your question has already been answered.

thank you for stepping in moderator. What you are saying about Speaktruth and Love s highly evident based on their posts.

and actually, no you haven't been able to answer my questions. Love. If you have a scriptural response to giving away a baby provide it with the specifics. I am not on here to engage in very mindless banter with you. You have provided no scriptural basis for the baby issue nor why an "elders" daughter would need to live with another and have a spiritual father as so many others do. You know I was trying to stay away from calling Radiant Life a full blown cult but then I looked at Websters and read some other info on cults and it is very much operating like a cult.

SpeakTruth, you couldn't be so wrong. the baby issue is reflective of the church practices and teachings. You still haven't reponded to the baby issue. Your response was a non response. Pauls "personal choice" is reflective of the leaders at RLC and the church as a whole for allowing a leader to do such and celebrate it in a church service. Abortion is a personal choice also and doing so is reflective of a persons beliefs, morals, ethics, etc.. These posts are to warn people of the wood in the eyes of those at Radiant Life. Yes I have wood in my eye and much more but that is not the topic of the thread. again, speaktruth you are only on here concerned about your reputation. And speaktruth you definately still have some brainwashing left in you. 2-42 group?. The baby issue is relevent. What has happened there in the past is evidence of the disease and sickness that is going on there.

I am looking for more responses on the baby issue. Is it right or do we as speaktruth seems to think say for anything that happens I am not here to judge. To me the baby issue in this case has no scriptural basis and is contrary to the new covenant and gods nature. So it is wrong and there is no gray area.

Again, I know of what I speak. Can't speak for others but it is not coming from the monkeys uncle here. and I would guess the others on here were longtime RLC attendees and are also not speaking from the monkeys uncle. Wht scepter and crown are you using to judge their posts. It seems you don't want others to evaluate, test, judge, but it is okay for you because you do not agree with something and find it ridiculous. Give me a break that is hypocritical and you have more Radiant Life left in you than you acknowledge. You do not have to go there to still feel the affects.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/11/2008 09:10PM by whatajoke.

WARNING SIGNS.....

Ask yourself if the following criteria apply to the group you are concerned about.

A destructive cult tends to be totalitarian in its control of its members' behavior. Cults are likely to dictate in great detail not only what members believe, but also what members wear and eat, when and where members work, sleep, and bathe, and how members think, speak, and conduct familial, marital, or sexual relationships.

A destructive cult tends to have an ethical double standard. Members are urged to be obedient to the cult, to carefully follow cult rules. They are also encouraged to be revealing and open in the group, confessing all to the leaders. On the other hand, outside the group they are encouraged to act unethically, manipulating outsiders or nonmembers, and either deceiving them or simply revealing very little about themselves or the group. In contrast to destructive cults, honorable groups teach members to abide by one set of ethics and act ethically and truthfully to all people in all situations.

A destructive cult has only two basic purposes: recruiting new members and fund-raising. Altruistic movements, established religions, and other honorable groups also recruit and raise funds. However, these actions are incidental to an honorable group's main purpose of improving the lives of its members and of humankind in general. Destructive cults may claim to make social contributions, but in actuality such claims are superficial and only serve as gestures or fronts for recruiting and fund-raising. A cult's real goal is to increase the prestige and often the wealth of the leader.

A destructive cult appears to be innovative and exclusive. The leader claims to be breaking with tradition, offering something novel, and instituting the ONLY viable system for change that will solve life's problems or the world's ills. But these claims are empty and only used to recruit members who are then surreptitiously subjected to mind control to inhibit their ability to examine the actual validity of the claims of the leader and the cult.

A destructive cult is authoritarian in its power structure. The leader is regarded as the supreme authority. He or she may delegate certain power to a few subordinates for the purpose of seeing that members adhere to the leader's wishes. There is no appeal outside his or her system to a greater system of justice. For example, if a schoolteacher feels unjustly treated by a principal, an appeal can be made to the superintendent. In a destructive cult, the leader claims to have the only and final ruling on all matters.

A destructive cult's leader is a self-appointed messianic person claiming to have a special mission in life. For example, leaders of flying saucer cults claim that beings from outer space have commissioned them to lead people away from Earth, so that only the leaders can save them from impending doom.

A destructive cult's leader centers the veneration of members upon himself or herself. Priests, rabbis, ministers, democratic leaders, and other leaders of genuinely altruistic movements focus the veneration of adherents on God or a set of ethical principles. Cult leaders, in contrast, keep the focus of love, devotion, and allegiance on themselves.

A destructive cult's leader tends to be determined, domineering, and charismatic. Such a leader effectively persuades followers to abandon or alter their families, friends, and careers to follow the cult. The leader then takes control over followers' possessions, money, time, and lives.

I still like this scripture.... it implies so much.... it says alot.... not only of the act.... but it goes much deeper.... this will only be considered off subject for those who defend RLC.... but for others against the evil ways of RLC.... this might say something... it does for me!

2 Samuel 11
David and Bathsheba
1 In the spring of the year,[a] when kings normally go out to war, David sent Joab and the Israelite army to fight the Ammonites. They destroyed the Ammonite army and laid siege to the city of Rabbah. However, David stayed behind in Jerusalem.
2 Late one afternoon, after his midday rest, David got out of bed and was walking on the roof of the palace. As he looked out over the city, he noticed a woman of unusual beauty taking a bath. 3 He sent someone to find out who she was, and he was told, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite.” 4 Then David sent messengers to get her; and when she came to the palace, he slept with her. She had just completed the purification rites after having her menstrual period. Then she returned home. 5 Later, when Bathsheba discovered that she was pregnant, she sent David a message, saying, “I’m pregnant.”

6 Then David sent word to Joab: “Send me Uriah the Hittite.” So Joab sent him to David. 7 When Uriah arrived, David asked him how Joab and the army were getting along and how the war was progressing. 8 Then he told Uriah, “Go on home and relax.” David even sent a gift to Uriah after he had left the palace. 9 But Uriah didn’t go home. He slept that night at the palace entrance with the king’s palace guard.

10 When David heard that Uriah had not gone home, he summoned him and asked, “What’s the matter? Why didn’t you go home last night after being away for so long?”

11 Uriah replied, “The Ark and the armies of Israel and Judah are living in tents,[c] and Joab and my master’s men are camping in the open fields. How could I go home to wine and dine and sleep with my wife? I swear that I would never do such a thing.”

12 “Well, stay here today,” David told him, “and tomorrow you may return to the army.” So Uriah stayed in Jerusalem that day and the next. 13 Then David invited him to dinner and got him drunk. But even then he couldn’t get Uriah to go home to his wife. Again he slept at the palace entrance with the king’s palace guard.

David Arranges for Uriah’s Death
14 So the next morning David wrote a letter to Joab and gave it to Uriah to deliver. 15 The letter instructed Joab, “Station Uriah on the front lines where the battle is fiercest. Then pull back so that he will be killed.” 16 So Joab assigned Uriah to a spot close to the city wall where he knew the enemy’s strongest men were fighting. 17 And when the enemy soldiers came out of the city to fight, Uriah the Hittite was killed along with several other Israelite soldiers.
18 Then Joab sent a battle report to David. 19 He told his messenger, “Report all the news of the battle to the king. 20 But he might get angry and ask, ‘Why did the troops go so close to the city? Didn’t they know there would be shooting from the walls? 21 Wasn’t Abimelech son of Gideon[d] killed at Thebez by a woman who threw a millstone down on him from the wall? Why would you get so close to the wall?’ Then tell him, ‘Uriah the Hittite was killed, too.’”

22 So the messenger went to Jerusalem and gave a complete report to David. 23 “The enemy came out against us in the open fields,” he said. “And as we chased them back to the city gate, 24 the archers on the wall shot arrows at us. Some of the king’s men were killed, including Uriah the Hittite.”

25 “Well, tell Joab not to be discouraged,” David said. “The sword devours this one today and that one tomorrow! Fight harder next time, and conquer the city!”

26 When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. 27 When the period of mourning was over, David sent for her and brought her to the palace, and she became one of his wives. Then she gave birth to a son. But the Lord was displeased with what David had done.

I love that story. More proof that you reap what you sow, and that God's grace is amazing!

Hey T, Is this scripture the one that the individual and church are using to justify giving away the baby? If so it is a very weak basis.

No it isn't.... i just wanted to post it on here....

I have posted another post on www.topix.com change the city to Sacramento, CA and you will find it there.....still waiting for an answer myself on that subject

Transparent: please explain for readers what your personal history has been in the church, including leadership experience, and time-frame present. I believe in past threads you may have already addressed this, but there are new readers and there is too much to skim through to find it.

I think this important because first hand experience is the proof that is needed here. Many issues are seen from the outside looking in, but the deeper you get the more you see. And I was in deeper that Doc Love at one point, although I have nothing to say concerning the past year-ish, as I have not been around.

WAJ: I have responded to the "baby" question over and over again... I just made it super clear that I don't believe it has anything to do with that church. I am entitled to that stance, whether or not you agree. And using this exact situation as an example, it would be like us judging transparent because he has "discipled" people in the past, and has been a part of that leadership in the past. This is NOT off-topic, in fact, it is the same scenario. Transparent, just like myself and so many others, have, in the past, done "discipleship" and the whole ordeal. RRMod, please don't say this is off-topic or that the thread is not about Transparent, because this is the same thing. I mean, look at the **llars Family. They were friggin awesome. Then they got jacked. But the truth is even all of these great people who has since left, have at one point, participated in this crap. So my point is, Paul may have done something that you disagree with, but if he is no longer submitted to that authority, then perhaps he is not the best example right now. What about TC, BM, or others?

i was involved with it since the 90's.... i thought it was the greatest place.... but i was lied to so much. what i mean by lied to is being discipled and encouraged to serve and then in the end get all kinds of jacked up philosophy thrown at me... the same bs of bless your discipler.... buy him starbucks coffee, buy him a gift.... but when you buy a gift it MUST be prophetic.... BULLSHIT! I hate it .... Tony is a friggin LEECH.... He will suck you dry with his own twisted form of teaching. i got into serving, not ever really consideredd a leader... just in the so called eyes or words of my ex-dicipler.... I went through life there trying to be cling to another man to help me grow spiritually and in fact... i died spiritually!!! It brought me to a dry place....and i'm trying to get out of that now!! Life is better being away from RLC...... The inner circle you remember.... Brandon, T.J. (oops... Timothy), Jeremy Stewart (mini-Tony), guys like that... i was never accepted amongst those individuals.... i could never be.... and I wanted it at one time till i woke up from my trance and got on with my life. there were some men that i lookled up to and respected at one time.... Greg Huth.... i don't get that dude....at all! As a matter of fact I think Greg Huth shoudl change his name to "Corporal Obvious" it suits him better.... how the hell is he gonna tell people that only the elders can pray for the sick.... thats bullshit! straight up and you know it.... you cannot stop someone from praying.... their running a nazi camp there at RLC, a mini-cuba, just like Fidel.... remember the history about him... at one time Fidel wasn't all that bad.... but a man named Che saw him for he who really was.... Today.... I am the Che Guevara who is about the people and making sure that the people have a voice!!!! Tony is worse than Fidel to me though.....