Paradise Cafe Discussions - A Place For Bible Research And Christian Encouragement

Sunday 21 January,

Topic.........Elitism.


Don't know about you but I am an Elite. Where is that roll on the floor laughing emoticon?

I think it's this one - :rofl:

Savvy

Suggested topic.
What is Babylon the Great and what does it encompass? What is the significance of being split into thirds.
All other suggestions welcome.

Yeah!  Great Idea...:cheer:

My brain is about to split into thirds studying this stuff!!

Time for some thinktank input!:friends:

Love Lynn

This Sunday's think tank, February 4, 5:30 pm (Eastern)

Topic ......"The Tabernacle of David"
http://www.paradisecafediscussions.net/s...hp?tid=383

Introduction by Anthony.

It has come to my attention that some have had issues with my speaking on this topic.   In particular that I would be giving a "talk".     Now Vicky delicately broached the subject with me tonight without providing names so you are still anonymous.   But since this PalTalk room is a shared interest I would like to publically bring up the topic as I don't believe all this "behind-the-back" stuff is always in the best interest.

For starters I would like to share some background info on the PalTalk room for those who are new to it.   Last year we did the memorial in PalTalk using a borrowed room from a Bible Student.  (Thanks again Watcher!)  We held two memorial services with myself and Chuck speaking on that night.   (And much to my personal schegrin there is an audio recording floating around of them.)  

Many enjoyed it and started talking out loud about how nice it would be to have a Sunday talk each week in PalTalk.   Chuck went ahead and rented a PalTalk room with this in mind.   At the time it was envisioned that talks could be arranged in rotation and given on a variety of different.   Personally I was opposed to the idea of just having people give "talks" because what that does is it only gives voice to one person and turns the audience into passive listeners which is very much not in the spirit of how congregations are presented in the New Testament.   I felt that if such an idea were to proceed then time should be allowed for a group discussion of what was spoken.   For whatever reason the idea of Sunday talk never came to pass and the room was vacant.

The year previous, a group of us had been doing a weekly Bible Study in an open room so we started using the private room that Chuck arranged for, "Discussion 101", as our new meeting place.   So we were doing that on Saturday.   Sometimes in our discussion certain deeper topics would come up and we would end up moving them to the "parking lot" because we couldn't really due them justice during the time we had allowed for a systematic Bible study.    Recently we started moving these "parking lot" subjects over to an open consideration on Sunday which we call a "think-tank" as it usually involves bouncing ideas off one another.  

Now both Saturday and Sunday discussions are really enjoyable and the reason for that is because of the open participation of many.   This isn't like a "book study" where you are confined to something somebody has written or like a talk where you have just sit idly by and listen to someone talk.    Everyone has a share and in this way we come close to fulfilling the picture of a congregation presented in 1 Cor 14:26:

When you come together, one has a psalm, another has a teaching, another has a revelation, another has a tongue, another has an interpretation. Let all things take place for upbuilding.

We each bring something to the table and my one regret is that PalTalk doesn't allow for group singing of a psalm because that would be wonderful!

Now specifically regarding this "talk" that has caused some concern.    I was recently speaking to Vicky about "the tabernacle of David".  I've written about in on this board but the problem with text is that no amount of smilies will ever convey the enthusiasm and warmth of human voice.   Vicky expressed that it would be nice for me to speak about the subject in one of the Sunday sessions.  

Personally I was reluctant to do so.  Remember that I'm very much opposed to the concept of one person speaking and audience of passive listeners.    At any rate I agreed and figured I could speak for half the session and then others could have discuss the subject and make their own comments.   That way I could say what I had to say and that there would be an interchange among all.

So this was presented as one of the ideas for a future Sunday meeting and once again I was eager to discern the will the group and definately did not want to do anything that would be harmful.  Others seemed to be in agreement with the idea and we decided to go ahead with it.  Since then different ones have continued to express interest to me in listening to this subject.

Now I've learned that some have issues with it.   I'm not certain what exactly the issues are since they were never addressed to me so I'm basically come at it blind.   But basically what is a talk?  (I'm going to use the Watchtower as a frame of reference since that is our common background) At the Kingdom Hall it can be any public discourse ranging from five minutes to fourty-five minutes.   In a discussion room when does something stop being a comment and start being a talk?  Sometimes we may give a five minute comment - is that a talk?

Personally I would really love to share about the Tabernacle of David but it is one of those "big" subjects that you just can't squeeze in under five minutes.   It's a thirty-minute subject and there really isn't a lot I can do about that so I was ready to just kill the subject and forget about it but Vicky suggested that we go about it a different way.  I'm really at a loss about what to do.   I can't present it in five minutes and I suppose I could just keep raising my hand and dishing it out in five minute increments but really would that be beneficial or just silly?  Really what is the difference between a person speaking for half an hour and someone coming on a board like this and writing a half-an-hour's worth of research?

Anyhow at this point it's officially dead and we will just do an open discussion of whatever.    But if I can be open - I've been spiritually frustrated lately and being able to share this information on Sunday was a much needed glimmer of joy in my life - so now I'm hurting at the loss.  But what is more painful is the idea that some may have felt like I was trying to make too much of myself by wishing to present this information in this manner.

I just wish you knew how I feel about this.   With that memorial talk last year I didn't want to give it.   I just felt the need to step up to the plate and make it happen - basically just filling a hole as it were.   I had wanted to really prepare for it but the weeks before I was going through judicial hearings and it was such an emotional strain.   My appeal meeting was on Sunday and the Memorial was on Wednesday.   It got down to the night of the memorial and all I really had was a handful of scriptures scribbled down on scrap paper and I felt so overwelmed.  I prayed for God's spirit and he gave it to me and suddenly it worked despite everything else.  And I was happy to be able to share that with others.  Now many people expressed to me how much they enjoyed it and there was talk of course about this coming memorial.   My suggestion was that it would be better if we arranged for as many as possible share something about Jesus on that special night and not just have one person speak.  

So I just want you to know that I'm not trying to be the main show about anything  not then not now.   My preference will always be the sharing of the body over a single part of it.      I just wish you knew how I even loathe moderating the discussions week after week for that very reason.   I'm always torn between wanting to use my gifts and hide them.   Right now I just want to crawl into a hole and hide out.

Friends right now I feel frustrated, embarassed, worthless, useless and any number of things ...  All I want to do is to share the beauty of Christ and bit about the special things that we have through him.

Your brother in Christ,

Anthony

Anthony, my dear brother.:cheekkiss:

I just want to begin by saying that you are VERY much appreciated. Your "stepping up to the plate" often at the discussions 101 is such a blessing and I'm sure there is not one of us that does not feel grateful that you are willing to do this. Because of this I'm feeling distressed that you are distressed. You need to have your anxieties set to rest.

I'll be be honest with you and the board and bare my chest on this and say that I was one that had reservations.....not with you or the subject you wish to share....not at all....but rather the format.

A "think tank" is, by its nature, a peer group. Speaking for myself, this little group we have on Sundays is challenging, invigorating and lively. It has stirred to greater study, prayer, meditation and all the other spiritual goodies that come from "iron sharpening iron".

So it caused no little concern for me personally to see that next Sunday's think tank would consist of a 30 minute talk followed by open discussion. Now let me add that I understand your explanation of why you chose to make it so. However, for me, this does not seem to fit in a "think tank" setting and I'll tell you why.

In a "think tank" one person may propose an idea about a scripture application and someone else may have quite another thought and bring that to bear on the subject. The free flow of Jehovah's spirit between members of the thinktank is similar to what happens in a Chamber Orchestra. It has no conductor, but because each player is in harmony with all the other players there is a spirit that they all share and together produce beautiful music. In contrast, a full Orchestra that does have a visible conductor, is required to follow the lead of the conductor in order to stay in time and in harmony with each other.

We've been enjoying this new "freedom of the spirit" in the "think tank" format since none of us with a WT background has ever really experienced such a thing before. It's incredibly faith-strengthening.

So my fear, dear Anthony, is that if a person gives a 30 minute talk with joy and enthusiasm, and if I have thoughts that would perhaps sound contrary to specific points in the talk....what am I to do? By voicing them afterwards, would it not seem like I was "picking the talk apart"? Would that not be destructive to the spirit of the gathering? Whereas, if the same interchange was done in "think tank" style it's doubtful that there would be hurt feelings over such disagreements.

Here is a suggestion: Why not schedule a talk from time-to-time when one wishes. The discussions 101 room is available 24/7 and can hold 300 people. But it does not have to take place at the time scheduled for our "think tank", does it? That does not mean we cannot discuss the subject of the talk at some future "think tank" session, when it would not sound as if we were attacking the speaker or his ideas. After a talk, the usual comments are congratulatory, are they not?

To conclude, I'd just like to post this quotation from your comments:

I like what you have written here, Anthony, and I heartily concur. That is the ONLY reason for my reservations. Hope you don't mind me sharing my concern with you.

Much appreciative love, Rez:love:

I realize that I'm not at the discussions very often so my opinion may not matter.
Still I will give my view. By the way, this is not to Resolute, just my thinking on it.

The discussion on the tabernacle of David was not to open with a talk in the WT sense, but instead Anthony wanted to share some things about this tabernacle with you all.

Maybe others have more important things to talk about. I understand that him talking about the tabernacle of David for 30 minutes might seem like the spirit isn't moving freely. I was weary of that too, months ago, when the room was just an idea. If it's all about giving talks and no one discusses it afterwards for fear of offending the brother/sister giving the talk, that isn't free. But here you have open discussion plus you can still type while he is talking. And there should be no worries that Anthony would be offended, because it's all about openly discussing things. A long as it's done respectfully, as it always is.

My concern is this. If we want the spirit to move freely in the room, what if the spirit is moving someone to share 30 minutes on the tabernacle of David? Who am I to shut that spirit out?

Traditions kill the spirit. The tradition of the room on Sunday is to freely discuss whatever comes to mind or a preselected topic. Would a preselected topic be considered letting the spirit move freely? Or maybe that would not really be allowing the spirit to choose right in the moment? It may be that the tradition is to have no one person talking for a long time on Sunday, but we don't follow tradition at the expense of blocking out the spirit.

And I have a feeling that this isn't completey about a 30 minute "talk" so much as maybe there are some people who don't agree with the topic, once again, because of tradition, or rather preconceived ideas of who could look at the Ark of the Covenant, along with the sometimes screwy translation of the New World Translation bible. And we know that there are at least a few things in the NWT bible that are translated wrong, so it should come as no surprise that they could be wrong in other topics. Maybe we just don't want to give up our long held views. But it may possibly mean being closer to the truth.

I've read about the tabernacle of David topic and it is really interesting. It's something that every Christian could benefit from. We know that David and Jesus have a huge connection so it only makes sense that things would change once David came into the picture. That the rules, so to speak, would not be the same since it was showing a way for us to come freely to Jehovah and Jesus, without special status like it had previously been, before David with the Ark, and without law.

No offense intended to anyone, please:giverose:

Good morning all you wonderful people!

This is my concern also Nami.  I understand Resolutes concerns also.  The think tank has been a wonderful experience.  Question is would a 30 minute talk hinder the flow of holy spirit?  Well, I really don't know since I have never been present for this kind of format in the think tank.  Sometimes we need to try a few things and see what works best.  I personally didn't realize it was such a touchy subject for some, and was looking forward to hearing Anthony's research.  I felt it would be a set up where he could present the subject in full, than we could discuss it piece by piece..

Well, we need to keep the room comfortable for all.  If the subject is not discussed on Sunday, which it looks like it will not...I really hope Anthony takes the opportunity to pick another day for all of us to hear his research..perhaps a different time in Paltalk.  Sometimes the spirit is strong, and it needs to be released so that others may share in the joy of it.

My love to all...

Lynn  

For the sake of keeping the peace I'm rescheduling the presentation on the "Tabernacle of David" to next Sunday (February 11th), one hour before the "think-tank". So at 4:30 pm (eastern) we can discuss it and then at 5:30 pm we can move to the regularly scheduled program.

I apologise for any offense that the emotion on this issue may have caused. At times like this we can count our blessings that we have such a beautiful family to help us make perfect our personalities. Regarding this, here is a portion of an article I recently wrote for Tami's newlsetter

"To the congregation in Colossae Paul wrote, “Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with a heart of mercy, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience, bearing with one another and forgiving one another, if someone happens to have a complaint against anyone else. Just as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also forgive others. And to all these virtues add love, which is the perfect bond.” (Colossian 3:13-14) Paul here stresses the preeminence of love over Christian qualities. The entire body of believers is likened to a building, a spiritual house of the Almighty God. (1 Peter 2:4,5) With the temple of Solomon no mortar was used and the stones where chiseled and cut to fit and held in place by friction. It is expected that in our relations with fellow “living stones” we will rub against each other from time to time; but, love, the “perfect” or “complete” bond, will hold us together and cause us not to divide. Love is essential to the success and growth of any body of believers as love is the uniting force between us. (See Phil 2:2)"

Hi all...

I just wanted to make comment from what I have read above...

There may be a case of misunderstanding words and intent if I can explain… :)

First of all, let me say that this board is about open discussions and if there is a topic to be discussed via PalTalk it has to my knowledge always been in that format.

This because many of the folks here have and are starting to truly enjoy the freedom of discussing ideas they have learned since getting more free from the thought control of the “Watchtower Inc”.

So when the idea of having a “Talk” in the “Think Tank” sessions was tabled I also thought that this may not be the time or place for a “Talk”. The original announcement was something to the effect that a 30 minute talk would be given followed by open discussion.

A discussion in a “Think Tank” is based on a fluid exchange of ideas and each idea has no greater place than the other which is why it is so refreshing. We may not all agree but we certainly always have something to think about that helps us to dig a little deeper.

I have no problem with a pre-selected topic or with someone taking 10, 15, or even 30 minutes to share an idea as way of an introduction as long as it is not in the format of “teaching it as hard fact” which I’m sure was not the “intent” by anyone.

The problem I have with the format of “Talks” is while I may think someone is qualified to speak on a subject, I may also then feel someone else is not.

How do we tell someone that they can or can’t give a “talk” on a subject without it looking like we are playing favorites or not being fair.

Thus in a “Think Tank” anyone can open the discussion with a sharing and introducing an idea then let all have free comment whether they agree or not.

That being said if people want to arrange at a new time for “Talks” on a bible based subject then that can be done. Those who would like to listen can pop in to Paltalk to hear while at the same time able to openly agree or disagree with points shared in the talk on the board.

So with respect to all … I believe that there has been a misunderstanding of what was meant and the intent of the ideas offered.

Lets all try to keep our egos and feelings in balance … we are all equal and not one of us has greater understanding at this time than the other. We all need each other and everyone is truly valued for the unique gifts and differences we have.

I appreciate all those who have been willing to share openly and I for one learn much from listening more than talking.

Let’s all grow together by being proactive on topics more than reactive.

This week's (Sunday February 11th at 5:30 EST) topic on the think tank has two possibilities:

1. If Anthony's talk (Sunday February 11th at 4:30 EST) on "The Tabernacle of David" generates enough discussion that it spills over the hour, we can continue into the "think tank" hour. This will probably happen if everyone does research on the subject. There are many websites on this subject, some good (at least one VERY good - Building Again the Tabernacle of David) and some sloppy. Have a look.

2. The coming discussion of the book of Revelation in the think tank in a topical format rather than verse-by-verse will require that we first understand how to "test the spirits" or "inspired expressions"--NWT as stated by the apostle John in 1John 4:1.

The 1John 4:1 discussion should include what this scripture means and how to apply it in our personal study of the Bible and our discussions with others.

Can you think of any personal situations where you have "tested the spirits" and come to a new and more accurate understanding of a scripture? Your contributions to the think tank are very welcome. All who attend are very welcome to participate if they wish. At any rate, your presence adds to our spirit as we open and close with prayer.

Love, Rez

HOW DO WE TEST THE FOUNDATION OF OUR FAITH?

Who is the rockmass and how to make sure we do not let sand come in between us and Jesus?

Matt 7:24-27
Luke 6:48,49

These also:-

(Romans 9:33) as it is written: “Look! I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense, but he that rests his faith on it will not come to disappointment.”



(1 Corinthians 3:11) For no man can lay any other foundation than what is laid, which is Jesus Christ.



(1 Corinthians 10:4) and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock-mass that followed them, and that rock-mass meant the Christ.



(Ephesians 2:20) and YOU have been built up upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone.



(1 Peter 2:8) and “a stone of stumbling and a rock-mass of offense.” These are stumbling because they are disobedient to the word. To this very end they were also appointed.

Suggested.
What does it mean to be baptised into Christ?


Acts 19:5
Romans 6
Romans 13:14
Galatians 3:26-29
Ephesians 4:24

Thanks for putting that up for us Vicky. Just a reminder to everyone that it is Sunday February 25 at 5:30 EST.

Love, Rez:giverose: