living a lie'.
Facts don't care about feelings. As for comments, the top 3 posts are virtually the only ones getting comments, so it's fairly simple to find the comments without using the recent comment lister on the right side of the page.
It's rather exhausting to be constantly nitpicked to death by those who have arbitrary standards and whose sole disagreement is to be able to express their displeasure.
AnonymousApril 2, 2019 at 5:42 PM
Your words tell the world who you are. I've never lied about anyone on here, though the same can't be said of others on here.
If you don't care to read what I post, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to read it and respond to it, but yet, we see you doing it anyway.
We normally have emotional outbursts when those who have inflated opinions and feel that their feelings ought to be worshiped, a common malady in Stanton and the Democrat party, are opposed. And thus the last two volcanic explosions.
Once again your assumption after assumption.
Empty words.
Unless you personally know who is commenting then you are doing nothing but judging.
Agree to disagree & move on.
Praying immensely for you.
Matthew 12:36 says we are known and judged by our words.
To those who study human nature, it is simple to reason to what kind of life a person leads based on their words.
It is astonishing you claim others do not know you, yet you voice your opinions and seem not to grasp their meaning. Further, you comment anonymously, and are shocked to learn that even without others ever having met you, it is not hard to understand the intentions of the human heart, as it hasn’t changed in thousands of years. The problem is, our schools and media no longer study the human nature, which is corrupt since childhood, and so, rarely will you find any so indignant as those who do not study themselves, but have their nature publicly pointed out. This is what causes liberal snowflakes to erupt every day.
As a result, they often scorn at, scoff at, and dismiss information they don’t like, however true it may be.
God doesn’t hear the prayers of the grumpy and unforgiving.
Kevin and M Long. I agree as I never understood how Merie’s cult would use this scripture for missing a worship. This is for people who “fall away” from worshipping God. You don’t abandon God because you miss a worship for a reason that goes against the cults rules and opinions. Nor are you turning your back on God when you know where your heart, soul and mind is to be worshipping the next Sunday. M Long great points as I heard their reasoning missing because of vacation or whatever. What if everyone did that on a certain Sunday. Well people there are Christian churches probably in almost anywhere you want to vacation at. Problem solved.
Craig – Yes, there are Christian churches in every town, but they're not all "Stanton authorized service centers." Lol
I heard it being used as an example of in another congregation where a brother had broken his leg and was really in pain to where he wasn't going to come to class one evening and what their direction of thought in their understanding of that verse is that you can't miss anything due to any infirmity. A certain member coxed that brother to "push his flesh" so that he isn't missing the class.
With their understanding of not missing classes, meetings, or worship is that it is up the one having problems to push past themselves as if it is wrong if they don't, yet this is really a mask for members of the the congregation not pushing themselves to attend another Christian in time of need.
So, this goes beyond just teaching you can't miss. It completely unravels God's plan of how he wanted it done.
I've wondered if God has planned for some of the members to be in the need of a little extra attention in the form sharing classes, visitations, even just checking up on to see if anybody in the congregation is even going to do it as Matt 25 clearly points out.
I heard that an elderly woman in the Tacoma congregation, who was having trouble making it to everything, eventually quit going because eventually she was, for lack of better words, hounded to push to make it. Works just like oppression.
It's interesting because around that time CS (preacher from the south) taught that we get credit for doing something even though we couldn't do it. Like how Abraham was ready to sacrifice his son and got credit even though God stopped him. I.e. if I was ready to got to class/worship and I or my child got sick to where we couldn't. Even though we didn't we were willing to. Yet, the opposite is taught to push or be deemed in the wrong. So controversial.
I struggle with my faith. I struggle to know what is real..what I believe..if I even believe..am I the only one?
I too struggle. And in that struggling, I believe the truth will eventually emerge. I have struggled for a while, and as a result, have gained a modicum of humility before God, and have learned to embrace all of our common humanity. "The know it all's"…i.e "SCOC", will never see God because they act as if they know all things as God.
Being brainwashed for so many years & seeing family still so brainwashed…it is a big struggle. I wonder about this "God" they worship. I question myself often & have yet to find the answers. I guess time will prevail..or maybe it won't. I do enjoy the majority of this blog..others not so much..it's taking a step back for me. Glad to see I am not alone with my struggle..
TBH: What you are feeling is completely normal for people affected by Stanton. Even for people who are not, frankly; but especially those from an authoritarian culture like Stanton's.
Start slow, understand the fruits of the spirit first. Understand that God is a God of love, grace, compassion, and forgiveness. That's the entire reason Jesus came to earth to live as a human, so it couldn't be said that God didn't feel what we feel. The creator became his creation and gave an example of sacrificial love for us to follow. We are here to follow a person (Jesus), not a sect that claims to speak for him.
THAT is what it means to be a believer, not following all the manmade rules and regulations imposed by Stanton or any other church. Forget everything you think you know about Christianity, and just start fresh learning about what it means to follow Jesus with all your heart, soul, and mind.
Hang in there, and keep reading. Feel free to call or email me if you'd like.
God bless.
Kevin yes their God is nothing of the love & grace you speak of. It's constant fear. But at some point in my life I just stopped listening. Maybe I stopped believing. I don't know. Still trying to figure that part out. I know I'm turned off by any organized religion..maybe religion in general..it's almost like you have to find yourself & who you are on your own. Thank you for your kind words!
Personally, I've learned it's only really safe to take my fears and doubts to God. Man has a nasty habit of using these against you if you tell them. Admit your faults, your sins, your doubts, your struggles, and man in power, who loves power alone, and doesn't understand that power is to serve others with, will use these as levers to manipulate those below with.
You see this same propensity in the greatest men in the Bible. Do you ever see Moses, Abraham, David, or Jacob running to other men with their fears, doubts, and struggles? I certainly don't. I do see them going to God constantly with them, and it's recorded now for all of humanity. Can you imagine David going to other great men in his Kingdom for advice? Joab, Ahithophel, Abishai, his Son Absalom? All of these men were against David or his will at some time of their lives. Yet, they were some of the most Godly and powerful men in David's kingdom. Even with Nathan, David didn't go running to him. He accepted correction when he got it. Moses accepted correction from his father-in-law Jethro, as well, but he didn't go and seek it from Jethro. Seek and ye shall find, is a promise from God, but seeking from man rarely yields good answers.
Lives by great men all remind us,
We can make our lives sublime,
And departing leave behind us,
Footsteps on the sands of time.
Longfellow
I struggle as well, however, I am not dismayed, and I do not despair, at least not to others. For, what sense does it make to tell others of problems, when only God holds the answers? Hard lesson I am blessed to have been taught by Stanton.
Also, if others don't love God enough to deny themselves pleasures of this life so they can judge better, for instance avoiding alcohol, then why should I open up to a person like that? They are too selfish. They can't be trusted.
The greatest leaders are those who direct people not to themselves, but to God, and the truths of history and the Bible. A great leader aims to make people self reliant, and reliant upon God alone. A mediocre leader seeks to make people reliant upon them.
TBH, I too have been pretty turned off by "organized religion," which is why my family spent a couple of years "detoxing" or "decompressing" in a home church with several close families.
And I don't think we can really "find ourselves" before finding God. This process is not about religion or church rules, but about recognizing who you are—that you are a child of God, created and loved by Him as a father loves his kids. It can take many years to shed that old mindset that God is all about putting obstacles in our way to overcome, like he's an authoritarian tyrant who is out to make our lives miserable, or something. That's not at all it.
I'm a father to 7 kids and dozens of foster kids. I try to show a lot of grace to them. But sometimes I have to be pretty firm, for their own good. I think the analogies to parenthood are helpful.
I love them all, and would lay down my life for them. But I also have boundaries that if I'm going to be an actual parent, I can't just say, "hey whatever you want to do, have at it."
Love drives everything for me as a parent, and sometimes that leads me to show a ton of grace, and sometimes that leads me to crack down and say "no way is that going to happen."
And I'll just throw it out there that it's a lot easier to say the latter, if you've made a habit of doing the former. This is what parenting is all about.
Maybe that makes more sense than Stanton's one-sided view of God as rulemaker.
Jeremiah 17:9 King James Version (KJV)
9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
AnonymousApril 3, 2019 at 11:41 AM
The Stanton nonmember class is normally on Thursday. You are a day early.
The heart desperately is deceitful above all things, however, using this scripture to say the teacher is always right, and no scriptural truth can come anywhere but from the teacher is flawed.
Anon 11:41 curious to know whats your purpose for posting that scripture?
@ Anonymous April 3, 2019 at 11:41 AM
If you are going to quote a scripture, might I suggest that maybe you add the full context of what the scripture is trying to say, or what your point is so people can understand what you are trying to say so there can be meaningful discussion.
Also the scripture you quoted asked the question "who can know it?" and the answer is in the VERY NEXT VERSE after it. God searches and knows the hearts of men, and if we live our lives following his commandments we will be accepted of him. Not seeking the approval and honor of men (in this case "teachers" of the SCOC), or living by the commandments of men not found in the bible, like in the SCOC.
ToBeHonest: I see you deleted some posts, and that's fine. Just know that when you do that, the replies also disappear.
I'll respond here in case you check back on this thread.
I, too, have an aversion to "organized religion." This is why I "detoxed" or "decompressed" by home churching with several families for a couple of years. That helped free me from the shackles of men's opinions.
And my suggestion is that the best way to find ourselves is to find our meaning and place in this world. And IMO, we can only do that by understanding that we're children of God, and loved by him.
There's a reason God is spoken of in the Bible as a father. I'm a father; I love my kids and would lay down my life for them. I show a lot of grace (especially in the teen years—you feel me?), but sometimes I also have to get firm and say "no, that's not happening, not in my house." That's my prerogative as a father who cares about the future of his kids.
So I think that's a better view of God than the "rulemaker" God that Stanton likes to portray.
Hope this helps.
@ Kevin, I still see TBH's recent posts and the replies. I might be wrong and may have missed something since I haven't been following all the comments recently. Maybe you just have to click the "load more" button at the bottom if you're on desktop since there's over 200 comments in this thread already and they don't all load at the same time (which is one of the reasons why I'm glad you're updating from blogger). If not then disregard this.
Kevin If I deleted it was by accident..not even sure I know how to delete it lol.
I have visited several other churches around..I guess I haven't connected in a way to make me go back. I long for that connection in a way. I don't feel I need to go to church 7 days a week but I'd like to be able to connect with what is being taught if that makes since…
I have struggled for many years trying to find a meaning or my place in this world. My family has made me feel like I am no value to them because their "church family" is all the family they need. I struggle with depression & then I find myself questioning this God often & wonder why I "have been dealt these cards" in life per say. I don't know…guess I will keep searching.
TBH, I've had similar thoughts, and this book, written 300 years ago, which I've spoken about often, as I am very enthusiastic about it, has some amazing insight into contentment and our purpose.
https://banneroftruth.org/us/store/christian-living/the-rare-jewel-of-christian-contentment/
There are definitely comments that exist that I can't find, sometimes. Usually when I click on a comment, it takes me directly to it. But sometimes, it just leaves me at the top of the page, no matter which browser, which device, or if I've cleared browser cache.
Which is why I just need to finish migrating everything over. I'll stop commenting and keep working. Hopefully by Friday. 🙂
Thanks for everyone's patience!
Kevin – I have noticed that when I click a comment and it just leaves me at the top of the page it's because I need to load more comments, and often have to load more comments after the first load or the second load.
the load more hides below the reply box in small red letters; above the "Your respectful comments are welcome! etc…
Haha found it, after all these years. What poor design! Lol
Advocate for Change: It's because of Monte's long long long comments. He is loading us down.
Here comes 11 more!!!
And sometimes there's ALOT of "load more" pages.. More than one time on some
That's what happens when I take a year and a half break…sorry about that! 😀
Making progress on the new site!
Anon 11:41 Jeremiah 17:9. I’d like to hear yours or others understanding of this scripture and what is meant by the heart. Jeremiah is addressing the sins of Judah and where does the basis of sins come from is our heart. Mark 7:21-23 within from the heart comes sin. I define heart as my understanding, my thoughts which all begins in the mind. Thoughts anyone? Am I correct? Gods word is straight forward not to lean upon my own understanding as I look at if it’s contrary to God then is it deceitful and desperately wicked. Or does it just need to be changed even a little to be on the same page as God whose thoughts and ways surpasses mine always. Merie’s cult uses this scripture mostly in nonmember class to I believe intimidate the nonmember to believe your thinking is way off. You need God and the only way you can have God is to be baptized into the cult. Just some thoughts. Please correct me if I’m missing something.
I tend to think that by "heart" the scriptures usually mean our emotions–what we "feel."
While our thinking is more rational, what we feel is more emotional. Our emotions often lead us astray, but our head should bring us back to what's right.
Your article helped me a lot, is there any more related content? Thanks!