|
Post by Joacom on Sept 8, 2016 23:37:14 GMT
Thank you for coming back to my thread, Joacom. I disagree with your statement that the PRC teaches that the entire Christian church is apostate. Please provide proof for that assertion. I'm not comfortable speaking about that story with you at this point. It contains information that is too identifying - I don't know any other PRs who have a similar story. Perhaps once we talk more I'll PM it to you if you are curious. Would that be ok? I really don't have enough knowledge about that particular subject to make any definitive statements. However, I don't think race/ethnicity is relevant. Do you think race/ethnicity is relevant? I would say a possible explanation for it would be that the PRC caught on with a primarily Dutch group of people, and since it's still a relatively new and quite small denomination, it hasn't spread much beyond that. I don't see why that's a problem though, can you explain to me why you do? Go to any PRC church and listen carefully to what they preach! Race/ethnicity: Brainwashing is used to maintain membership in PRC and it is obvious you are brainwashed and I doubt that you have any story to tell beside, you know that you will be exposing PRC. The Protestant Reformed Churches in America (PRC) or (PRCA) is 92 years old today and that does not make it relatively new. I have no problem with race but when people are brainwashed to maintain membership in a religious sect ,then there is a problem.
I do not think that you are the right person to ask about PRC since you do not have enough knowledge about this sect.
|
|
|
Post by cannalily on Sept 9, 2016 5:24:20 GMT
Seriously, ask me anything. I am not here to claim I am an authority on what the PRC teaches, although I am a member, but I am interested in hearing what you have to say to me. My main interest here is that I feel I, as well as others in the church, am being misrepresented in the comments. Please do not misinterpret me as saying that I don't believe your stories listed elsewhere on the forum, because I know very well that bad people exist within our congregations. I simply feel that sometimes a blanket statement is used for all members of these churches when it isn't appropriate. And so, allow me to defend myself and my beliefs to you. All I want is to have a fair debate that represents both sides of our arguments well. I am willing to reveal personal details to a certain extent, although I do wish to remain anonymous so some questions may go unanswered. I will do the best I can to paint an accurate picture of myself and my beliefs without compromising that anonymity. Ok, I'll play. So here's my debate question: Tell me, how do you continue to be in a church that's supposed to be the truest church and yet abuse of women - particularly spousal abuse - not to mention psychological abuse - is still rampant in "God's truest church"? How is "God's truest church" so filled with these things, while other churches don't suffer from this nearly at all? (Oh, and unlike yourself, I've been to many different churches. So I can accurately say that.) How does abuse fit into God's master planned ratio of the Protestant Reformed saved, 4:7125000 people? Second debate question: If there's another TRUE church out there, please name it. Specifically. Third debate question: Why is it that the PRC teaches you to put the full armor of God on, and not to let your light so shine, but you are so concerned about your outward appearance, not necessarily to people here (although you've demanded their respect), but how you will be perceived back in your home base? If no one knows about this forum, why are YOU so worried about that? Does that not seem a bit pharasee-istic? Shouldn't you just be yourself? Why all of the guarded feelings?
|
|
|
Post by Skyfall on Sept 9, 2016 11:50:33 GMT
Seriously, ask me anything. I am not here to claim I am an authority on what the PRC teaches, although I am a member, but I am interested in hearing what you have to say to me. My main interest here is that I feel I, as well as others in the church, am being misrepresented in the comments. Please do not misinterpret me as saying that I don't believe your stories listed elsewhere on the forum, because I know very well that bad people exist within our congregations. I simply feel that sometimes a blanket statement is used for all members of these churches when it isn't appropriate. And so, allow me to defend myself and my beliefs to you. All I want is to have a fair debate that represents both sides of our arguments well. I am willing to reveal personal details to a certain extent, although I do wish to remain anonymous so some questions may go unanswered. I will do the best I can to paint an accurate picture of myself and my beliefs without compromising that anonymity. Ok, I'll play. So here's my debate question: Tell me, how do you continue to be in a church that's supposed to be the truest church and yet abuse of women - particularly spousal abuse - not to mention psychological abuse - is still rampant in "God's truest church"? How is "God's truest church" so filled with these things, while other churches don't suffer from this nearly at all? (Oh, and unlike yourself, I've been to many different churches. So I can accurately say that.) How does abuse fit into God's master planned ratio of the Protestant Reformed saved, 4:7125000 people? Second debate question: If there's another TRUE church out there, please name it. Specifically. Third debate question: Why is it that the PRC teaches you to put the full armor of God on, and not to let your light so shine, but you are so concerned about your outward appearance, not necessarily to people here (although you've demanded their respect), but how you will be perceived back in your home base? If no one knows about this forum, why are YOU so worried about that? Does that not seem a bit pharasee-istic? Shouldn't you just be yourself? Why all of the guarded feelings? The muslims are contrite to their "god" as well. They apparently don't hold their women too high either. Cult practice? Or because "god" says to do something, you blindly obey?
|
|
|
Post by cannalily on Sept 9, 2016 13:53:54 GMT
Ok, I'll play. So here's my debate question: Tell me, how do you continue to be in a church that's supposed to be the truest church and yet abuse of women - particularly spousal abuse - not to mention psychological abuse - is still rampant in "God's truest church"? How is "God's truest church" so filled with these things, while other churches don't suffer from this nearly at all? (Oh, and unlike yourself, I've been to many different churches. So I can accurately say that.) How does abuse fit into God's master planned ratio of the Protestant Reformed saved, 4:7125000 people? Second debate question: If there's another TRUE church out there, please name it. Specifically. Third debate question: Why is it that the PRC teaches you to put the full armor of God on, and not to let your light so shine, but you are so concerned about your outward appearance, not necessarily to people here (although you've demanded their respect), but how you will be perceived back in your home base? If no one knows about this forum, why are YOU so worried about that? Does that not seem a bit pharasee-istic? Shouldn't you just be yourself? Why all of the guarded feelings? Abuse may exist in the PRC. I'm not trying to claim it is impossible with my next statement. I disagree with your assertion that abuse is rampant. For abuse to be rampant, it must be flourishing, spreading unchecked. Please provide proof for that statement. Without proof, we have to continue with our discussion on assuming that it is not rampant. Once there is a solid footing for this question, I will answer it. If the validity of the statement cannot be proved, this is a loaded question therefore I cannot answer it directly. May? Did you read other posts here? Its DOES exist. Abuse is part of the institution. You need to read more about it. You may not even know it because you're still in the PRC. As an EX-PRC member, I can tell you that it absolutely exists. The true church "manifests itself in the PRC". How many times have I heard with my stint in the PRC. You did exactly what you were told in the PRC. Weasel out technically. I'm sure FreefromPRC might have something to say here. And I completely disagree with that statement. How many times have I heard Dutch ministers go on and on - even in their own native tongue about how God is part and parcel with the PRC? Maybe you haven't noticed, but the PRC is ONLY interested in the outward appearance of sin. It's one of the reasons why psychological abuse can be so prevalent, but goes unsaid - because it "looks" good. I disagree with your assessment of yourself - you're trying to look good in front of the PRC - just in case they "hold the PRC accountable for what you say". It's why you're anonymous. So in case you say something wrong, they can't track you down and make an public example of you. I get it. Been there and done that. You mean, PRC rules, right? It does. typo. But that being said, why all the anonymity?
|
|
seeker
Seminary Student
Posts: 351
|
Post by seeker on Sept 9, 2016 14:24:56 GMT
Seeker: A. Yes, I do believe that is where God led them. Do you believe God is omnipotent? B. I take issue with the fact that you assert I was indoctrinated in your question. Being indoctrinated implies that you are unable to look at your beliefs critically. I was taught by the PRCA to always be critical of my beliefs. I would like to think that I am living up to being critical of my beliefs by welcoming you to challenge them. Taking into account the argument I have presented, do you still feel that I am indoctrinated? Please do not ask questions with assertions that have not been proved. C. I do not know the number of people who came to our church from outside churches. I personally don't think it matters. Does it say in the Bible somewhere that the church who is teaching the pure Word of God will also have the most converts? D. I do not wonder if I am here because it is all I know, because it is not all I know. My family came from outside the PRC. They found the PRC after searching for many years for a church that taught what they believed. Do you have a question for me about what I believe? I'll keep answering any questions you have, but please be careful not to make unfounded assertions in your questions. a - yes he is. but that does not mean that being brought up pr is god leading. maybe god left you there. muslims bring up new muslims. catholics bring up catholics. pr bring up pr your point b explains that you are indoctrinated. you seem to only know what the prc taught you. no cult member believes they are in a cult.......until they leave c - maybe this is a stat you should know. if you believe god leads the pr there, why does the church only grow internally d - you said you have not spent time in other churches. the amish do not either, yet they are convinced they are right i am not trying to hurt your feelings. i actually feel bad for the people stuck there. they have no idea. i was there too once
|
|
|
Post by freefromprc on Sept 9, 2016 14:50:28 GMT
Ok, I'll play. So here's my debate question: Tell me, how do you continue to be in a church that's supposed to be the truest church and yet abuse of women - particularly spousal abuse - not to mention psychological abuse - is still rampant in "God's truest church"? How is "God's truest church" so filled with these things, while other churches don't suffer from this nearly at all? (Oh, and unlike yourself, I've been to many different churches. So I can accurately say that.) How does abuse fit into God's master planned ratio of the Protestant Reformed saved, 4:7125000 people? Second debate question: If there's another TRUE church out there, please name it. Specifically. Third debate question: Why is it that the PRC teaches you to put the full armor of God on, and not to let your light so shine, but you are so concerned about your outward appearance, not necessarily to people here (although you've demanded their respect), but how you will be perceived back in your home base? If no one knows about this forum, why are YOU so worried about that? Does that not seem a bit pharasee-istic? Shouldn't you just be yourself? Why all of the guarded feelings? Abuse may exist in the PRC. I'm not trying to claim it is impossible with my next statement. I disagree with your assertion that abuse is rampant. For abuse to be rampant, it must be flourishing, spreading unchecked. Please provide proof for that statement. Without proof, we have to continue with our discussion on assuming that it is not rampant. Once there is a solid footing for this question, I will answer it. If the validity of the statement cannot be proved, this is a loaded question therefore I cannot answer it directly. It seems as though you refuse to acknowledge my previous statements that the True Church is not a physical institution, but rather the gathering of all of God's people. If the reason you haven't acknowledged that is because you need me to provide proof for that statement, I can. It is impossible for me to define a physical institution for something that is by definition not a physical institution. Do you agree with that statement? Again, I feel I explained myself with my previous posts. I am trying to conceal my identity from the general public for security reasons. People who know who I am will recognize me easily on this forum because of the details I have revealed and the way I write. I have no problem with that at all. I disagree that I am only worried about how people in the PRC think of me. I agree that I'm worried about how I'm being perceived in general, but I think it would be a little backwards if I didn't care how people perceived me. Whether I want it to or not, some people who come across this thread may hold the PRC accountable for what I say so I want to be careful with the way I speak. I am being myself. Perhaps I am guarding my feelings, but again I don't think that's wrong or even unexpected. Are there any statements in my argument that you disagree with? Also, could you please explain to me how that I am being like the Pharisees so that I can respond to that question? Respect is necessary to have a productive conversation. I try to respond both logically and respectfully to further discussion. If those who I speak with do not follow those same principles, then we cannot move forward in our arguments. I'm not asking that people agree with me. I'm asking that people acknowledge to me when they disagree with me and why. Do you feel it is improper of me to ask for people to respond respectfully if they want the conversation to continue? If so, why do you feel that way? Also, your third question is also has another unproved assertion. Please prove that the PRC does not teach us to let our light shine or we will have to throw that statement out. Just a note, you say abuse may exist, I would like to correct you and say it DOES exist and it IS rampant. If you take the time to read the pain people on this site have experienced, then you would know this. Of course there is no way to prove this to YOU without people saying who they are....and surely you understand why people would want to stay anonymous...
|
|
|
Post by Skyfall on Sept 9, 2016 14:54:49 GMT
The muslims are contrite to their "god" as well. They apparently don't hold their women too high either. Cult practice? Or because "god" says to do something, you blindly obey? If you are saying that Muslims and the PRC have a similarity in that they are both "contrite to their 'god'", or both "don't hold their women too high", that is not an illogical statement. If you are saying that Muslims and the PRC have more in common simply because they are both "contrite to their 'god'", or both "don't hold their women too high", that is illogical.
|
|
|
Post by freefromprc on Sept 9, 2016 15:09:26 GMT
Abuse may exist in the PRC. I'm not trying to claim it is impossible with my next statement. I disagree with your assertion that abuse is rampant. For abuse to be rampant, it must be flourishing, spreading unchecked. Please provide proof for that statement. Without proof, we have to continue with our discussion on assuming that it is not rampant. Once there is a solid footing for this question, I will answer it. If the validity of the statement cannot be proved, this is a loaded question therefore I cannot answer it directly. May? Did you read other posts here? Its DOES exist. Abuse is part of the institution. You need to read more about it. You may not even know it because you're still in the PRC. As an EX-PRC member, I can tell you that it absolutely exists. The true church "manifests itself in the PRC". How many times have I heard with my stint in the PRC. You did exactly what you were told in the PRC. Weasel out technically. I'm sure FreefromPRC might have something to say here. And I completely disagree with that statement. How many times have I heard Dutch ministers go on and on - even in their own native tongue about how God is part and parcel with the PRC? Maybe you haven't noticed, but the PRC is ONLY interested in the outward appearance of sin. It's one of the reasons why psychological abuse can be so prevalent, but goes unsaid - because it "looks" good. I disagree with your assessment of yourself - you're trying to look good in front of the PRC - just in case they "hold the PRC accountable for what you say". It's why you're anonymous. So in case you say something wrong, they can't track you down and make an public example of you. I get it. Been there and done that. You mean, PRC rules, right? It does. typo. But that being said, why all the anonymity? Hey cannalily, how do you create those quotes with spaces between them? I have seen others do it as well.
|
|
|
Post by cannalily on Sept 9, 2016 15:15:03 GMT
May? Did you read other posts here? Its DOES exist. Abuse is part of the institution. You need to read more about it. You may not even know it because you're still in the PRC. As an EX-PRC member, I can tell you that it absolutely exists. The true church "manifests itself in the PRC". How many times have I heard with my stint in the PRC. You did exactly what you were told in the PRC. Weasel out technically. I'm sure FreefromPRC might have something to say here. And I completely disagree with that statement. How many times have I heard Dutch ministers go on and on - even in their own native tongue about how God is part and parcel with the PRC? Maybe you haven't noticed, but the PRC is ONLY interested in the outward appearance of sin. It's one of the reasons why psychological abuse can be so prevalent, but goes unsaid - because it "looks" good. I disagree with your assessment of yourself - you're trying to look good in front of the PRC - just in case they "hold the PRC accountable for what you say". It's why you're anonymous. So in case you say something wrong, they can't track you down and make an public example of you. I get it. Been there and done that. You mean, PRC rules, right? It does. typo. But that being said, why all the anonymity? Hey cannalily, how do you create those quotes with spaces between them? I have seen others do it as well. Hey FreefromPRC - when you "quote" someone, use the BBCode button to see where the "" tags are sitting. You can either move them, or create new ones, and so you can manipulate the text as you wish. I'll PM/direct message you for more examples.
|
|
|
Post by crazychurch on Sept 9, 2016 15:17:03 GMT
So anonuser - just because YOU didn't see it, it means it didn't happen? Got it. That means the earth isn't really round, right? Or there aren't such things as germs, because you have no proof - only the symptoms, right?
ok. #logicfail
|
|
|
Post by freefromprc on Sept 9, 2016 15:26:14 GMT
Just a note, you say abuse may exist, I would like to correct you and say it DOES exist and it IS rampant. If you take the time to read the pain people on this site have experienced, then you would know this. Of course there is no way to prove this to YOU without people saying who they are....and surely you understand why people would want to stay anonymous... I explained my usage of may in my response about that earlier. I definitely don't expect people to reveal themselves. However, I personally cannot make the claim for or against abuse existing in PRC members homes without proof. Those people can. I just want to be correct with the way I word things, and I feel that is the most correct way to word things for myself. It amazes me that when people in the PRC learn of abuse, instead of investigating it, they immediately defend the organization. Many people here including myself have seen first hand horrible abuse. Spousal beatings, horrific child beatings, and much more. In several instances that I personally know of, the abuse was brought to the attention of pastors who refused to acknowledge it. One of these pastors I know first hand for a fact was extremely abusive to his family and more. If you want proof, you need to do your own homework. I suspect you will choose to ignore what people on here have discussed. I do understand that there are good families in the PRC who would be in complete disbelief over what we have seen, be thankful if that is where you grew up. Also, the fact that your family joined the PRC later also is a reason you do not know the inside goings on there. You have been trained to require proof on all things. This is classic PRC methodology, which has its positive points, but also enables people to ignore the possibility. The PRC fails in that it requires so much red tape to deal with an issue, that people who try to solve problems become exhausted before the problem even gets addressed.
|
|
|
Post by crusader on Sept 9, 2016 15:31:35 GMT
Crusader: A. Yes, I am sure I am a member. B. No, I have not heard of the forum before stumbling across it myself the other day. I'm not lying about my experiences, and I trust that you aren't either. Are there any more statements that I have made that you are questioning? I do not believe you are lying. I do think that you sound young, and maybe have not had the experiences that I have had, and maybe a little naive about our church.
|
|
|
Post by crazychurch on Sept 9, 2016 15:32:36 GMT
So anonuser - just because YOU didn't see it, it means it didn't happen? Got it. That means the earth isn't really round, right? Or there aren't such things as germs, because you have no proof - only the symptoms, right? ok. #logicfail Please tell me where I said that because I did not see something it didn't happen. I said that I cannot make a claim that something did or did not happen without proof. Without proof, I don't like to make definitive statements. That is logical. I do find it telling that you refuse to respond to my post to you earlier, however. You said this " I have not yet found proof of it myself, therefore I can not logically make a statement that either supports or dismisses the claim that abuse has occurred." So just because you haven't personally found "proof" (whatever that means) you don't believe it. And I know exactly what you're doing here. You're getting all technical to AVOID the real issues of the PRC. Nice try. I'm not falling into that trap. But par. And the reason why I didn't respond to your other quote is because you already discounted what I wrote - again typical. Why not answer and look at the real issues here instead of this still mind game of technical jib jab?
|
|
|
Post by KristianWrights on Sept 9, 2016 22:58:25 GMT
Anonuser- you said ask anything
Is it correct to assume that you are a single female? Because a female in the pr church is typically frowned apon if they work. Because it is the mans job to provide
Second of all reading all of this makes it sound like your not part of the Michigan group.... I'm making this assumption due to the fact that you are unaware of the abuse that runs rampant in your church.
I will get very graphic if I need to - there is a young woman who was a mother to young children and the father beat the hell out of his kids and wife... The pastor asked her what she was Doing wrong to her husband because she probably deserved to get beat.... The husband had a temper .... I would know I grew up with him. The pastor and consistory stood up for the husband.... Yes!!! True... Even when the kids would show up to school with bruises from that husband....and to make matters worse... The pastor told her is was wrong of her to hold back sex from her husband and that was a sin...
Now you tell me to sit in a pew with these "leaders" who don't help a woman and children from an abuser??? And then come to find out these men are having affairs on their wives and are on gay websites???
Yes truth
|
|
|
Post by freefromprc on Sept 10, 2016 4:54:53 GMT
Anonuser- you said ask anything Is it correct to assume that you are a single female? Because a female in the pr church is typically frowned apon if they work. Because it is the mans job to provide Second of all reading all of this makes it sound like your not part of the Michigan group.... I'm making this assumption due to the fact that you are unaware of the abuse that runs rampant in your church. I will get very graphic if I need to - there is a young woman who was a mother to young children and the father beat the hell out of his kids and wife... The pastor asked her what she was Doing wrong to her husband because she probably deserved to get beat.... The husband had a temper .... I would know I grew up with him. The pastor and consistory stood up for the husband.... Yes!!! True... Even when the kids would show up to school with bruises from that husband....and to make matters worse... The pastor told her is was wrong of her to hold back sex from her husband and that was a sin... Now you tell me to sit in a pew with these "leaders" who don't help a woman and children from an abuser??? And then come to find out these men are having affairs on their wives and are on gay websites??? Yes truth Unfortunately, people who have not witnessed it or experienced it will not believe it is rampant in the PRC. It is also unfortunate that victims will not speak out because they will not be able to deal with the fallout, and also will not find support amongst the leadership. It is a vicious cycle in this cult. Thankfully this site provides a place for people to discuss what they have experienced. In the past, the mistreated people in the prc had no voice, but now can at least read what others have written and realise that they are not alone.
|
|