Why Two Opposites In This Forum?

[pdudgeon]

This is extremely biased, P. Not all Charismatics are WOF or Post-Charismatic and from your proposed “rules” Pentecostals would be eliminated altogether. In fact, when you think about it, WOF as Post-Pentecostal and may be Post-Charismatic themselves, depending on one’s view.

~Jim

Remember the weekday and keep it holy.​

you've missed the boat somewhere, Jim.
Pentecostals already have their own forum separate from ours, have had for quite a long time now, and are no longer part of the SF/C forums.

ps. here's their new address: http://www.christianforums.com/f420/

 

[Simon Peter]

This is my post and I'm rather proud of it.

It's not an anti-WOF posting in itself, but rather a very accurate description of my WOF-experience. I consider those 10+ years to be a complete waste of my life and will be a regret I will most likely take to my grave.

It's personal about me and WOF only. It has nothing to do with you or any other WOFer. It's my experience alone and I still mean every word of it.

I for one, am grateful for your testimony; and not only that, I am also grateful that we have the 'freedom of speech' that allows you to share as you see fit. You didn't break any rules, you didn't flame, slander or berate anyone; you merely shared your personal experience.


peace,
Simon

 

[JimfromOhio]

You don't have to hunt for divisive people. They'll make themselves known fast.

But if you want to divide the forum, I suppose that's one option.

Almost everyone here is very divisive people depending on the doctrines.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

So in other words you cant actually provide any threads where you specifically have been slammed, or where WoF beliefs have been trashed

As for the user title, I figured if I was going to be continually accused of being anti WoF, I should start living out that stereotype

I actually spent a little time just browsing.
I found a couple dozen in the first few pages. Finally it was so sad and disturbing to rehash these things that I decided not to post them. They liken us to satanism, cults, heretics, false prophets, false teachers, and "spiritual abusers" just to name a few. At other times we have been compared to Jim Jones, David Koresh, that heavens gate guy, and many others of disrepute. Virtually everyone over there claims to be ex-wof. It is amazing. Some of them for decades. But I have yet to find a one that actually knows what WoF believes. Much like an ex-catholic not knowing who Mary was. One guy ended up pushing a book. Several are confessed heresy hunters and proud of it.
All this from people who with the same breath claim to be loving and "more spiritual than thou." They claim to have "escaped" the excesses of "charismania" and "wolfers" but I am not sure what they have escaped to.
And WoF is not the only victim here. Charismatics and Pentecostals get slammed also.
Many posts and threads have been "cleaned up" now that someone is looking, so what I found is cleaned up version...

Any friends who would like to review this short list feel free to pm.

That list expanded to 77 before I it just became moot to have to find more.
It is anti-wof regardless of how much you may deny it.

 

[pdudgeon]

We could actually create 4 forums:


*Spirit Filled (where all SF believers can discuss, debate...)

* Pentecostal
* Word of Faith
* Charismatic

But the three branches would not be able to post on, or police the other congregations.


peace,
Simon

entirely possible to create 4 forums as suggested. but you will most assuredly need to update the standard existing definition of what beliefs/practices define each group.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I for one, am grateful for your testimony; and not only that, I am also grateful that we have the 'freedom of speech' that allows you to share as you see fit. You didn't break any rules, you didn't flame, slander or berate anyone; you merely shared your personal experience.


peace,
Simon

LOL....
Yes... and all my references regarding the non forum are merely my "personal experiences" also.

 

[probinson]

Lol, this post was from about 2 and a half years ago!

Well, when your forum generates, on average, 3 threads per month, you don't have to go past page 2 or 3 of the thread index to find yourself 2 and a half years back.

And by saying "a once very active member of the non-WoF forum", are you implying that he's no longer active because of the friction?

Here we see the much used gift of seeing imaginary implications that do not exist.

No, I'm not implying that at all. I'm simply saying that he was once a very active member.

 

[Simon Peter]

entirely possible to create 4 forums as suggested. but you will most assuredly need to update the standard existing definition of what beliefs/practices define each group.

Yes, and that's never a perfect process. If we were to go that route, then people could choose one of the three groups that most closely fit their beliefs. Like the old church cliche: 'you won't find a perfect church, and if you do, it will no longer be perfect once you've joined'

Anyone one could post on the main SF forum. The other three would be 'members only'. Which was actually how it was supposed to be when the current system was set up three years ago.

peace,
Simon

 

[probinson]

This is my post and I'm rather proud of it.

It's not an anti-WOF posting in itself, but rather a very accurate description of my WOF-experience. I consider those 10+ years to be a complete waste of my life and will be a regret I will most likely take to my grave.

It's personal about me and WOF only. It has nothing to do with you or any other WOFer. It's my experience alone and I still mean every word of it.

I'm quite glad you have found yourself set free from bondage, but WoF is not a "bondage train".

 

[Simon Peter]

Well, when your forum generates, on average, 3 threads per month, you don't have to go past page 2 or 3 of the thread index to find yourself 2 and a half years back.

Don't despise us because we are the least tribe in CF

Here we see the much used gift of seeing imaginary implications that do not exist.

No, I'm not implying that at all. I'm simply saying that he was once a very active member.

Hmmm... to imply such a thing would be very unusual in this forum But I'm glad I was wrong.


peace,
Simon

 

[probinson]

This is not a one sided issue no matter how much the WoF crowd would like to make it

I would agree with you that it is not one-sided. However, I would also say it is not equally weighted.

 

[pdudgeon]

Yes, and that's never a perfect process. If we were to go that route, then people could choose one of the three groups that most closely fit their beliefs. Like the old church cliche: 'you won't find a perfect church, and if you do, it will no longer be perfect once you've joined'

Anyone one could post on the main SF forum. The other three would be 'members only'. Which was actually how it was supposed to be when the current system was set up three years ago.

peace,
Simon

to refresh your memory, the folowing is taken from the current non-WOF forum rules:

House Rules-
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

 

[Yitzchak]

It sounds like at least some of the anti wof is really anti extremist wof. From what wof people seem to be saying , they don't feel those extremes accurately reflect their movement. I wonder if is is true in reverse as well. Meaning that it is the extreme in the non wof that have problems with the extrem in the wof ?

Are the moderates from both groups having problems ?

 

[Tamara224]

It sounds like at least some of the anti wof is really anti extremist wof. From what wof people seem to be saying , they don't feel those extremes accurately reflect their movement. I wonder if is is true in reverse as well. Meaning that it is the extreme in the non wof that have problems with the extrem in the wof ?

Are the moderates from both groups having problems ?

I don't think there are any "extreme non-WoFs" around here. I don't know what that would be.

One needn't be "extreme" to disagree with WoF doctrine or to have had bad experience with some WoF churches or people.

 

[Simon Peter]

to refresh your memory, the folowing is taken from the current non-WOF forum rules:

House Rules-
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.


Thanks. I was refering to when the non-WoF forum was being first being set up, there was serious discussion that you wouldn't even be able to post at all on the sub-forum where you did not belong.

I don't recall it being implemented; and I'm not sure it would have been good idea, but it's another option for the 'peace at all costs' camp.


peace,
Simon

 

[psalms 91]

I rest my case for seperation and having two seperate full forums

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I like the idea of having a spirit filled forum . i think the proposed (4) separations are a good idea . denominations and separations exist because we cannot get along . so as it was with the Herders of Abraham and the Herders of Lot separation is to allow for space for continued growth and good will toward one another .

 

[nephilimiyr]

I know! Lets have everyone have their very own personal forum! We could have our own rules and our very own SOF. And we moderate our forum ourselves.



Maybe we could even have a huge arguement with ourselves, like with our alter ego, and make something like The Non-neph forum or something like that?

 

[Yitzchak]

I don't think there are any "extreme non-WoFs" around here. I don't know what that would be.

One needn't be "extreme" to disagree with WoF doctrine or to have had bad experience with some WoF churches or people.

Presumably in this context the extreme non wof would be at the opposite of whatever extreme wof issues are being opposed.

I can disagree with lots of groups but still see the good in their denomination and their teaching. We should be able to disagree agreeably and not feel a need to demonize the Christian people who we disagree with.

Having a bad experience with any church is painful but over time people are able to put that into perspective. From what I understand from this thread , there are wof people who feel similar ways towards non wof. That they have had bad experiences and disagree with their beliefs about things.
For example. I find a lot of good about positive confession. Think on good things, speak words of faith , bring the scriptures into you situation as words to stand upon in faith. It is the extreme of positive confession that starts making me uncomfortable. I find some truth in even the extreme views of both sides. It reminds me of when I went to the Mennonite church and they said it was wrong to wear a tie because it is worldy and proud. But then I went to Assembly of God and they said it is wrong not to wear a tie because we should dress up to show honor to God when we go to church. two opposite practices both emphasizing a different virtue...

 

[Yitzchak]

Take my bad spelling in my posts as an example. One person might be a perfectionist and emphasis the virtues of giving our best and showing excellance. Being disciplined. Good manners even.
Another might emphasize virtues of not being legalistic , of being relaxed. Of not getting hung up on the small things. Or just plain being real and sincere.
People can argue about almost anything. The question is are we dealing with people who are emphasizing different virtues and sometimes taking it to an extreme or are we dealing with people who are from the devil.
I am able to see both sides as well meaning Christian brethren. I don't think either side is from the devil. But the extreme views which lead people to demonize the other side are not healthy.