opening the door

Good fun, but for accuracy's sake perhaps you should have called them pseudo-Quakers? Real Quakers were in no doubt as to what they believed or why they believed it.

Now Ron, you know very well that Friends have no creed whatsoever. This is the point of the joke.pseudo quakers may have no creed but Robert Barclay knew what he believed and why, and he had the confidence of George Fox. You see the reason I find it hard to smile at the joke is that I am proud of George Fox and Robert Barclay; they are members of my family. I feel oneness in spirit with them, but none with you. The name of Quaker has been honourable and in the annals of God's warriors they have a high place. Pseudo-quakers are a disgrace and shame on the genuine glory of the real Quakers.

I'm not sure about thier theology, however brothers and sisters this one thing i DO know . .them Quakers make some great oatmeal!!! :-P

God is directly accessible to all persons without the need of either an intermediary priest or ritual. God speaks in a manner that is personal, direct and certain - a continuing revelation. This discernment is clarified through collective worship.JakeIt would be interesting to go through your list section by section, but this is interesting. Of course the Bible teaches categorically that we have to have a priest to give us access to God. This is why Christ became man to qualify for this role. Your pseudo-quakerism has disconnected. If you know and reject this priest there can be no access to God. The priest has to be specifically appointed my God, no man can self-induct himself as a priest. There is one mediator (priest) between God and man the man Christ Jesus. You are quite right to reject other professed priests, but you should put your own priesthood on the banned list too. You cannot access God without His appointed priest, and if you pretend otherwise you are in defiance of God's order.Pseudo-Quakerism has become self-authenticating. If the meeting adds is assent it is OK. You have become your own final authority. This was Satan's aim from the beginning.This is where your folly in refusing the revelation of Christ's unique person as God become man has led you. Virgin birth, by which God Himself became human in the moment of conception provides a Divine-Human person who is described thus in Hebrews (I forget do you accept Hebrews?)(For those priests were made without an oath; but this with an oath by him that said unto him, The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec:) By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. (Heb 7:21-25 KJV)There you have it, an never ending priesthood through God who became man and remains both God and man in His priesthood. Man has no access to God without a priest.

Jake writes;And you also know that I profess Christ as God come to earth in human form. I just don't tie Him up with all kinds of qualifiers.This is still not a confession of 'incarnation'. God came to earth in the form of angels in OT times. Did God become man? This is not God pretending to be man, nor God co-existing with a man, but the Word become Flesh. Do you or don't you confess that the Word, God the Son, became flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth?"There is That of God in all persons, often called the Seed or Christ Within or Inward Light, which can guide and shape each life in accordance with the will of God."Ron, you must have missed this one. The Inner Light is available to those who seek it. Christ Jesus, through the Holy Spirit, is the acknowledged source of this Light in Quakerism.No I didn't miss it and problem is that you are using the same words as the real Quakers but meaning something quite different by them. All Christians who believe the scripture know that God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.(Act 17:24-28 KJV) and as we can read earlier And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein: Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways. Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness. (Act 14:15-17 KJV) It is also true that the Word of God (the person) has always been the channel through which God has revealed truth, but the Word is no longer anonymous; the Word has become flesh. The revelation is not fixed personally in the person of Jesus Christ. There is no other name under heaven whereby we may be saved.It is the light of Christ that illuminates all men not Christ the Light. Light may penetrate where the person who is the Light has not entered. Light however is not Life, although Life is light. I am just unpacking John 1:4-9 here.I am not sure that the Light of Christ and the Seed of Christ are at all the same things in Fox's writings. Seed, of course, has Life in it. Barclays 4th proposition is quite specific that all do NOT have the seed;All Adam's posterity (or mankind)both Jews and Gentiles,4 as to the first Adam or earthly man,is alien, degenerated, and dead, deprived of the sensation or feeling of this inward testimony or seed of God,and is subject unto the power,nature,and seed of the serpent,which he sows in men's hearts,while they abide in this natural and corrupted tate;from whence it comes,that not their words and deeds only,but all their imaginations are evil perpetually in the sight of God,as proceeding from this depraved and wicked seed. Man therefore,as he is in this state,can know nothing aright;yea,his thoughts and conceptions concerning God and things spiritual,until he be disjoined from this evil seed,and united to the divine light,are unprofitable both to himself and others:hence are rejected the Socinian and Pelagian errors,in exalting a natural light;as also of the Papists,and most Protestants,who affirm,That man,without the true grace of God,may be a true minister of the gospel.Nevertheless,this seed is not imputed to infants,until by transgression they actually join themselves therewith;for they are by nature the children of wrath,who walk according to the power of the prince of the air.Your credal statement "There is That of God in all persons, often called the Seed or Christ Within or Inward Light, which can guide and shape each life in accordance with the will of God." confuses the inward light with the Seed of Christ. Fox and Barclay had experienced regeneration.Fox similarly distinguishes between those who have the 'Seed' and those who do not. eg.I was born in the month called July,1624,at Drayton-in-the-Clay,7 in Leicestershire.My father ’s name was Christopher Fox;he was by profession a weaver,an honest man;and there was a Seed of God in him. The neighbours called him Righteous Christer.My mother was an uprightwoman;her maiden name was Mary Lago,of the family of the Lagos,and of the stock of the martyrs. Pseudo-quakerism continues the mechanics of real Quakerism but is without its life.

by the way, if it were not for uppity unprogrammed Friends, like Lucretia Mott, women likely would not have the right to vote; slavery might still be in place (john woolman, the underground Quaker railroad, etc.) By following the Inner Light of Christ, these people bucked injustice that the traditional Church looked away from and accepted or even enforced.Jesus' teachings are practical as well as spiritual. Forget about predictions of tribulation and rapture etc. and set your minds and hearts to spreading God's love. It is sufficient.Over this side of the water these names are no so well known. I looked up a little on Lucretia Mott. The sympathetic note informed me that she was influenced by the Unitarians and that her "hearers are often told that they are not called to rest their hopes of selection on the "sacrifice" without the gates of Jerusalem." So much for the Atonement then?Over here we had some real Quakers like Elizabeth Fry and Thomas Fowell Buxton. If you want the ultimate hero of slave emanicipation you should read the biography of William Wilberforce and the Clapham Sect. These people turned the world upside down; they were bible believers, each one of them.

True faith rests on doubt and uncertainty.HUH? What is faith then? How can you have faith in anything that is doubtfull and uncertain? Thats not faith its just a thought.

I guess my main problem with literal fundamentalism is that it seems to make God out as cruel, something I refuse to believe.As it happens there isn't a single view in your list that I share! So you can pump as much lead as you like into that scarecrow; I'm not standing even close!Am I going to get an answer on whether or not "The Word became Flesh and dwelt among us"?

Thanks for the thoughts Jake!I interpret the bible literally, believing every word of it - I don't know if that makes me a 'literal fundamentalist' - but I will assume it does, and try and address some of your thoughts.The bible teaches that 1. everyone is a sinner, 2. every sinner is deserving of God's judgment, and 3. God's judgment for sin is death.Based on these simple biblical truths, I reason that God is not "cruel" for sending sinners to hell - rather He is "just."Likewise, the gospel is fairly simple:1. Repentance toward God2. Trust in Jesus ChristIn the same way that gun's don't kill people (it is the person who pulls the trigger that is the killer) - in the same way, God doesn't send people to hell - sin does. Again, the reason people go to hell is not because they haven't heard about Jesus Christ - they go to hell because they are sinners. Do we imagine that Noah went and preached God's righteousness to every sinlge living person in the whole world before God sent the flood? Of course not. Was God wicked for destroying those sinners? Of course not! The reason people were destroyed in the flood had nothing to do with whether or not Noah gave them a personal visit and told them about God and His righteousness - they were destroyed because they were wicked. Being wicked is reason enough.They didn't die and go to hell 'through no fault of their own' - they died and went to hell because they were sinners - and it was their own fault that they were sinners - not Noah's, and in the example of sinner's today who do not hear the gospel - they don't go to hell 'through no fault of their own' - they go to hell because they are sinners, and have only themselves to blame.I think true faith trusts in the person of Jesus Christ (rather than a prayer, decision, intellectual persuasion, or works). My faith then, is on something sure and solid, not doubtful or uncertain.I don't think there is anything spiritual (and certainly nothing attractive) about being confused and unbelieving. I believe you are sincere of course, but I think you have misunderstood 'fundamentalism' - since I see nothing in your observation that rings even remotely close to applicable.Dan

I guess my main problem with literal fundamentalism is that it seems to make God out as cruel, something I refuse to believe.I got 2 cents How can GOD Be Cruel, When it is Sin that Kills.Everyone has a Death Sentence from Birth; it’s there Ego/Pride that makes Humans think they have a Right to Exist. Satan said "You will not surely die"!! But GOD did say, “You must not eat Fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die”!!Take you Pick, that’s what this life is.Disobey and DieObey and Live.It's all in Chapter One.One Letter in the Bible has more weight than all the Books and Words and Thoughts ever devised by Fallen Man such as We.Tanks for listening.

bubbaguy wrote:I guess my main problem with literal fundamentalism is that it seems to make God out as cruel, something I refuse to believe. The bar for salvation is set very high at best and at worst is so complex in detail that people poor of mind have no chance at all. They don't even know there's a bar.I have a 4 year old son. If I explained to him the effects of getting drunk, positive and negative, and then left a case of beer on the bench saying, "Please don't drink this, or you may become an alcholic, or worse", there's a good chance, that'll he'll try to prove me wrong. If instead I said to him, "There is alot of things in this world that can hurt you, but if you trust me, and do what you're told, there's a good chance that you'll grow up to be a good person, with a good life and not end up in jail", and then make sure that I don't drink, and have no alchohol in the house, the chances of him becoming an alchoholic reduce damatically.This is what God did in the garden. He wanted us to love Him, and love requires choice. Rather than leaving something, like a shot gun lying around, waiting for Adam to have an argument with Eve, he put a tree that would make it possible to know what evil is, then said "Don't touch!!" God's answer to sin, is ingorance to it, and trust in Him. He wants us to consult Him in everything, and involve Him in our life, which flies in the face of "doing our own thing". We tend to say, "Here's what I want you to do. Ihaven't got time to help. Don't screw it up." While God says, "Come with me, and I'll show you what to do, and then we'll do it togther." (Psalm 23:3). How is that cruel? Then after that, He says to those who take up His offer, "You'll have to put up with selfish people, who'll hurt you, because I need them to trust me, like you do, to stop. But it won't be forever, and one day, you won't have to suffer at their hands anymore." Not only that, but in spite of people continually saying, "It's okay God. I can manage on my own." He keeps offering His help.Eventually, He has to separate those who won't trust and obey Him, from those who don't, or He would be cruel and inhumane. Now consider a place where everyone is totally selfish, and never want to do anything for anyone else. Personally, I'd rather a lake of eternal fire any day.Essentially, eternal judgement is a matter of being "cruel" to be "kind".

literal fundamentalism What is literal fundamentalism? If God created all of us, how could he be cruel in allowing all of us to go to hell? Can't he do whatever he wishes with his own creation? The creator isn't cruel even if he chooses to destroy his creation and begin again. He can do this as many times as he likes. This whole conversation makes me think of some sci-fi movie where the robots take over. We don't care what they think, do we? If we made them?I was disciplining my 8 year old son the other day for an angry, demanding attitude. It took all afternoon. Finally, he screamed, "I'm not angry!" I said, "I don't care what you think. It's what I think that matters and you better get busy convincing me your not angry by your actions!" That's how I see God. What we think doesn't matter. He's right and that's that. The rest of our lives need to be spent aligning ourselves with him. It's called, 'honoring your father'. That's my 2 cents. Thanks. Dian.