The saints will be there: it will be filled with the saints! So only the Saints will go to Heaven - and this is true  

by Matt


I can seem to find this in my Bible, care to expound on this statement?  

Mkoley, the saints = all believers. Try John 3:16 for evidence of their salvation. It's the book after Luke.

Matt, this is Mc-theology.  (as in Mcmuffin, Mcmeal, Mcwisdom, etc.)

Have you any idea what George taught about entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven?  Have you ever read one of his books?  If you answer no, you have no business commenting on it in this manner.

Brent

     Call me naive, but i just don't get all the Brent-bashing.  
i was gone for two weeks, during which time Brent returned from his six week hiatus, and now it seems every time i look at the bb, somebody is taking a shot at him.  i'm not writing this to defend Brent, he's a big boy.  i just don't get it.
     His comments are often tongue-in-cheek, and quite amusing (but maybe that's because i'm not passionately debating him over something).  i don't read in his remarks that he's throwing his weight around, trying to be someone important or even getting emotional.  But claims are being made to that effect and quotes presented to back those claims (although they fail to do so) that make me think that maybe the patients have taken over the asylum.

     Let me ask this:  If the Son of God, during three years of ministry, was misunderstood by everyone who heard him (even his closest disciples), why should we feel that we must keep hammering away at our points of view until everyone else accepts them?  Do we just post whatever pops into our heads, or do we carry that thought to the Lord and ask him whether HE wants it posted?
     Suppose we do that and are convinced he wants us to post, but when we do, someone else refutes our words?  Do we at once engage that person in debate without consulting the Lord?  If we follow human instinct and attack, the results resemble a cheap talk-radio program.  (Still, someone will probably refute what i'm saying here without seeking the Lord's counsel about it).
     
     Let's face it, it isn't human nature to carry everything to God in prayer.  But then again, human nature isn't what's going to overcome this present evil world and the temptations of the flesh and carry us to our heavenly reward.  That is all attributable to the nature of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, AND our partaking of IT.
     Well, that sounds awfully preachy and takes all the fun out of showing everyone how much more clever i am than are those whose views oppose mine.  Maybe i should just stuff all this spiritual business under a rug and get on with tearing into my brothers and sisters as if they are my enemies.  That oughta have our REAL enemies (those powers and principalities) rolling on the floor with laughter.  It won't make me more than a conqueror, but if i "win" my debate, i can pretend it does!

Fair enough.  We hope and pray that any LBs that have chosen to step down and go to a different gathering, will learn from the good example of Wayne Mathews.
Lord bless,
M

     No two viewpoints are the same, so it would be useless for me to attempt to define the purpose of this bulletin board.  i can only state MY purpose in posting here:  It is to exalt and glorify God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, and to be a channel of blessing to his people (which can ONLY be done by exalting and glorifying him).
     Some of my following remarks are specifically addressed, as they respond to posts by specific persons.  However, they are for general consumption, and should not be interpreted as verbal assaults against any:
....................................................................

Brent,

     While i am not at all offended by your last post, i also do not understand your point.  Since it is specifically addressed to me, it seems i probably should.  If you have a personal issue with me, please send it to me personally, and let's not trouble the saints who it does not directly concern.
     It occurs to me that you may have misinterpreted my previous post as having been directed at you.  It was not (in fact, its application to you never entered my mind), but if you see a personal application, you should definitely feel free go over my head to take it up with the Lord.
....................................................................


     The topic of "Brent-bashing" was simply a springboard for me to address the concern of indiscriminate posting.  While i try to not be judgmental of individual posters' personal motives, it is difficult to see the Lord's hand in the broad spectrum of posts which feature little or no mention of Christ, unless it is to tell an "opponent" that God disapproves his methods.  They are virtually devoid of any signs of grace or love, except to emphasize negatively critical points of view.
     This BB has been the vessel of spiritaul reawakening for me and, if testimony can be believed, numerous others.  Must it now decline into a spitting match between opposing factions?  Maybe i'm missing something, but with email and personal messaging available to us all, the only reason i can see for ANYONE to assault another's character, OR EVEN CRITICIZE another saint on the BB is to cause public humiliation, WHICH IS GUARANTEED to bring negative reaction & agression.
     I am not saying that sin which damages the saints should not be publicly decried.  But i AM saying that most of the open BB hostility we have been seeing would have never reached its present stage if its protagonists had had the courage to eschew public SELF-vindication, and had taken the discussion to a personal venue, out of sight of the BB.  Humility leads us to prostrate ourselves before the Lord, allowing him to vindicate us, in his time.  It is ego that demands instant justice, standing us toe-to-toe in a verbal slugfest that honors no one and injures many.

     Again, the above comments are addressed to ALL.  If anyone finds them offensive, or wishes to discus them with me personally, i'm in the book (check my BB profile for details).  If, on another hand, you find them convicting, you may want to take them up directly with the Lord.
....................................................................

Verne,

     My understanding is that GG/Fullerton were in "fellowship" with a few (?) assemblies that came into being prior to any contact with him, and which received George and/or others from "the work" as no more than visiting ministers.  My questions are:
     (1.)  Is this true, & if so, where are these assemblies?
     (2.)  If such an assembly was established without input from GG/Fullerton, and has since renounced GG/Fullerton and rejected all association with same, of fellowship or doctrine, have they been able to continue, and how are they faring?
     This is addressed to Verne in view of his previous post, but responses are invited from any who have answers.

Earnestly, in the love of Christ,
al Hartman

Please allow me to suggest some qualifications to MGov's opinion, below:

     Differences which cannot be quickly resolved, particularly those which take on venemous worldly charactaristics are best resolved OFF the public forum, THEN presented fully resolved for all to see & rejoice in.
     Discussions, and even debates which honor the Lord through the evidence of honest inquiry, expressed respectfully and in love, can be a blessing to all.  A difference of opinion that degenerates into disrespectful remarks and/or accusations becomes a liability, threatening the peace of God's people, and is best resolved privately.

     We must all be responsible to ask ourselves what our purpose is in posting, and to ask the Lord whether it is his desire that the thoughts on our minds be posted.  This is no different than any other aspect of the Christian life.

al Hartman