Why Two Opposites In This Forum?

[psalms 91]

I have wondered for awhile now why we have WOF and non WOF, I( know of no other faith group that has that. There is no Baptist and non Baptist, so does this mean we had better tighten the definitions for this area?

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I have wondered for awhile now why we have WOF and non WOF, I( know of no other faith group that has that. There is no Baptist and non Baptist, so does this mean we had better tighten the definitions for this area?

WoF and Non-Wof are not opposites.
One is a positive forum for those who believe in WoF to discuss their beliefs in safe place. There is no logical "opposite" to this.

Non-WoF is a forum specifically created to be a safe place slam WoF and WoFers, A place where nobody can question, respond, or even defend themselves. There are no rules there to protect WoFers. To the contrary, those making up stories and lies about WoFers are protected from any scrutiny. They cannot be questioned regarding anything they say, even when the things they say are blatant lies. They do not have to offer proof or expanation. If you want to say WoFer are all rapists and child abusers you can... without explanation or query. It is the only place in CF that is set up this way. It's title tells you exactly what it is. It is non-WoF.
So you are correct. There is no other place like non-baptist or non-catholic or non-pentecostal. Not only is the non-wof forum it a safe place to gossip and tell stories about fellow Christians, but chances are this thread will be shut down and we may be reported for even discussing the issue. Not only are we at risk of being reported, but we may receive infractions for even mentioning the name of that forum.
It is truely an amazing thing to exist on a "Christian" forum.

 

[CindyisHis]

WoF and Non-Wof are not opposites.
One is a positive forum for those who believe in WoF to discuss their beliefs in safe place. There is no logical "opposite" to this.

Non-WoF is a forum specifically created to be a safe place slam WoF and WoFers, A place where nobody can question, respond, or even defend themselves. There are no rules there to protect WoFers. To the contrary, those making up stories and lies about WoFers are protected from any scrutiny. They cannot be questioned regarding anything they say, even when the things they say are blatant lies. They do not have to offer proof or expanation. If you want to say WoFer are all rapists and child abusers you can... without explanation or query. It is the only place in CF that is set up this way. It's title tells you exactly what it is. It is non-WoF.
So you are correct. There is no other place like non-baptist or non-catholic or non-pentecostal. Not only is the non-wof forum it a safe place to gossip and tell stories about fellow Christians, but chances are this thread will be shut down and we may be reported for even discussing the issue. Not only are we at risk of being reported, but we may receive infractions for even mentioning the name of that forum.
It is truely an amazing thing to exist on a "Christian" forum.

Well put.

You would think that would tell somebody something - that there is no other "Non" anything.

 

[disciple-ofjesus]

One would think ey? I agree.

 

[meh]

Actually, I'd like this thread to go for awhile. If everyone could please comment without flaming others...please discuss what you'd actually like from SP-C. We've talked with others before about splitting the place up, having WoF be it's own congregation, etc. I'd actually like to know what the majority want.

 

[CindyisHis]

Actually, I'd like this thread to go for awhile. If everyone could please comment without flaming others...please discuss what you'd actually like from SP-C. We've talked with others before about splitting the place up, having WoF be it's own congregation, etc. I'd actually like to know what the majority want.

I'm glad you're watching. I was hoping someone would take note and that this would actually prove to be productive.

 

[JimfromOhio]

Actually we are talking two types of Spirit-filled Charismatics. One group is WOF and Pentecostals and group is non-WOF/Non=Pentecostals.

There is a WOF focus groupl
There is a Pentecostal focus group.
There is a non-WOF focus group
Finally spirit-filled Charismatics that WE ALL post together and we are very diversed group.

Examples:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7419328-15/

Thoughts on Charismatics vs. non-Charismatics

 

[JimfromOhio]

WoF and Non-Wof are not opposites.
One is a positive forum for those who believe in WoF to discuss their beliefs in safe place. There is no logical "opposite" to this.

Non-WoF is a forum specifically created to be a safe place slam WoF and WoFers, A place where nobody can question, respond, or even defend themselves. There are no rules there to protect WoFers. To the contrary, those making up stories and lies about WoFers are protected from any scrutiny. They cannot be questioned regarding anything they say, even when the things they say are blatant lies. They do not have to offer proof or expanation. If you want to say WoFer are all rapists and child abusers you can... without explanation or query. It is the only place in CF that is set up this way. It's title tells you exactly what it is. It is non-WoF.
So you are correct. There is no other place like non-baptist or non-catholic or non-pentecostal. Not only is the non-wof forum it a safe place to gossip and tell stories about fellow Christians, but chances are this thread will be shut down and we may be reported for even discussing the issue. Not only are we at risk of being reported, but we may receive infractions for even mentioning the name of that forum.
It is truely an amazing thing to exist on a "Christian" forum.

Flaming?

 

[JimfromOhio]

Actually, I'd like this thread to go for awhile. If everyone could please comment without flaming others...please discuss what you'd actually like from SP-C. We've talked with others before about splitting the place up, having WoF be it's own congregation, etc. I'd actually like to know what the majority want.

I will as long as others play fair.

 

[JimfromOhio]

There was Baptist and Anabaptist in one forum until CF administration separated them to individual groups. Even though they are similar in many areas but divided big time a several issues.

 

[JimfromOhio]

I forgot, there is another group that is similar. Charismatic Catholic Renewal

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Actually, I'd like this thread to go for awhile. If everyone could please comment without flaming others...please discuss what you'd actually like from SP-C. We've talked with others before about splitting the place up, having WoF be it's own congregation, etc. I'd actually like to know what the majority want.

Thank you meh.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Flaming?

See what I mean?

 

[JimfromOhio]

Well put.

You would think that would tell somebody something - that there is no other "Non" anything.

There is a huge difference between WOF and Non-WOF. Word of Faith is a teaching movement kindred to many Pentecostal churches and individuals around the world. Most Christian movements share common beliefs in the major aspects of the Christian faith, while differing in many secondary doctrines, especially in key areas such as they focuses on works in terms of “faith” towards health, wealth and prosperity. I don’t view these as the essentials of Christian life and practice.

 

[JimfromOhio]

See what I mean?

Do you have to say those words especially they were never said?

 

[Simon Peter]

I have wondered for awhile now why we have WOF and non WOF, I( know of no other faith group that has that. There is no Baptist and non Baptist, so does this mean we had better tighten the definitions for this area?

Would you outlaw the label 'Protestant' at CF?

Because Protestants got their name from PROTESTING Catholicism. They are PROTESTants, labeled for their direct opposition to the Catholic Church and what it stands for.

Now the name is 'non-WoF', it's not 'ANTI-WoF', not 'PROTESTING-WoF', it's merely not WoF. Charismatic, but not WoF.

I don't really believe that people who protest the name 'non-WoF' are genuinely offended by the name (unless they buy into a type of religious 'political correctness'). I think their real concern is that the name openly communicates that there's another way.

Thankfully, we have the freedom of self-determination; it's right up there next to freedom of speech.


peace,
Simon

 

[JimfromOhio]

Actually, I'd like this thread to go for awhile. If everyone could please comment without flaming others...please discuss what you'd actually like from SP-C. We've talked with others before about splitting the place up, having WoF be it's own congregation, etc. I'd actually like to know what the majority want.

I would like to take a look at http://www.christianforums.com/f400/Charismatic - Non-Word of Faith. I don't think Pentecostals should be part of this Charismatic section. Looking from "movement" perspectives, we have to remember, in this world, movement doctrines make movement believers. From my perspective, we Charismatics are spirit-filled but not in the same definition as Pentecostal/WOF's perspective.

I believe many of us Charismatics look at this way:
If a Christian is not spirit-filled, then that Christian do not have the spirit that will take him/her into heaven for eternal life. Spirit-filled is not about spiritual-gifts but rather eternal gift. "If Christ is in us, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness" (Romans 8:10). The word in the Greek is charis and it basically means a favor bestowed, it means a generous gift given and this Greek word used 155 times in the New Testament. God applies to us everything we need,to save us, to keep us, to enable us, to deliver us, to sanctify us, to glorify us. We were saved by grace, (Ephesians 2) through faith, but it is God's grace that just initiates there and sustains all the way, every benefit in life, every benefit in eternity is by God's grace. emphasize that the purpose of spiritual gifts is to build up the church and enrich worship of God, not to gratify the individual such as speaking in tongues as evidence.

I will stop here and I will post more later.

 

[JimfromOhio]

Would you outlaw the label 'Protestant' at CF?

Because Protestants got their name from PROTESTING Catholicism. They are PROTESTants, labeled for their direct opposition to the Catholic Church and what it stands for.

Now the name is 'non-WoF', it's not 'ANTI-WoF', not 'PROTESTING-WoF', it's merely not WoF. Charismatic, but not WoF.

I don't really believe that people who protest the name 'non-WoF' are genuinely offended by the name (unless they buy into a type of religious 'political correctness'). I think their real concern is that the name openly communicates that there's another way.

Thankfully, we have the freedom of self-determination; it's right up there next to freedom of speech.


peace,
Simon

That's a good perspective. This reminds me of Martin Luther. Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses that explained the Catholic doctrine of justification is precisely what Paul condemned as "a different gospel." I agree with Martin Luther when he spoke out that Roman Catholic Church was that they have a different gospel. One of the biggest issue was: Justification was the doctrine that sparked the Reformation. Catholic theology had neglected the subject for centuries. One thing I have learned over the years relating to the "doctrine of salvation". No doctrine is more important to evangelical theology than the doctrine of justification by faith alone—the Reformation principle of sola fide. Martin Luther was used by God to develop, what theologians call "soteriology" the doctrine of salvation. He was a "soteriologist" and the truth of the matter is that the Reformation was a soeteriological reformation, that never touched the field of ecclesiology (the doctrine of the Church).

 

[nephilimiyr]

Do you have to say those words especially they were never said?

Um, Jim, of course you said that, Did's quoted you basically accusing him of flaming. If you don't want him to respond to your accusation then don't accuse him in public.

 

[Faulty]

Um, Jim, of course you said that, Did's quoted you basically accusing him of flaming. If you don't want him to respond to your accusation then don't accuse him in public.

I'm guessing he was asking why dids felt justified in using these words, to classify fellow believers

"If you want to say WoFer are all rapists and child abusers you can... without explanation or query."

As if those of us here who are non-WOF ever made such a remark. It's actually quite uncalled for and rather insulting.