He started the conversation by posting the information.
Did he, now? John made a total of two posts. If I recall -- in his first post he stated:
"My dear pal Jeff recently informed me that he has been posting some things I've written in the past, and that it has stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest. At his suggestion, I had a nice visit with "PawTucket" by phone, and told him I'd be glad to make myself available to some degree, though probably not to the extent that will satisfy some of you."
It seems to me that an argument could be advanced that he was "baited".
He goes on to say (in that same post)
"I will probably not spend much time reading or answering a bunch of posts, but will give you my email address (jalces@aol.com) and home (317-849-5707) and office (317-255-6189) phone numbers in case you really want to communicate with me. I'm not much for communicating with those unwilling to identify themselves, although I have often done so when I felt it would serve them. I prefer the personal touch of the phone over email, so as to better experience one another's hearts."
I think he makes his position quite clear. He won't waste his time here defending himself. Why is it so difficult to understand that?
He further goes on to say:
"My goal in taking a shot at coming onto G-spot is to do whatever I can for anyone who is interested in knowing, loving, and walking with The Man, the Lord Jesus Christ, whom I have come to know much better in the years since I was dispatched by TWI. "
Which if taken in conjunction with what he says at the end . . .
"If you want to know more about Jesus, check out this link."
. . . seems to be saying, in my mind, that if anyone is interested in walking with our Lord Jesus Christ then he's interested in helping you. But if you're only interested in attacking him then -- he's not going to waste his (or the Lord's) time.
Eyes, I think what you said to Danny . . .
I am actually more concerned about the people of CES that were once again tricked and misled by so called ministers.
. . . says it all. You believe that John has tricked and misled the people of CES. It's possible that he doesn't agree with you (and based on his two posts here on GS I think it's highly likely that's what he thinks). Seeing as how you've already concluded in your mind that John is a false minister of the Lord why would he waste his time answering any of your questions. I know that if it was me -- I wouldn't.
HELLO AGAIN, JEFF BLACKBURN AND JOHN LYNN!........CHECKING ONCE MORE TO SEE IF YOU'RE LIVING YOUR WORDS, BY POSTING SOMETHING HERE AT YOUR FORUM!!........LOOKS LIKE YOU STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO SAY??........JUST SOME SIMPLE ANSWERS WILL DO JUST FINE!............
FROM YOU ARTICLE, "OUR VIEW OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY".......
As we grow up in Christ, we learn to identify and interrupt unhealthy attachments to things, ideas, people, emotions, etc. that interfere with our ability to love God completely and our neighbor as ourselves. Jesus often addressed the idea of attachment, whether to riches, to religious ideas, relationships, or any other thing that might hinder wholehearted devotion to God. Attachments are at the root of addictions and idolatry, so it is imperative that we deal with whatever we might have in our lives that limits our freedom to love and be loved.
FROM THE WAY YOU'VE BEHAVED SO FAR IN THIS FORUM, YOUR ATTACHMENTS TO VICTOR PAUL WIERWILLE AND DOCTRINES PRACTICED BY THE WAY INTERNATIONAL, APPARENTLY STILL "INTERFERE" WITH YOUR "ABILITY TO LOVE GOD COMPLETELY AND OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELVES."!!........IN MY VERY FIRST POST TO YOU, I ASKED YOU TO PLEASE NOT "PULL A TWI ON US"............BUT, AGAIN, YOUR TWI ATTACHMENTS ARE FAR MORE REAL AND PRESENT THAN YOU MIGHT BE AWARE OF!!!.......APPARENTLY, THESE "ATTACHMENTS" OF YOUR'S ARE KEEPING YOU ROOTED IN YOUR ADDICTION TO THE ARROGANT ABUSE OF YOUR SELF-PROCLAIMED POSITIONS AS "SERVANT/LEADERS"...........AND, YOUR ATTACHMENTS TO THE DOCTRINES AND PRACTICE OF PERSONAL PROPHECY SEEM TO KEEP YOU STUCK IN YOUR OWN BRAND OF "IDOLATRY".........SOME ANSWERS FROM YOU WOULD CERTAINLY CLARIFY YOUR POSITIONS, DON'T YOU THINK???........STILL WAITING PATIENTLY FOR YOUR REPLIES!.......................THANKS!..........................PEACE.
first of all, i was not a member or poster here until september,12, 2007. so, neither jeff nor john were replying to anything i asked them.........as a matter of fact, it was jeff, john and other ces members who asked pawtucket to post their letters, and, all the other "documents" of their's here at the greasespot!....he did not approach them......they approached him!.........and.......he graciously responded by setting up this very forum for them and ces....and all those who cared to follow the "events"as they unfolded here for all to see...........john posted another letter to all here at the spot besides the "epistle" of demember, 2006, in which he implied his willingness to respond to those who posted to him here........since ces' own site no longer provided "open" forums to it's own followers.......which at one time they had done.......why did they stop??...why have they not resumed their own open forum at any of their several websites??
secondly.......their "replies" here were not what " became fodder for the lawsuits in the first place".........it was their own foolish ministry of "personal prophecy" that started it all!........they turned on themselves and their followers......no one and no posters at the greasespot prompted any of their ridiculous lawsuits against themselves!......they were and are totally responsible for that themselves!!.......and, apparently, did'nt need or want anyone else's input or encouragement to get that silliness started.......they provided the "fodder" on their own by practicing their own doctrines!.........and, when folks here at the spot asked honest questions, they were told simply......."we have a book on all that which you can buy for"...........sooo.......let's give the credit for the "fodder" to whom it belongs.......the ces leadership themselves........and stop trying to blame "us" for their behavior!!
thirdly..........the reason i am asking jeff and john to reply here, is because, it was one of them who called me last winter, and asked me to "lurk" at the greasespot cafe to see everything they posted here........starting with john's letter of 12/2006...........to catch up on everything happening in their ministry.......and, then, to "please" get back to them and let them know what i thought about it all.........well, there were more pressing matters in my life requiring my attention at that time.........but i finally got to it in mid-august of this year, and i spent 3 weeks reading all the "stuff" here on this ces forum!........which is what prompted me to become a member here so that i might post my thoughts in this ces forum..........i have yet to post "what i think" about all of this..........but i have posted what i think are honest and pertinent questions of someone who asked me what i think!!.......i am responding to that request with a few questions of my own.....on a forum set up for them, at their request and specifically for their use!............i am in no way "adding to the stockpile" of anything!.....let alone their banal legal squabbles!
fourthly............i am not asking them to alter their lives to include "multiple daily visits to the cafe".........i am simply providing them a chance to reply to honest questions i have asked in a forum provided for them here at the greasespot..........a forum they asked me to read........a forum they've used before...........my questions are honest and polite..............so,..........what's the problem, cinderpelt???....................and, btw,.....thanks for your concern about my cardiovascular health..........i am normotensive and usually in good humor..........enjoying my life and job enormously!!...........so, no thanks on the chill pill..........i prefer that "jagged little pill" alanis sings about when i'm posting here..............seems that one's a bit too tough for you to swallow though, cinderpelt!!.............peace.
Some people know how to use communications to their advantage. JAL, IMHO, is one of these people. He asks something over the phone and acts completely differently in writing.
It's still manipulation. It's still dishonest. It still doesn't jive with the creed they have publically declared.
And no, I don't give a tiny little rat's azz about JAL or CES - but I DO have friends that have been affected by this debacle - those are the people I care about.
do you have a little program-widget that keeps reposting the same cut-and-paste every day or so?
No but, if you know of one I'd appreciate it if you could tell me how to download it. It would make it possible for me to waste less of my time.
Actually, this is not "John Lynn's response", since for this to be "John Lynn's response", it would have to be IN RESPONSE to Don's post in some way, which means it would have to have taken place AFTER Don's post. (Unless he claims personal prophecy showed him Don's post and he posted the "response" before the original post, but I've yet to see him claim this. I don't know if he is, but if he is, I haven't seen it.)
You believe that John has tricked and misled the people of CES. Seeing as how you've already concluded in your mind that John is a false minister of the Lord...
Please don't tell me what I believe. I'm not in TWI anymore so I won't listen anyway.
There is much that you dont know about this situation Larry. Please avail yourself of the post that Dooj made. She graciously did some research and found some information that might help clarify things for you.
LNM claims he has no dog in this hunt, yet he "answers" for JAL and does that unsanitary thing of putting words in others' mouths. WHY do you care, lnm, you claim you are busy, why not get busy and take a hike if you do not have anything genuine to "add" to the discussion....
right now, playing jal's toady seems beneath you...give it up.
Please don't tell me what I believe. I'm not in TWI anymore so I won't listen anyway.
Eyes, did I misunderstand you when you stated the following?
I am actually more concerned about the people of CES that were once again tricked and misled by so called ministers.
It seems to me you were making the implication that you don't think John (or the other leaders of CES) are genuine ministers. Instead of lecturing me about what you think I'm doing why don't you simply clarify what you meant. That would be appreciated.
There is much that you dont know about this situation Larry. Please avail yourself of the post that Dooj made.
I've availed myself to you with the invitation to PM email me. I haven't received one from you yet.
She graciously did some research and found some information that might help clarify things for you.
I've done my own research, thank you very much. From it I see nothing that would indicate that JL made himself available to be questioned by members of GS on a public forum. I've heard it stated that John requested this forum to be set up. Confirmation of that statement I could not find. Maybe dooj could be so gracious as to provide me a link to that.
Please state the origin of that John Lynn quote you are using. And your message has been received. After the 2nd one you are just harassing people!! If you don't have a source for the John Lynn quote then I will remove the posts.
Please state the origin of that John Lynn quote you are using. And your message has been received. After the 2nd one you are just harassing people!! If you don't have a source for the John Lynn quote then I will remove the posts.
John can be his own spokesperson.
Paw, despite the fact that I thought we had an agreement, I'll comply with your PUBLICLY made DEMAND -- when I have more time to look through my computer files. In regards to "harassing people" -- I think you should take note of cman's post (above) to me. It's a clear example of harassment. DWBH post's also fit that description -- IMHO. I guess it's all relative -- isn't it?
Larry - Hypothetically - If I call you on the phone and ask you to do something for me, then I publically post something contrary to what I said, I have manipulated information and I've manipulated you.
NOW that is dishonest. Is it not?
Why do you refuse to take what DWBH wrote on face value? Your insistence that a second written confirmation be provided comes across as naive at best and complicit at worst.
I am not accusing you of either naivete or complicity - I am saying that is the impression you are giving.
I wonder about your motivation for playing devil's advocate. What do you hope to accomplish?
I'm writing this in as neutral a fashion as I can muster.
And no - I will not email you because I have no information other than what I read here on the boards.
Larry - If I call you on the phone and ask you to do something for me, then I publically post something contrary to what I said, I have manipulated information and I've manipulated you.
Dooj, could you rephrase this? I'm not sure what you mean because the first part of the statement doesn't seem to agree with the second. Iow -- if you ask me to do something for you, how can you manipulate that request into something else?
Why do you refuse to take what DWBH wrote on face value?
The question is: Why should I? I don't know who DWBH is. I don't know if he has a personal axe to grind. Paw accused me of being harassing because I have posted a comment by JL every time DWBH has posted another one of his inquisition posts. My posts may be considered harassing but, if so, then so are DWBH by the same standard.
Your insistence that a second written confirmation be provided comes across as naive at best and complicit at worst.
I haven't seen the first written confirmation. I asked for a confirmation written by JL that he requested this forum to be set up. I haven't found it.
<snip> I'm writing this in as neutral a fashion as I can muster.<snip>
Dooj, could you rephrase this? I'm not sure what you mean because the first part of the statement doesn't seem to agree with the second. Iow -- if you ask me to do something for you, how can you manipulate that request into something else?
Here it is plain and simple:
It is possible for me to call you on the phone (hypothetically) and ask you to do something for me on a forum. If I then write things on that forum that are contrary to what I asked you to write and I make you out to be a fool or a liar or anything other than a person who has done what I asked - then I have manipulated you and "the public" on the forum.
I haven't seen the first written confirmation. I asked for a confirmation written by JL that he requested this forum to be set up. I haven't found it.
Suppose no written confirmation exists? Suppose that confirmation was made on the phone - as I stated in my first point, and as DWBH stated in the post I quoted.
It seems to me that to be totally neutral, you would have to accept both DWBH's word and JAL's word equally, and to at least hold your judgement in abeyance.
I'll admit that I have no fondness for JAL. I've seen the wake of destruction that he can leave. I'm not claiming neutrality regarding him.
Perhaps that's a good reason for me to go back to lurking on this thread.
It is possible for me to call you on the phone (hypothetically) and ask you to do something for me on a forum. If I then write things on that forum that are contrary to what I asked you to write and I make you out to be a fool or a liar or anything other than a person who has done what I asked - then I have manipulated you and "the public" on the forum.
Are you suggesting that JL called Pawtucket and requested this forum to be set up? What follows from this seems to indicate that you are.
Suppose no written confirmation exists? Suppose that confirmation was made on the phone - as I stated in my first point, and as DWBH stated in the post I quoted.
It becomes a matter of one person stating what was said on the phone, minus confirmation from the other party of that conversation, that it's true. Is it unreasonable for me with-hold my belief that it is true? I think not.
Oh! Wait a minute!!!!
It seems to me that to be totally neutral, you would have to accept both DWBH's word and JAL's word equally, and to at least hold your judgement in abeyance.
A light-bulb goes off. Yes, I have no way of judging if DWBH is telling the truth. He very well could be. However, there are little red flags I've seen that suggest that there's something to this story that doesn't quite ring true.
I'll admit that I have no fondness for JAL. I've seen the wake of destruction that he can leave. I'm not claiming neutrality regarding him.
That's honest of you (and appreciated by me). Given your bias I have no choice but to think that you would naturally be inclined to see JL run through a ringer (you may be too young to know what that is).
Perhaps that's a good reason for me to go back to lurking on this thread.
It might be. I do thank you for your candor and (civil) attempt to reason with me.
It seems to me you were making the implication that you don't think John (or the other leaders of CES) are genuine ministers.
Yes I think that you did.
But perhaps it is I who is misunderstanding you...
I draw a distinction between a "so called minister" which to me implies (does not state) that a person is called a minister by someone but may or may not be a minister, and a "false minister" which again to me clearly states that a person is not in fact a minister. Perhaps you do not draw this same or similar distinction.
Instead of lecturing me about what you think I'm doing why don't you simply clarify what you meant.
I am in fact implying that it is possible given the events that John's letter (which was posted here on GS) details that at least one if not more of the leaders of CES were not acting as true ministers. In fact according to other information (again posted here on GS) two top leaders of CES were removed from their positions because others thought that they were not being true ministers. Both of these items detail events that actually happened.
I see no need at this time to email anyone. The information is here. I have read it...you can as well.
And for the record I do not believe that I lectured you about anything. I asked you:
"Please don't tell me what I believe. I'm not in TWI anymore so I won't listen anyway."
That is not a lecture...my children would be happy to tell you about one of my lectures. :blink:
HELLO AGAIN, JEFF BLACKBURN AND JOHN LYNN!.......I WAS HOPING TO FINALLY FIND A POST FROM EITHER OF YOU HERE TODAY......BUT,......OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS STILL NO POST FROM EITHER OF YOU SERVANT/LEADERS........
FROM YOUR ARTICLE, "OUR VIEW OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY".......
As mentioned, one of the manifestations of holy spirit is “discerning of spirits.” We consider it fundamental to healthy Christian spirituality to learn to be spiritually discerning, and to recognize the reality and presence of a kingdom of spiritual darkness. This kingdom is led by a spirit being known as “the Prince of Darkness,” or “the Devil,” who organizes the activities of legions of evil spirits. These spirits are adept at counterfeiting everything the true God does, and hindering His purposes in every way they can. They attempt to saturate human societies with falsehoods, leading men and women away from the true God and the truth of the Bible. Authentic and mature spirituality involves faith and boldness to contend effectively with evil spiritual forces. It is also vitally important for a healthy spirituality that the believer not get out of balance in this area and “overspiritualize” adversity as if it were all the attack of the Devil. Healthy spirituality first emphasizes submission to God and Christ and their authority, then resistance to the Devil (James 4:7).
WAS IT "THE DEVIL" WHO CAUSED YOUR MINISTRY TO BE LED "AWAY FROM THE TRUE GOD AND THE TRUTH OF THE BIBLE", IF INDEED YOU ADMIT TO THE FACT THAT "SOMETHING" HAPPENED WHICH NECESSITATED THE REMOVAL OF MARK AND KAREN ANN GRAESER FROM THE LEADERSHIP OF YOUR MINISTRY??......HOW DO THE "DEFINITIONS" OF THE REVELATION AND POWER MANIFESTATIONS AS TAUGHT BY CES/STFI DIFFER FROM THOSE TAUGHT BY THE WAY INTERNATIONAL??..............AS TAUGHT BY B.G. LEONARD??........YOUR USE OF A "DEFINITION" OF "DISCERNING OF SPIRITS" SEEMS TO BE THE SAME AS WIERWILLE'S.......IS IT?.......THE MORE I READ AT YOUR SEVERAL WEBSITES, THE MORE WIERWILLIAN "THEOLOGY" AND PHRASEOLOGY I FIND!.....WHAT ARE YOUR DOCTRINAL "ATTACHMENTS"??......HOW CAN WE KNOW IF YOU GUYS ARE "OUT OF BALANCE IN THIS AREA", IF YOU DON'T COMMUNICATE WITH US??........STILL HOPING TO READ A POST OR TWO FROM YOU GUYS HERE!......AFTER ALL,....IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'VE NEVER POSTED HERE BEFORE!!........THANKS FOR YOU FORTHRIGHT REPLIES!......................................PEACE.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
33
85
41
69
Popular Days
Nov 16
30
Nov 19
29
Dec 9
19
Oct 21
19
Top Posters In This Topic
Tom Strange 33 posts
Ham 85 posts
Larry N Moore 41 posts
DontWorryBeHappy 69 posts
Popular Days
Nov 16 2007
30 posts
Nov 19 2007
29 posts
Dec 9 2007
19 posts
Oct 21 2007
19 posts
Popular Posts
DontWorryBeHappy
HEY JEFF!..........HEY JOHN!.............WHAT'S UP?? It's been almost a year now since you guys posted a load of your information, a long letter from you, john, as well as a number of other lengthy l
waysider
Just so you know, I put the quotation marks around it to indicate those are not my words.
Ham
and they can't hear or see the steam-roller heading in their very very own direction.. I've seen it heading in mine.. but that is life, isn't it? I'm "lucky(?)".. heh. I've had the advanced notice
Larry N Moore
Did he, now? John made a total of two posts. If I recall -- in his first post he stated:
"My dear pal Jeff recently informed me that he has been posting some things I've written in the past, and that it has stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest. At his suggestion, I had a nice visit with "PawTucket" by phone, and told him I'd be glad to make myself available to some degree, though probably not to the extent that will satisfy some of you."
It seems to me that an argument could be advanced that he was "baited".
He goes on to say (in that same post)
"I will probably not spend much time reading or answering a bunch of posts, but will give you my email address (jalces@aol.com) and home (317-849-5707) and office (317-255-6189) phone numbers in case you really want to communicate with me. I'm not much for communicating with those unwilling to identify themselves, although I have often done so when I felt it would serve them. I prefer the personal touch of the phone over email, so as to better experience one another's hearts."
I think he makes his position quite clear. He won't waste his time here defending himself. Why is it so difficult to understand that?
He further goes on to say:
"My goal in taking a shot at coming onto G-spot is to do whatever I can for anyone who is interested in knowing, loving, and walking with The Man, the Lord Jesus Christ, whom I have come to know much better in the years since I was dispatched by TWI. "
Which if taken in conjunction with what he says at the end . . .
"If you want to know more about Jesus, check out this link."
. . . seems to be saying, in my mind, that if anyone is interested in walking with our Lord Jesus Christ then he's interested in helping you. But if you're only interested in attacking him then -- he's not going to waste his (or the Lord's) time.
Eyes, I think what you said to Danny . . .
. . . says it all. You believe that John has tricked and misled the people of CES. It's possible that he doesn't agree with you (and based on his two posts here on GS I think it's highly likely that's what he thinks). Seeing as how you've already concluded in your mind that John is a false minister of the Lord why would he waste his time answering any of your questions. I know that if it was me -- I wouldn't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Danny
Looks like to me John did himself in by his own words.
He came up with the new and improved TWI.
He took money.
He claimed to be a minister.
So do the work.
Don't like the flock. Then prefect them like it says.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
HELLO AGAIN, JEFF BLACKBURN AND JOHN LYNN!........CHECKING ONCE MORE TO SEE IF YOU'RE LIVING YOUR WORDS, BY POSTING SOMETHING HERE AT YOUR FORUM!!........LOOKS LIKE YOU STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO SAY??........JUST SOME SIMPLE ANSWERS WILL DO JUST FINE!............
FROM YOU ARTICLE, "OUR VIEW OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY".......
As we grow up in Christ, we learn to identify and interrupt unhealthy attachments to things, ideas, people, emotions, etc. that interfere with our ability to love God completely and our neighbor as ourselves. Jesus often addressed the idea of attachment, whether to riches, to religious ideas, relationships, or any other thing that might hinder wholehearted devotion to God. Attachments are at the root of addictions and idolatry, so it is imperative that we deal with whatever we might have in our lives that limits our freedom to love and be loved.
FROM THE WAY YOU'VE BEHAVED SO FAR IN THIS FORUM, YOUR ATTACHMENTS TO VICTOR PAUL WIERWILLE AND DOCTRINES PRACTICED BY THE WAY INTERNATIONAL, APPARENTLY STILL "INTERFERE" WITH YOUR "ABILITY TO LOVE GOD COMPLETELY AND OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELVES."!!........IN MY VERY FIRST POST TO YOU, I ASKED YOU TO PLEASE NOT "PULL A TWI ON US"............BUT, AGAIN, YOUR TWI ATTACHMENTS ARE FAR MORE REAL AND PRESENT THAN YOU MIGHT BE AWARE OF!!!.......APPARENTLY, THESE "ATTACHMENTS" OF YOUR'S ARE KEEPING YOU ROOTED IN YOUR ADDICTION TO THE ARROGANT ABUSE OF YOUR SELF-PROCLAIMED POSITIONS AS "SERVANT/LEADERS"...........AND, YOUR ATTACHMENTS TO THE DOCTRINES AND PRACTICE OF PERSONAL PROPHECY SEEM TO KEEP YOU STUCK IN YOUR OWN BRAND OF "IDOLATRY".........SOME ANSWERS FROM YOU WOULD CERTAINLY CLARIFY YOUR POSITIONS, DON'T YOU THINK???........STILL WAITING PATIENTLY FOR YOUR REPLIES!.......................THANKS!..........................PEACE.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Some people know how to use communications to their advantage. JAL, IMHO, is one of these people. He asks something over the phone and acts completely differently in writing.
It's still manipulation. It's still dishonest. It still doesn't jive with the creed they have publically declared.
And no, I don't give a tiny little rat's azz about JAL or CES - but I DO have friends that have been affected by this debacle - those are the people I care about.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Larry,
do you have a little program-widget that keeps reposting the same cut-and-paste every day or so?
Actually, this is not "John Lynn's response",
since for this to be "John Lynn's response",
it would have to be IN RESPONSE to Don's post in some way,
which means it would have to have taken place AFTER Don's post.
(Unless he claims personal prophecy showed him Don's post and he posted
the "response" before the original post, but I've yet to see him claim this.
I don't know if he is, but if he is, I haven't seen it.)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
seems these questions DWBH ask have little to do with jl's personal life..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
No but, if you know of one I'd appreciate it if you could tell me how to download it. It would make it possible for me to waste less of my time.
:blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
"call me" he says..
the guy who was at one time in charge of a program, practically "training" people how to sell ice makers to penguins in the antarctic..
CALL ME??
"now ham, we oughter agree on the big T truth.. nothings broken. You've got all the ice you ever could use in one lifetime, do you not?"
You've gotta be kidding..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Please don't tell me what I believe. I'm not in TWI anymore so I won't listen anyway.
There is much that you dont know about this situation Larry. Please avail yourself of the post that Dooj made. She graciously did some research and found some information that might help clarify things for you.
Edited by EyesopenLink to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
LNM claims he has no dog in this hunt, yet he "answers" for JAL and does that unsanitary thing of putting words in others' mouths. WHY do you care, lnm, you claim you are busy, why not get busy and take a hike if you do not have anything genuine to "add" to the discussion....
right now, playing jal's toady seems beneath you...give it up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
maybe he's playing the "devil's" advocate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Eyes, did I misunderstand you when you stated the following?
It seems to me you were making the implication that you don't think John (or the other leaders of CES) are genuine ministers. Instead of lecturing me about what you think I'm doing why don't you simply clarify what you meant. That would be appreciated.
I've availed myself to you with the invitation to PM email me. I haven't received one from you yet.I've done my own research, thank you very much. From it I see nothing that would indicate that JL made himself available to be questioned by members of GS on a public forum. I've heard it stated that John requested this forum to be set up. Confirmation of that statement I could not find. Maybe dooj could be so gracious as to provide me a link to that.
Mr. Squirrel, you're very bright.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
Larry,
Please state the origin of that John Lynn quote you are using. And your message has been received. After the 2nd one you are just harassing people!! If you don't have a source for the John Lynn quote then I will remove the posts.
John can be his own spokesperson.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Paw, despite the fact that I thought we had an agreement, I'll comply with your PUBLICLY made DEMAND -- when I have more time to look through my computer files. In regards to "harassing people" -- I think you should take note of cman's post (above) to me. It's a clear example of harassment. DWBH post's also fit that description -- IMHO. I guess it's all relative -- isn't it?
Edited by Larry N MooreLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Larry - Hypothetically - If I call you on the phone and ask you to do something for me, then I publically post something contrary to what I said, I have manipulated information and I've manipulated you.
NOW that is dishonest. Is it not?
Why do you refuse to take what DWBH wrote on face value? Your insistence that a second written confirmation be provided comes across as naive at best and complicit at worst.
I am not accusing you of either naivete or complicity - I am saying that is the impression you are giving.
I wonder about your motivation for playing devil's advocate. What do you hope to accomplish?
I'm writing this in as neutral a fashion as I can muster.
And no - I will not email you because I have no information other than what I read here on the boards.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Dooj, could you rephrase this? I'm not sure what you mean because the first part of the statement doesn't seem to agree with the second. Iow -- if you ask me to do something for you, how can you manipulate that request into something else?
The question is: Why should I? I don't know who DWBH is. I don't know if he has a personal axe to grind. Paw accused me of being harassing because I have posted a comment by JL every time DWBH has posted another one of his inquisition posts. My posts may be considered harassing but, if so, then so are DWBH by the same standard.I haven't seen the first written confirmation. I asked for a confirmation written by JL that he requested this forum to be set up. I haven't found it.
I sense that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Paw, you'll find where I got the quote from in Belle's new topic Who is John Lynn? It's the very last paragraph.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pawtucket
Thanks Larry.
I will remove your posts with that in there since that quote is in no way directed at any of the posters on that thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Here it is plain and simple:
It is possible for me to call you on the phone (hypothetically) and ask you to do something for me on a forum. If I then write things on that forum that are contrary to what I asked you to write and I make you out to be a fool or a liar or anything other than a person who has done what I asked - then I have manipulated you and "the public" on the forum.
Suppose no written confirmation exists? Suppose that confirmation was made on the phone - as I stated in my first point, and as DWBH stated in the post I quoted.
It seems to me that to be totally neutral, you would have to accept both DWBH's word and JAL's word equally, and to at least hold your judgement in abeyance.
I'll admit that I have no fondness for JAL. I've seen the wake of destruction that he can leave. I'm not claiming neutrality regarding him.
Perhaps that's a good reason for me to go back to lurking on this thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Do as you will. I don't agree with you but, that's besides the point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Are you suggesting that JL called Pawtucket and requested this forum to be set up? What follows from this seems to indicate that you are.
It becomes a matter of one person stating what was said on the phone, minus confirmation from the other party of that conversation, that it's true. Is it unreasonable for me with-hold my belief that it is true? I think not.Oh! Wait a minute!!!!
A light-bulb goes off. Yes, I have no way of judging if DWBH is telling the truth. He very well could be. However, there are little red flags I've seen that suggest that there's something to this story that doesn't quite ring true.
That's honest of you (and appreciated by me). Given your bias I have no choice but to think that you would naturally be inclined to see JL run through a ringer (you may be too young to know what that is).It might be. I do thank you for your candor and (civil) attempt to reason with me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
I read the information that I reposted in post #230. I am not implying anything. I am simply re-stating what I read.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Yes I think that you did.
But perhaps it is I who is misunderstanding you...
I draw a distinction between a "so called minister" which to me implies (does not state) that a person is called a minister by someone but may or may not be a minister, and a "false minister" which again to me clearly states that a person is not in fact a minister. Perhaps you do not draw this same or similar distinction.
I am in fact implying that it is possible given the events that John's letter (which was posted here on GS) details that at least one if not more of the leaders of CES were not acting as true ministers. In fact according to other information (again posted here on GS) two top leaders of CES were removed from their positions because others thought that they were not being true ministers. Both of these items detail events that actually happened.
I see no need at this time to email anyone. The information is here. I have read it...you can as well.
And for the record I do not believe that I lectured you about anything. I asked you:
"Please don't tell me what I believe. I'm not in TWI anymore so I won't listen anyway."
That is not a lecture...my children would be happy to tell you about one of my lectures. :blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
HELLO AGAIN, JEFF BLACKBURN AND JOHN LYNN!.......I WAS HOPING TO FINALLY FIND A POST FROM EITHER OF YOU HERE TODAY......BUT,......OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS STILL NO POST FROM EITHER OF YOU SERVANT/LEADERS........
FROM YOUR ARTICLE, "OUR VIEW OF CHRISTIAN SPIRITUALITY".......
As mentioned, one of the manifestations of holy spirit is “discerning of spirits.” We consider it fundamental to healthy Christian spirituality to learn to be spiritually discerning, and to recognize the reality and presence of a kingdom of spiritual darkness. This kingdom is led by a spirit being known as “the Prince of Darkness,” or “the Devil,” who organizes the activities of legions of evil spirits. These spirits are adept at counterfeiting everything the true God does, and hindering His purposes in every way they can. They attempt to saturate human societies with falsehoods, leading men and women away from the true God and the truth of the Bible. Authentic and mature spirituality involves faith and boldness to contend effectively with evil spiritual forces. It is also vitally important for a healthy spirituality that the believer not get out of balance in this area and “overspiritualize” adversity as if it were all the attack of the Devil. Healthy spirituality first emphasizes submission to God and Christ and their authority, then resistance to the Devil (James 4:7).
WAS IT "THE DEVIL" WHO CAUSED YOUR MINISTRY TO BE LED "AWAY FROM THE TRUE GOD AND THE TRUTH OF THE BIBLE", IF INDEED YOU ADMIT TO THE FACT THAT "SOMETHING" HAPPENED WHICH NECESSITATED THE REMOVAL OF MARK AND KAREN ANN GRAESER FROM THE LEADERSHIP OF YOUR MINISTRY??......HOW DO THE "DEFINITIONS" OF THE REVELATION AND POWER MANIFESTATIONS AS TAUGHT BY CES/STFI DIFFER FROM THOSE TAUGHT BY THE WAY INTERNATIONAL??..............AS TAUGHT BY B.G. LEONARD??........YOUR USE OF A "DEFINITION" OF "DISCERNING OF SPIRITS" SEEMS TO BE THE SAME AS WIERWILLE'S.......IS IT?.......THE MORE I READ AT YOUR SEVERAL WEBSITES, THE MORE WIERWILLIAN "THEOLOGY" AND PHRASEOLOGY I FIND!.....WHAT ARE YOUR DOCTRINAL "ATTACHMENTS"??......HOW CAN WE KNOW IF YOU GUYS ARE "OUT OF BALANCE IN THIS AREA", IF YOU DON'T COMMUNICATE WITH US??........STILL HOPING TO READ A POST OR TWO FROM YOU GUYS HERE!......AFTER ALL,....IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'VE NEVER POSTED HERE BEFORE!!........THANKS FOR YOU FORTHRIGHT REPLIES!......................................PEACE.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.