"laestadian, apostolic, gay, lgbtq, ex-oalc, ex-llc, llc, oalc, bunner" LEARNING TO LIVE FREE: Morality

Thursday, October 06, 2005

Morality

Lively discussion lately! (Thanks for keeping it civil.) What accounts for our differences in determining what is ethical?

According to psychologist Carol Gilligan, women and men process moral decisions differently, with women reasoning from an ethos of care, and men from an ethos of justice. Some folks think that ethnic groups and even nations can be similarly divided along these lines.

Above is a link to a fascinating article about the latest cognitive science on morality.

68 comments:

  1. Caution is advised in dividing men and women into different worlds of moral reasoning. The differences are often exaggerated beyond what the data warrants. According to the study _The Gender Similarities Hypothesis_, "gender differences in moral reasoning and moral orientation are small." http://www.apa.org/journals/releases/amp606581.pdf

    Morality and ethics are evolved mechanisms. Many of the good things we see in humans are due to reciprocal altruism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reciprocal_altruism

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you ilmarinen, for the caution and the links.

    ReplyDelete
  3. t
    Re; Moral Delemma in Article
    To escape the horns of the
    Trolley Problem moral is easy.

    Put your daughter ,son ,brotner
    sister ,mother or father as the
    one to be sacrificed and give
    me your answer

    Would you do it for two ,five ,
    ten or a hundred strangers to
    saved ?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Many Trails Home10/10/2005 12:51:00 PM

    Hello, Back to an unrelated topic but this seems as good a place to post as any. RE: differences between FALC, OALC, ALC, and reasons for the splits. I visited my 84-yr-old mother this weekend and asked her these questions. She was born 3 years after the intial split. Her father was an "elder" at that time, and all the preachers and elders stayed at their house. She knows the history as well as anybody, and I couldn't get anything substantial out of her.

    Her explanations were that "they didn't want to be obedient to the mother church" (in Finland) and "they wanted to take allowances" ie not follow all the strict rules for living. The Others are, of course, "dead faith" and they "lost the faith" when they refused to be obedient. Nothing much about beliefs or theology here.

    What I concluded from all this is that, as a foundation, obedience to the rules, or more precisely to the makers of the rules, is primary. That's what holds the congregation together. The rest (repentance, forgiveness, salvation etc) is more individual or private and is, of course, the "club" that keeps everyone obedient.

    There is absolutely no room for contemplation or inquiry, unless the purpose of the inquiry is to find out what the party line is so I can follow it. I think anybody from the OALC will confirm this. NO QUESTIONING. The farther I get away from this, the more bizarre it looks. They all live in an "Emperor Has No Clothes" world, where getting to the truth, any truth, is not possible because they will always insist that the emperor is clothed.
    Thank God for the peace that comes from opening directly to God and asking for truth. Many blessings.

    ReplyDelete
  5. LLLreader hasn't given up the quest to get information about the splits in the church. I have been able to come up with a few scattered facts, and will be posting soon. I know it's not of interest to everyone, but I am just so intriqued with "how things got be the way they are". More later-----

    ReplyDelete
  6. I know people from all 5 major splits have gotten some good info. about what some of those splits occured. What surprised me is the amount of similarily still in some of these churches, although they all claim to be different. I would be interested to hear what you found.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Can you list what the five major splits are?

    I'm sure they are all different, but there must be many similarities. Have you been to all five branches? What strikes you as most similar?

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is what I consider the major 5:
    Old Apostolic Lutheran (OALC),
    Laustadian Lutheran (LLC),
    First Apostolic Lutheran (FALC),
    Independent Apostolic (Pollarites),
    Apostolic Lutheran Church of America (ALC).
    I listed them in order of how exclusive the churches seemed to be, with the OALC being the most exclusive. The exclusivity is the most similar trend among all of these churches, at varying degrees. I know some law (fire and brimstone) is preached in all of these churches...some more than others (OALC preached it the most). It sounds like most of the people on this site are trying to get away from that kind of teaching but not neccesarily their finn/apostolic herritage. In that case, the ALC or Independent Apostolic churches could be a healthier alternative. However, those churches have some problems too. You're never going to find a church that is perfect...but a good starting point is an overall healthy & uplifting message. Agree?

    ReplyDelete
  9. "a good starting point is an overall healthy & uplifting message"

    Yes, that's one sign of a healthy church: a place that lifts people up instead of tearing them down. I wish that all churches would promote a sense of community and connectedness while encouraging their members to follow Jesus' teachings about living a better life by serving others with love and humility, but too many instead rail on gays like cursed lepers to be cast out from humanity or turn into political arenas for bone-headed testosterone bags to vie for power and gossiping, sniping busy-bodies for social position.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Limarinen, I do agree with you. All churches have their issues. And I don't believe any one church has all the answers. I think each person needs to find the right message for them. I have been thinking about joining The OLAC. I love the community and oneness. I like the forgiveness of sin through confession.
      Gods Peace.

      A wonderer.

      Delete
  10. Many Trails Home10/11/2005 05:16:00 PM

    Rather passionately stated, Ilmarinen, but of course you are right. I have definitely seen the "vying for social position," among the ladies especially. Has anyone any direct evidence of "testosterone bags vying for power?" I always suspected there was some of that, but very subtle perhaps. Do you suppose it is ever overt, other than during the "splits?" MTH

    ReplyDelete
  11. MTH,

    From the men's perspective, the pursuit of power and reputation is huge for all too many, and it leads to conflict within the church even when no split is happening. Too many people I know treat religion as a sport, in which their team is to be rah-rahed and the opposing team trashed.

    ReplyDelete
  12. In Finland, the local LLC equivalent would be the most exclusive one, while the OALC equivalent is more moderate in that regard, and more fragmented. I'd guess that about 1/4 of the Finnish oalcers are strictly exclusive, 1/4 are certain that you can be saved also outside of the oalc group, and the rest prefer not to take any stand on the issue. In the Finnish LLC it is very difficult to find persons who openly say that you can be saved outside of their group, almost everyone has the strictly exclusive attitude.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Good thoughts here. You know, reading about vying for social position and power.. sadly, I do think it is true. I used to think that we were 'above' those things.. It shows our human nature, doesn't it! But believers really should be better than that.. which makes me think that there are many unregenerated people even in those positions within the church. We need to have our eyes opened to these things.

    ReplyDelete
  14. wow, people in the OALC thinking there is christanity outside of its church! The LLC being even MORE exclusive than the OALC in finland. This is quite interesting me me.

    I laughed when you said it is difficuld to find a peron in the LLC who would openly say that you can be saved outside of thier group. If they did, their group would consider them an unbeliever.

    ReplyDelete
  15. b.h.,

    What you say is interesting, because I grew up in the ALC and am still somewhat connected to it. In the Copper Country, it is obvious that groups like Chassell are very different from groups like Hancock, but I've never really gotten into the politics enough to identify these 3 or 4 groups. Would they be groups like this: 1) OALC-like: Chassell MI, New Ipswich NH (Goen Rd), Greenville SC (Rutherford) 2) Somewhat traditional but not like the OALC: Tapiola MI, Ironwood MI, Ashburnham Mass 3) "Progressive": Hancock MI, the new congregation in New Ipswich NH, Eastside in SC, Esko MN?

    It would be too bad if the whole ALC had a bitter split, because they've been able to tolerate diversity better than many of the other Laestadian groups, I would think. Nontheless, it does concern me how some ALCers are tying in Religious Right politics with their faith. If that trend continues and envelops the whole ALC, I will have to cut even the tenuous ties I currently have with them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. who knows, I might know you. that would be interesting.
      why would you want to attend a progressive church? I have yet to find a place in the Bible where is gives us permission to keep up w/ the times. We are to follow the old paths, follow the traditions of the elders in the truth, etc. There are other passages that speak of this also. I am sure if you have read the entire Bible you will be able to find the passages too.

      Delete
  16. Breathlessly His ~ THANK YOU! What an awesome couple of posts. And I agree on the split. Sure its not the most ideal solution, but it also beats going through constant friction and stress at meetings. I have a huge problem with these people who won't compromise "because it might offend someone". Offend who? and Why? Those questions are never answered with any substance!! (Can you tell I was just at a meeting?!!)
    Yes, Yes, Liberty in Christ. Sometimes I wonder if some of the factions know what that is. They put Him in a box and try to tell everyone that that's the only place you'll find Him. And anything beyond that is suspect, suspicious, and potentially offensive.
    Yes Hockinson is a very diverse group. And yes legalism is still there. Not so much because the majority believes it, but because a small minority does, and a whole bunch of other "peace makers" don't want to "offend" anyone. So in a sense, they look around at this minority group's list, and make their decisions based on that. Especially if anything NEW comes along. It's that "well... we'd better stick to the traditional in case someone might get offended" attitude.
    Your last comment "too many are one way at home and another way at church for the sake of tradition". The worst part is the middle of the road crowd or "peacemakers" as they like to call themselves, think that's perfectly OKAY!!! That that's how it should be. You can listen to certain songs (praise) and types of music(contemporary) at home in the car etc. and that's okay. But just keep it there. For the sake of unity they say.I wish they would listen to themselves. And of course they usually manage to give the impression that we're the problem. Patronizingly saying "we hear the other side" and why they don't like it. NO thought is given to us "liberals" by these "peacemakers".
    We need vocabulary lessons too... what does it mean to truly be offended, or to repent, or to have our sins forgiven, (they already are, that was finished 2000+ yrs ago), or to confess etc. Instead its the ALC defintions that people know.
    Thanks for letting me sound off. Helps get rid of the frustration!!
    anon ALCer

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. oooo, my goodness you seem a little angry here.
      Do you know the definition of forgiveness?
      And what is your definition of legalism?
      I have heard many a sermon in Hockinson and I have never heard a legalistic one yet. (I have not attended church there for the last 15 years, since they started having paid preachers, so maybe there is legalism there, I can't say)
      Maybe it's peopel like you that are the problem and not "them"
      Do I know you? I might........

      Delete
  17. Breathless,

    The idea that a split could be good is a way of looking at the issue that I hadn't considered, but it does have a lot to recommend it. There is no point in continuing to stay together if the different parties are so divergent that they spend all their time resolving conflicts instead of accomplishing something positive like helping the poor. It's just sad for me to think that if a split occurs, my family will be separated and likely begin growing apart, possibly with bitter feelings. People I've grown up with will in time become strangers as they drift away. I have friends from all of the different branches and enjoy their friendship, in spite of my concern over some of their beliefs.

    Growing up, I never got into the politics enough to know what is really happening in the ALC, but I was often confused by all the different messages I heard.

    The New Awakenist movement is something I wish I knew more about, because I grew up in it, but have never understood all its history and connections. You're right that many did consider Carl Kulla to be almost a pope: I remember being in awe of him when he came to preach at Chassell. When you mention his "his dark and hopeless teachings," are you referring to the New Awakenist teaching on the third use of the law?

    From my perspective growing up in Chassell, I heard of the changes happening in Hockinson and was appalled. How time brings new perspective: now I am glad to learn Hockinson has changed!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ilmarinen said, "....New Awakenists....stayed with the Federationists. This situation has continued to the present day, with elements of the Reawakenists still operating within the Federation." I will try to shed some light on this subject as some friends of mine in the Federation group explained it to me after I inquired about them having had several conversations with some people of the New Awakenist persuasion. I noted how they do not speak of Christ working within them & transforming them through the Spirit but rather how a person must 'keep seeking a deeper and hidden truth at the foot of the Cross.' I learned that the term 'Reawakenists' is a term used by the 'New Awakenists' as a cheap cover title hiding their real identity. The New Awakenists originally had a strong hold in Kittala, Finland in the late 1800's & eventually some of them came to America. After the major splits in America they were kind of an isolated group. In the 1920's and '30's, they began attending the Federation group with a strict understanding that they would not be allowed to preach. That 'understanding' fell by the wayside & the New Awakenists spread out from northern MI out to Hockinson & New Ipswich, NH. Basically, the New Awakenists felt that the endless focus on confession of sins & the pronouncement of absolution was not providing any peace either for themselves or others. They also resented the Christians who had the liberty to live a less legalistic life. They then began to speak of a deeper, sort of mystical experience one needs in order to come to a deeper (and true) understanding of salvation. They often stated how one had to come to know Christ in Gethsemane or on the cross and that "the 'deep matters of redemption' had to be opened up to one's heart." Over time they began associating with each other and holding their own additional separate home services where they stated that they were, "a church within the church" & they used their newfound unity to influence speakers, preaching & the general tone of their respective congregation. Their fanatic-like outlook includes the third use of the law, guilt & they remain in a sort of deep spiritual funk to this day as they never seem to attain the 'deep experiences of redemption' they allude to. In general they are real quick to criticize speakers whom they do not agree with but anyone who disagrees with them is told that they have, 'blasphemed the Holy Spirit and that God would kill them.' My limited conversations with the New Awakenists led me to believe that I was talking to very thoroughly indoctrinated cult-like people who had a strong grasp of only a limited number of Bible verses which they repeated like mantras. I was never told by those whom I spoke with what Christ had done in their hearts but only what God had to do in my heart-I guess my having been born again in Christ was not enough. I would dare say that the only reason they made any in-roads at all into Laestadianism was probably due to the already strong emphasis on sin and guilt within the Laestadian movement. So from what I was told the New Awakenist clique/faction is still alive and well in Chassell, MI, New Ipswich, NH & in the Hockinson, WA area. Based on my conversations with some of the New Awakenists I would have to say I found them to be essentially spiritually dead with no real Biblical transformation in Christ. Their so-called 'deeper understandings' really were only sort of a self-induced mysticism based on portions of Laestadius' sermons. The New Awakenists seem to think one must first convert to a life of legalism & then eventually one might find Christ through a mystical experience having shown God that they are really sincere. The amazing thing is that they still exist in the flesh to this day albeit under the cover of the Federation. What at a bunch of phonies. Old AP

      Delete
  18. Hi, it's anon ALCer again. Right now Hockinson has an almost full time, paid pastor. What's interesting, is that C.K. and those like him are in church regularly, and yet the message they hear isn't anything like what he would/did preach. I really wonder what they think, how do they connect the dots?
    A split doesn't have to be bitter, if people were willing to accept others whose opinions are different as Christians too. But you'll notice, that it's the people who put a box around God, that seem to have the biggest problem. After all if they are willing to call others a fellow brother/sister in Christ, then how do they justify their "have to" "can't do" life style?
    Keep praying for Hockinson, and our pastor. He's got his work cut out for him, and it doesn't help, that there are those who can't understand how there could be that much to do!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It could be that Carl is still fed in church. As long as the WORD is there, there is food, even if the vessel delivering it is imperfect. It's how the heart receives it.
      Maybe he, Carl, knows the true meaning of forgiveness and living according to God's Word. Maybe Carl is concerned about being an example of a true Christian and doesn't want to offend others. Just maybe........

      Delete
  19. Hi Breathlessly His,
    I understood your comments on compromise and change. For others out there it might be easier to view it as a fence...with 2 sides, and the "peacemakers" sitting on the fence. Don't get me wrong, there are some genuine peacemakers out there. The ones led by God. I'm talking about the ones who aren't letting the Spirit lead them, but rather man's potential to be offended, usually about something that has no reason to offend anyone unless they let it.
    No I can't say I've heard of anything in particular about the forgiveness of sins. I have respect(as church leaders) for SOME of the central board members. (I can respect all them as people, but that's different.) I really can't imagine being on that board, when you look at who is all on it. How do they reach ANY conclusions? By their preaching, I know that they don't agree on the most basic fundamentals of Christianity. (not sure if that's the right choice of words)
    Ron is doing an incredible job. He would probably say he's a traditionalist at heart. BUT that doesn't mean he thinks new things are wrong. It's just his personal preference. And yes, I would say he is held back. He doesn't have much say really in how the church is run. The board does. He has influence, and uses it, and isn't afraid to speak up. It just isn't always enough.
    Our biggest problem is the extreme side who is afraid.... afraid of change, of anything new, of anything that even hints at being mainstream(like other churches). Even putting the cross on the wall was a battle. And some of the biggest fight came from the "peacemakers". Oh we don't want to offend, we don't want to "look" Catholic(sorry that's where we came from!!), you're only pushing it through to prove that you can. I had no such agenda, I hadn't even thought about it until it came up at a meeting. Then I thought... yeah, that's a good idea, lets go for it.
    How can people claim to be offended by a cross!?, or plants, or a Christmas Program, or jewelery on another person,or pants on a lady???!!!!
    God's blessings...anon ALCer

    ReplyDelete
  20. A question about the current situation in Hockinson, does the full-time pastor preach at every service or are there others too? I'm a bit uncertain about the ALC use of the word 'pastor'. Are there several preachers in every congregation and one of them is elected pastor, or is there just one preacher and he is always called a pastor? I used to know a former pastor of the Hockinson church (W.T.) and I don't think he preached during his last years.

    ReplyDelete
  21. wow, this is interesting.. coming from someone in a 'peacemaker' church, and also personally, with many loved ones on all sides. I don't know very much about the individuals involved but have observed this rather delicate balance from a distance for many years. Recently someone (who would also be considered a peacemaker) told me that perhaps a lack of leadership, which leads to indecision, is part of the problem. I love the ALC as I know many of you do and I appreciate the tone that I see coming through in these posts, even though you see problems. I see them too. I wonder why we are so afraid of just being who we really are, and just loving life and our liberty and each other and first and foremost the wonderful message of the Gospel, and sharing all the wonderful things we learn about God's love and care for us as we go through life...

    just some thoughts..

    AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  22. Theo ~ Our Pastor preaches 1st, 2nd, and 4th Sundays. And leads the Wed. eve Bible study and preaches some Wed. eves. We also have 3 other preachers (voted on by the congregation) who take turns 3rd Sunday and Wed. eves and usually have a part in Sun. afternoons and evening service. I call him a pastor because that is what he is. He is paid...it's how he earns a living. I think that each word .... pastor, preacher, minister all mean something a little different. The terms preacher and minister are most commonly used, and are freely interchanged by many.

    AnonyMouse...(cute name) I don't know if you were referring to Hockinson or not when you mentioned a lack of leadership, but I don't think that's the problem here. That is why we decided to have a full time/paid pastor. To alleviate that problem.

    BH...I don't know why people look up to LLL so much. Actually my husband started reading that book that was put out this past summer by M Ylimieni. "A Godly Heritage". He said it gives a good explanation of how and why the teaching of the forgiveness of sins is what it is. It sounds like LLL started it, because he had a congregation of people who couldn't believe, so he began to lay hands on them to reassure them. And you know the rest. ( I probably simplified that a little too much, but I'm not the best with words, and I'm also quoting from what I remember my Husband saying). Anyways, I don't think that's a good excuse for the way it's been twisted over the years, but it helps a little in understanding why. The problem is taking our eyes off Christ, and putting them on Luther, LLL or anyone else.
    Anon ALCer

    ReplyDelete
  23. BH... I'm assuming you still attend an ALC church right? Do you mind giving the general area or state?
    You've got me curious! :-)
    anonALC

    ReplyDelete
  24. Breathlessly His - Yes, I do understand what you are saying here. It's funny though, that you would feel out of place in showing emotion, when elsewhere on this blog we've read how emotional the early LLL church services were!! So things certainly have changed in that way, haven't they!! I don't say this as a criticism, just as an observation. Do you, or anyone else here, think that better communication, such as on the net, will improve things.. or are there any other things that can be done... ??

    To AnonALCer -- no, I'm not referring to Hockinson and probably don't even know anyone there. This was a broad statement about the state of the Federation at the present time. Also, I do believe in the doctrine of the keys and I believe this is part of Christian doctrine in general, and Lutheran doctrine in particular, but there has been something added to it. Just thinking here..

    AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  25. LLLreader sez: Well, HERE you are! I have just been reading the current post, not checking the old ones, and was afraid some of you interesting folks had disappeared!! Am glad to find you again. I'll post a little New Awakenists info tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Hi Anonymouse... What's been added, is the teaching that your sins aren't forgiven until the audible declaration. And the teaching that the Laustadian groups are the only ones that have this priviledge of reassuring one another.

    anonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  27. LLLReader! I'm glad to see you found us. I was hoping you'd show up.
    Anonymouse,
    I hope I dont offend you but I am ready to scrap that teaching in a BIG way. It has been mutilated by Satan and we'd be wise to admit it.
    Have you ever read the life of Hezekiah and the first thing he did when he became King?
    The brazen serpent... wow. It's so much like the ALC's and other LLL churches "Keys to the Kingdom" and for that matter any teaching that is boxed into a system and forced as the way "in"... for instance I share this same opinion when it comes to "pray to invite Jesus in".
    Statistics show that only 4 percent of altar calls are true beginnings with Christ. (although, I praise God for those beginnings!)
    I am not AGAINST someone beginning in ANY way... just against those that wont see others as Christians if they didnt do it "thier" way.
    It's this thing that Hebrews 6 introduces about making a religion out of HOW we turned to Christ and turning over the building over and over trying to make sure people did it the right way...
    It says there "not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, laying on of hands, baptisms...etc". Wow, the church of Jesus Christ has sure missed that teaching.
    Every denomination stands tall on one or the other from that list.
    I believe the author is telling us that if the foundation of our faith is laid and it is in Christ, then why would we need to repent again from dead works like we did when we repented into the kingdom... why would we need NEW faith toward GOD? Why would we need more doctrines on Baptism? Why would we need to stare so hard at HOW we came to a knowlege of Christ? WE just need to grow up... into a healthy building of the Lord Jesus and quit tearing the walls down and staring at the foundation. We need to be growing UP into perfection in Jesus.
    seems like people would rather stare at the way then be in the Way.
    Jeepers... I act like a preacher sometimes.
    sorry...

    ReplyDelete
  28. Don't apologize BH! You're making some good points, and lots of sense.

    anonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  29. I find it interesting to see all the emotion and expression in the scriptures. It makes me feel better.
    It is OKAY to get excited about our LORD! This selection shows us how the “religious” ones of Jesus day thought it was not right to show expression and look what our Lord told them:

    Luke 19
    And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen; Saying, Blessed [be] the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.
    (heres those religious ones..)
    And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples. And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

    Have you ever felt that the stones would cry out if you did not?

    How about David.. and How about Miriam… I have shared the same feelings as they, ever since my God brought me out of Egypt and through the Red Sea!
    I have nothing else to sing except that “He has triumphed gloriously!!”

    “Praise with me the King of Heaven!”


    Psalms 63:4
    Thus will I bless thee while I live: I will lift up my hands in thy name.
    Psalms 47:1
    O clap your hands, all ye people; shout unto God with the voice of triumph.
    Psalms 98:8
    Let the floods clap [their] hands: let the hills be joyful together
    Isaiah 55:12
    For ye shall go out with joy, and be led forth with peace: the mountains and the hills shall break forth before you into singing, and all the trees of the field shall clap [their] hands.
    Psalms 28:2
    Hear the voice of my supplications, when I cry unto thee, when I lift up my hands toward thy holy oracle.
    Psalms 63:4
    Thus will I bless thee while I live: I will lift up my hands in thy name.
    Psalms 119:48
    My hands also will I lift up unto thy commandments, which I have loved; and I will meditate in thy statutes.
    Psalm 84:12
    O LORD of hosts, blessed [is] the man that trusteth in thee.

    Exodus 15 :20-21
    And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances. And Miriam answered them, Sing ye to the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea.

    2 Samuel 6:15-16
    So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the trumpet And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul's daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD;

    Praise Ye the Lord!!
    -breathless

    ReplyDelete
  30. breathless,

    I don't really want to even talk about Chassell, but since you asked, I'll give you a brief history of what I know about it. Please realize that I am trying to move beyond my bitterness and am not posting this to bash the members of Chassell. There are many wonderful people who attend there who I value as friends.

    The Chassell Apostolic Lutheran Church was built in 1920. A story I've heard says that shortly after the church was built, very few members attended, but more members began attending later. When the Heideman group split, there were two groups who used the church. One was Heideman, and the other was associated with the Federation. Although they are not part of the Federation, that group continues to attend the Federation Conventions and occassionally invites preachers from the Federation to speak. The Heideman group continued to use the church for afternoon services while the other group used it for morning services. In time, the Heideman group was reduced to just a few elderly people in the Chassell area, and their group has now stopped holding services in Chassell.

    In the 1970's, there was conflict between the conservatives and the more progressive members of the church. This conflict was so bad that a person I know who attended there at that time will not come back because all they remember was fighting. Eventually, the conservatives achieved control, and the more progressive members left.

    From what I remember in the 80's and early 90's, Chassell church was almost a family church, with most of the people being close relatives. Althought there was extensive preaching of law, hyvees were not common and some women who attended held jobs. Most of the kids up to this point attended public schools.

    Then sometime (in the mid-90's, I would guess), things began changing in the more conservative direction. Hyvees became more common and almost all the children began to be homeschooled. Certain new people began attending who contributed to some radicalization. One of these people was incredibly patriarchal and once actually preached on a text of Levitical laws as if they applied to today's society. A few Mennonite families began attending Chassell, and ironically, liberalized Chassell in some ways by bringing in some cultural diversity and speaking against judging others by outward appearance, but their attendance also made it even easier for the people from Chassell to continue diverging from the ALC mainstream.

    In the past few years, people have left Chassell, mostly to pursue work opportunities elsewhere. Last time I attended, there are about 50 people, including children, present on a Sunday morning. It's surprising to me that such a small congregation has been able to achieve such notoriety within the ALC.

    The preaching in Chassell is heavy of law. Although the members would immediately deny that they believe we can earn our own salvation, their emphasis on law sometimes makes one wonder whether they believe in Christ's work plus something else leads to salvation. Things that were preached against in Chassell included TV's, playing or watching sporting events, ties on men, cutting or curling of women's hair, women's make-up, necklaces, earrings, and countless other things I'd rather forget. There was no organ or piano played during the singing of hymns.

    In conclusion, I have no hatred toward the people from Chassell but am glad I left, even though leaving was extrememly hard for me. Growing up there was not a healthy experience for me.

    ReplyDelete
  31. breathless,

    I don't really want to even talk about Chassell, but since you asked, I'll give you a brief history of what I know about it. Please realize that I am trying to move beyond my bitterness and am not posting this to bash the members of Chassell. There are many wonderful people who attend there who I value as friends.

    The Chassell Apostolic Lutheran Church was built in 1920. A story I've heard says that shortly after the church was built, very few members attended, but more members began attending later. When the Heideman group split, there were two groups who used the church. One was Heideman, and the other was associated with the Federation. Although they are not part of the Federation, that group continues to attend the Federation Conventions and occassionally invites preachers from the Federation to speak. The Heideman group continued to use the church for afternoon services while the other group used it for morning services. In time, the Heideman group was reduced to just a few elderly people in the Chassell area, and their group has now stopped holding services in Chassell.

    In the 1970's, there was conflict between the conservatives and the more progressive members of the church. This conflict was so bad that a person I know who attended there at that time will not come back because all they remember was fighting. Eventually, the conservatives achieved control, and the more progressive members left.

    From what I remember in the 80's and early 90's, Chassell church was almost a family church, with most of the people being close relatives. Althought there was extensive preaching of law, hyvees were not common and some women who attended held jobs. Most of the kids up to this point attended public schools.

    Then sometime (in the mid-90's, I would guess), things began changing in the more conservative direction. Hyvees became more common and almost all the children began to be homeschooled. Certain new people began attending who contributed to some radicalization. One of these people was incredibly patriarchal and once actually preached on a text of Levitical laws as if they applied to today's society. A few Mennonite families began attending Chassell, and ironically, liberalized Chassell in some ways by bringing in some cultural diversity and speaking against judging others by outward appearance, but their attendance also made it even easier for the people from Chassell to continue diverging from the ALC mainstream.

    In the past few years, people have left Chassell, mostly to pursue work opportunities elsewhere. Last time I attended, there are about 50 people, including children, present on a Sunday morning. It's surprising to me that such a small congregation has been able to achieve such notoriety within the ALC.

    The preaching in Chassell is heavy of law. Although the members would immediately deny that they believe we can earn our own salvation, their emphasis on law sometimes makes one wonder whether they believe in Christ's work plus something else leads to salvation. Things that were preached against in Chassell included TV's, playing or watching sporting events, ties on men, cutting or curling of women's hair, women's make-up, necklaces, earrings, and countless other things I'd rather forget. There was no organ or piano played during the singing of hymns.

    In conclusion, I have no hatred toward the people from Chassell but am glad I left, even though leaving was extrememly hard for me. Growing up there was not a healthy experience for me.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Hi B ~ I don't know if CK has ever issued an invitation or not. At least I don't remember one. Although he has never struck me as one who would shy away from a discussion or question. Seems like most people would be willing (or even want) to explain their statements of the past.
    You were last in Hockinson around 10 yrs ago.... interesting, I moved here around 14 yrs ago, so we might have overlapped by a couple of yrs. But... back then I thought it was just church. The old "take the good/truth and leave the bad". Really I hadn't thought about it much at all. (I had my list!)
    I have found people to be very skeptical of praising. There are the negative "is it real" comments. I had to bring myself up short awhile back. I was thinking along those lines, concerning something similar, and then realized, that if they weren't sincere, it WASN'T MY PROBLEM, and I shouldn't be judging them anyways. Actually it wasn't me that brought me up short, it was God. (And thankfully, I didn't open my mouth before He did!)
    Keep the sermons/praises/thoughts coming B. I've really enjoyed them.
    anonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  33. I know what you mean when you say God just had to show you that it wasnt your problem. I have had the same lesson from Him.

    Oh, I cant wait to get to heaven where the "flesh" can not get in the way of our worship of the King!
    I suspect it will be a very surprising praise and worship for some of the ones who are so reserved and conservative. But God will bring out the praises when personality and flesh is removed, what a day that will be!
    When I read Hezekiah's life (Chronicles and Kings) and the music service they had and the way everything was so impulsively done be the unction of the Spirit, I laid on my bed and just longed for such a thing in our day. Destruction of the high places, and then a celebration like none other.. it says.
    -BH

    ReplyDelete
  34. Hi B ~ Should you? I don't know, but God does.
    I asked my husband, and he doesn't remember CK asking either, but he agrees that CK has never been one to not like questions. I think in that way he's approachable.
    Who else preached then? Haven't there always been several?

    God bless you,
    anonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  35. Hi BH,

    I think it's safe to say that lots of people DO feel emotional at times during church services, even if they don't show it. Often I rejoice inwardly when the grace of God is revealed to me anew. It isn't the knowledge of our sins that causes us to rejoice, it's the knowledge of His deep, deep love for us, and grace toward us, that causes me to love him in return. That said, focusing too much on praise can cause us to forget what 'worship' is all about. Sometimes that's sitting quietly with our spiritual ears and eyes open, and listening and learning, and worshipping Him. God is not concerned with earning our praises, but He is concerned with our worship and acknowledgement of Him through listening to His Word, and finding out what He wants to tell us. He wants us to focus on HIM. That's my opinion.. for what it's worth :-).

    AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  36. In all due respect, I'm confused!
    I cant quite grasp what you mean. The bible says he LIVES within the praises of His people.
    I guess I always thought worship and praise and thanksgiving were all in the same slot and that none of them would be accomplished unless we knew the true extent of our sinfulness. So then we literally live and breath "amazing grace how sweet the sound that saved a wretch like me".
    David said the Lord gave him a new song every day and many hear it and fear, and were converted because of it.
    Wait, what do you make of the entire book of the Psalms? The Word of truth is in the songs that is inspired by the Spirit and sometimes ONE song can have more of an impact on a heart than 45 minutes of preaching.
    Not because of anything else, but the power of praise and music mixed with the power of the Spirit.
    It's an unfathomable gift from God.
    I am not against preaching. I love it and I have no problem with length, but I dont understand it when people say its more important than the praise and worship time. Have you studied the Levites? The setting up of the Tabernacle and the Temple?
    How do you explain that? Do you hum when you shower as you think of your God?
    The rocks will cry out if we quit singing His praises!
    I'm just curious what scriptures motivate your thoughts on the above post, respectively.
    I hope I dont sound harsh. Thats not it. Whenever I have these discussions and dont "get it" I can sound kinda like this...
    pardon me... and lets talk it out!
    Love ya,
    BH

    ReplyDelete
  37. Hi BH ~ I too have heard it said that we should place more importance on the sermons. "Singing is good but do it when it doesn't conflict with the sermon time," is the general idea. And no, I DON'T agree. If for no other reason that the songs can help get my mind off other matters. My kids remember the order of the books in the NT because of the song, (and so do I!!). I think of the "praise" songs that take scripture and put it to music, what a good way to learn it! Children in Sunday School are usually excited when it's time to sing. (though some of it might be due to the fact that class is almost done at that point!)
    Did you know that Hockinson has a Christmas Program now? I think this is the 5th year. It's been awesome!!
    anonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  38. Hi BH, I've been thinking about the posts on this thread for a week or so, and here are some of the things that went through my mind.. About splits.. I wonder why all of the different factions can't get along in a democratic way similar to the way our two-party system of government is set up. Why is it that some should be forced out of a church because of their beliefs? The way I see it, God gives us all different gifts for a reason, and it's a system of checks and balances. So many times we see churches and individuals who are 'out of balance' for so many different reasons. We NEED those who think and believe differently than ourselves. I think there's a reason why those who some might consider legalist are there.. maybe God has placed them there for a reason, to help us to think seriously about what the Scriptures really say. And there's a reason why those who love to praise and rejoice are there.. it brings us serious and reserved ones out of our shells when we see the spontaneity and joy in those faces. We need each other! Does that sound radical?? I smile when I think of it, and what some of the readers out there might be thinking.. But I don't want to diminish any abuses or extremes that have occurred, whereby people have been hurt. But I believe that many of us are on the same page when it comes to our faith in Christ. A congregation SHOULD be made up of a variety of people, each living as Christ is leading them... There is no liberty in enforced conformity. That certainly is a sign of a cult, if we all look alike.

    About the Scriptures that speak of praise and worship in the church.. I can't think of the passage at the moment, but it's where Paul (I think) speaks of the orderliness of the worship service.. can you think of where that is, BH? Anyway, that's where I'm coming from. I apologize for the vagueness and abrupt way I wrote that last post. I'll think about that a bit more.

    AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  39. Also.. differences in 'preferences' in lifestyle, etc. should not be confused with errors in doctrine. There is a lot that could be said about this..

    AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  40. Hi AnonyMouse ~ (I still like that handle, wish I'd have thought of it!!) Anyways here are some of my thoughts and observations concerning your last post.
    Splits aren't all bad. The problem comes because people AREN'T WILLING TO ACCEPT OTHERS AS FELLOW CHRISTIANS!!! In fact that is one of the biggest problems, past and present. I agree, diversity is good, but only if people are willing, as you said, to let Christ lead them. Then it won't matter to them if someone isn't walking exactly the same walk they are.
    A church can have a system of checks and balances though without having people who don't agree on certain controversial issues mixed together. I think some issues are just too important for compromise, no matter which "side" one is on.
    There is a big difference between being serious because that's your personality, and being that way because you think that is how a Christian HAS to be.
    I do hope this made some sense.

    AnonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  41. Hi again... I agree with your second post... It popped up after I posted mine.
    Boy, this could get confusing!!:-)

    anonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  42. Hi anonALCer.. Yes, I do see where you are coming from when you say maybe splits aren't all bad. On the other hand, the various LLL churches have been severely criticized for splitting so many times. And I'm thinking, 'where will it end?" LOL The way I feel about people much of the time, I could end up in a church of ONE -- just ME.. And STILL not be happy. LOL

    (would you like to borrow my handle?? you could be AnonyMouse2 or something) :-)

    ReplyDelete
  43. that was cute. I like your heart anonyMouse.

    I am gonna take a break from this discussion for a few days. I want to finish like 3 intense bible studies. I'm behind in my Patriarch study by Beth Moore and my husband and I do study and I have stuff I do on my own. Its my very favorit thing in the whole world. I've been captivated by the scriptures. I'll probably stop by to see your comments and enjoy how you work this out.
    At first thought, I am going to guess that if Paul was talking about the order of worship then he was dealing with a VERY out of order Gentile group whom he was probably trying to train away from foreign worship ideas since that was his ministry. But I'll look that up since I dont recall that exact verse off hand.
    God bless,
    And STAY IN THE WORD!
    Love Ya
    BH

    ReplyDelete
  44. Hi again..
    I just wanted to clarify something as I may have sounded confusing.
    When I said in an earlier post that it seems to be okay for people to show emotion over their sinfulness, I was specifically referring to the way that emotion causes them to wail about themselves and go into an asking forgiveness session.
    In the more recent post I was trying to show the difference between emotion concerning SELF and what the true work of Christ is to a sinful heart. In my experience, the longer I have known my Lord the more I have come to know how sinful I am. I am undone without Him! And when Christ is preached, be it song or sermon or in my own meditations, I am compelled to worship Him. It just has an effect on me. But the praise and emotion that may well up in me is toward God with a thankful spirit and heart of gratitude. In other words, my sinfulness and his mercy meet and kiss each other and I am left in awe. I am covered over with a shielf of love.
    To me, its very different than what I remember of those old time asking forgiveness sessions and wailing about "self". that always just got everyone looking at sin.
    Christ has a way of getting it all right at the same moment and causing the praise to be centered on Him.
    Wow, this is hard to explain. But I hope that it helped some who are reading this cuz I read thru the posts again and thought I could have people tied up in knots trying to figure out what I'm saying. Ha!
    Sorry.
    Anyway, I'll check back off and on but I'm really gonna get myself busy in the other projects I have going.
    I'll join up again later.
    GOD BLESS
    BH

    ReplyDelete
  45. BH,

    Yes, BH, I do understand where you are coming from. This is how I understand rejoicing to be in the IALC (Pollari) Churches. People rejoice more out of their thankfulness and joy that they, too, can be a child of God DESPITE their sinfulness, rather than BECAUSE of their sinfulness. In other words, it can be a happy or joyful rejoicing, rather than always a sorrowful or mournful expression of emotion. It is not looked down on to rejoice nor is it an expectation--some people do, some people don't, and that's that.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Free,
    I was just wondering why naming an ALC preacher and insinuating certain allegations against him is okay here, but you've deleted names in other places on your blog. Would he not be entitled to the same consideration?

    ReplyDelete
  47. My apologies if I've done that. Please point me to the spot, as I am still catching up on my reading . . . (I'm overwhelmed these days with other priorities, please bear with me!).

    ReplyDelete
  48. Free, it's here on this thread.. It seems only fair and I know you want to be fair. I have no problems with speaking about disagreements with certain traditions or doctrines, but naming names seems out of place here..?? Thanks for your balanced approach! :-)

    ReplyDelete
  49. Sorry!
    I wondered about that after I put it in...
    I wouldnt be offended. I suppose there is a time and place for the names... And I will respect your wishes if you dont put names..

    can I just say, that my boldness with the names comes because I have read in three occasions that Apostle Paul used names and did a public announcement of the false teachings associated with such names! One time it was the beloved Peter that Paul publicly rebuked.
    Guess that shows we all need to keep a teachable and tender spirit.

    It's always a touchy thing when we use names, and can be offensive... but it depends on how you see the issue in check.

    What about the names that are mentioned in a more positive note above? Is it better to just leave those things out?

    The biggest thing is that we only ever defend the Name above all names and that we all lose our identity in Him.

    Humbly sorry,
    -Breathless

    ReplyDelete
  50. Free ~ I think I have a couple posts with initials, and maybe 1 or 2 with a first name. Don't know if that's acceptable or not?
    Thanks
    AnonALCer

    ReplyDelete
  51. Ilmarinen,
    somewhere above there is a comment you made in answer to me...
    Thought I'd point it out since its deleting time.
    Guess thats up to you..

    Free,
    I took out most of my posts- I had no idea where to draw the line so... I just took most of them out.

    Ilmarinen and AnonyMouse and AnonALCer its been nice to discuss with you all. You all were more careful than I. I am very new at coming into this sort of thing so I am learning rules and manners! Its not a bad thing!

    God bless you,
    BH

    ReplyDelete
  52. Okay, dear readers, I appreciate your concerns, but here's my view about anonymity . . . it should be honored as much as possible, but when talking about a preacher and his teachings, which should be open to scrutiny and debate, I will vote for naming the preacher, who is a public figure. That's my bias.

    (Sorry, BH, if I was too late in posting this!).

    ReplyDelete
  53. Okay Free, it's your blog, so your rules.. :-) I think I agree, though I'm a tadbit uncomfortable with names. You're right though... if they said things from the pulpit, they are open to scrutiny. Besides, BH could probably get some old sermon tapes to back up her comments.

    AnonALCer

    P.S. Don't leave for good BH!! If you're not sure, just use initials or a pseudonym. ( one that fits )

    ReplyDelete
  54. LLLreader sez: Freeda I agree that if if someone is preaching and impacting lives, their speech is open to discussion on this site and anywhere else. It's public knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
  55. BH, please don't feel bad about your posts, you were being honest. My feeling is that it borders on gossip because we are anonymous and the person spoken about has no way of responding. Also, Mr K is quite elderly and not well. It does seem uncomfortable. I don't know him well, but have heard him speak a few times, and I have some of the books he and his wife have translated from Finnish to English. I don't agree with everything, but I also don't think of these writings as dark necessarily.

    Which brings me back to something you and I discussed earlier in this thread.. the Keys to the Kingdom. The brazen serpent, what it was originally constructed for, and what it became) --this is very vividly told in a song by Michael Card, have you ever heard it? love it!! Look upon it and LIVE!) But I'm wondering if this doctrine has actually become a brazen serpent in the LLL churches. Maybe in some circles it has.. but the doctrine of confession and absolution is practiced in many Christian denominations with various tenets depending on the denomination. The doctrine itself is not in question in my mind. However, what you're talking about is the particular way in which LLL churches (most?) believe it must be administered. My own opinion is that if we listen very carefully to the words which are spoken as part of the Sacrament of the Altar, then we should have no problem with any part of the service. Maybe some people will think that we must behave in a certain way - I say, let them. But if we know and believe in our hearts that through this Sacrament, which is totally supposed to be administered among the fellowship of believers.. (this is what it was instituted for!) then that is the only requirement for taking part in communion. By confessing our sins even as praying it in the Lord's Prayer, and by believing that the words that are spoken are true. That this IS the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, given and shed for you, that we are fulfilling what Christ has commanded us to do by remembering Him in this way. We don't have to worry about what anyone else thinks of our partaking of it. But we should NOT think of this as part of salvation..this is something we do BECAUSE we are saved, not TO BE saved. Maybe that's another topic, but enough for now :-) Will look forward to comments! :-) AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  56. Anonymous,

    I think this the issue of forgiveness is what caused the Grace Apostles/FALC split in Cokato, Phoenix, and Lansing. The FALC believes that the forgiveness of sins is neccesary for salvation...and it comes before faith in Christ. Grace Apostles probably agree with your interpretation. Anyone from the FALC, correct me if I'm wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Jesus says to Peter in Matt 16:19 - and I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. John 20:22-23 Jesus says to all of the disciples: Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whosoever sins ye remit (forgive), they are remited unto them: and whosoever sins ye retain, they are retained.

    re: the keys to the kingdom.. I take these words literally as spoken by Jesus. I do believe that the Holy Ghost empowers believers in this way..not just pastors and priests, but the priesthood of believers, you and me. But I don't believe that this should be reduced to a formula and used in a demanding way, where it has lost its power and is merely a ritual.

    And just wanted to clear up something else too.. I don't want to give the impression that all we need to do is "just believe" to be saved. It is always God who initiates, who draws us to himself. Without God revealing Himself to us, try as we might we will not be able to truly believe. And when God calls us, how will we respond? Will we repent, or will we turn away. That is the question.

    Thanks for letting me take up so much of your time, I don't want to intrude on your conversations, but just wanted to clear that up. AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  58. Hi...
    AnonyMouse,
    I am not sure that I still understand you. First you say I am being honest... and dont feel bad... then you say that what I said borders gossip because he cant defend himself. I hope every bible teacher or preacher that I challenge doesnt have to be present to defend himself! What about LLL and the whole purpose of this blog page?
    I am going to let that all drop because my posts are removed anyway. But I must confess that you had me chasing my tail with that one. LOL

    (by the way..I would not be able to prove anything with tapes because that was a sin back then)

    lots of witnesses tho...!

    Also, your comment on "not dark necessarily" brings me straight back to that old famous saying "take the good and leave the bad".

    Maybe you have not had the experiences that some of us have gone through under such a damaging compromise. I am not at all into trying to be fair. I am into the truth. There are lots of wonderful nice people whom I love that I can not endorse to teach God's word.
    There are people I love that I wouldnt give 2 minutes of pulpit time to. I dont believe in compromise to keep peace.
    And I do believe that sometimes names HAVE to be used to help set people free.

    also, on a post above you left this comment...

    ..."Why is it that some should be forced out of a church because of their beliefs? The way I see it, God gives us all different gifts for a reason, and it's a system of checks and balances. So many times we see churches and individuals who are 'out of balance' for so many different reasons. We NEED those who think and believe differently than ourselves"...

    I guess I'm no politician. In fact I hate politics in the church.
    I hold the opinion that a church can not get anywhere but only remain in gridlock with a bunch of people raising their hands for what they see as their cause that day.

    I do agree that the difference in personalities is a unique blessing from God and that it has a wonderful impact on the church. But I have never intended you to think I want everyone to think and react like me. I am speaking of the spirit within the church. If the spirit is in conflict then I dont see it as healthy. If everyone has the same vision with different ways to accomplish it then we are blessed. I dont feel that in the ALC. I feel like its a bunch of people determined almost to death to persuade the people to a wrong doctrine. I'd rather weed them out and let them nest elsewhere then expose my kids to their lies and I'd prefer to be in unity of spirit with all the teachers and preachers. I see preachers getting in the pulpits and straightening out what the last guy said. What a riot!
    I dont see this as healthy or as growing upward knit together in the unity we are supposed to be in..
    Just my thoughts on that...
    I think a lot of the reason for how we see things has everything to do with what we've been thru.

    I'm sorry to hear about the illnesses... I dont hate them or feel bitter with them... please know that... but I strongly disagree with them!

    Love BH
    I hope I dont sound cold. I'm in a hurry, got to run...
    The Love of Christ be with you!

    I love you all in JESUS!

    ANONalcer- and anyone else...
    I invite you to read my comments on the keys of the kingdom on the other blog page...(lefttheoalc)all the way at the bottom of the first page... under "comments"

    ReplyDelete
  59. AnonyMOuse,
    I didnt mean to sound like my invitiation was for ANONalcer and not you... its just that they asked me to post it on the other page and I wanted to say that I had done it now...

    I'd be interested in what you think of it too! Just some thoughts there...
    Love BH

    ReplyDelete
  60. Oh, my goodness, BH! You are so prolific! I found the other blog and will print it out to read. There is so much material here to cover! (and I'm glad for it! :-) )

    Will write more later!
    AnonyMouse

    ReplyDelete
  61. Is anyone around these parts anymore?
    If so, here's a thought...

    The most important thing in a persons life is their view of God.
    And how a person explains their view of God speaks volumes about theirselves.

    A quote I read today...
    "We know we have created God in our own image if He hates all the people we hate".

    Anybody have a favorite quote?
    I like finding little quotes.
    Another thing that really touched me so much a few years ago was somehting a speaker on Christian radio said. I went home and typed it in large format with a nice font and printed it and hung it in my bathroom. Everyday for a year I read this...

    NO MAN COULD LOVE ME ENOUGH
    NO JOB COULD PAY ME ENOUGH
    NO CHILD COULD NEED ME ENOUGH
    NO EXPERIENCE COULD SATISFY ME ENOUGH
    ... only JESUS

    Its amazing how just when the words can be our very own God sort of slips them into our lives to rejoice in...

    Love BH

    ReplyDelete
  62. Yeah, I have one....found it in a "letter to the editor" from our local newspaper.

    "If you always do what you've always done, you'll always be what you've always been."

    I've tried to apply it to the natural and spiritual parts of my life. I thought it was a good thought to keep in mind when I look at those "lists" I grew up with. Was I "NOT doing" simply because I never had, or was "doing" because I always had. Make sense?

    ME...

    ReplyDelete
  63. Yes, I like those thoughts.
    It's something I relate to and have explored about myself over the years.

    It's funny how something that can be so wrong can seem so right...
    Sort of like the verse in Proverbs that says
    "There is a way that seems right to a man but the end thereof leads to death"
    Of course, I am specifically referring to the darkness of human religion... the Pharisee style... that is all outward rule following and inwardly empty.
    Thanks for the quote... get some more!
    BH

    ReplyDelete