The Quakers

[Butterfly]

Hi JIP,
Wow that a lot of reading----------------have to take that in stages, have read some of it- really interesting.

Sorry misunderstood, but you did say Quakers, in your post, to me at least , it came across as meaning ' all ' quakers- sorry a little bit sensitive to the issue because of a recent situtaion on another forum.

I don't think I have formed any opinions of you at all -- honest, don't know you well enough to do that. Words can be written with full understanding of what the writer means but the hearer does not always have the full picture. Sadly that is the only problem with forums and internet interactions. Maybe thats why it's important to ask- it reveals more. So thanks for allowing me to challenge, and thanks for putting your words into context- much appreciated.

Butterfly

[JIP]

You are welcome Butterfly.
If you have time, read about Quakers.
It will teach you a lot of good stuff.

Be Blessed As Always

[JIP]

Originally Posted by Butterfly

Hi JIP,...Sorry misunderstood, but you did say Quakers, in your post, to me at least , it came across as meaning ' all ' quakers- sorry a little bit sensitive to the issue because of a recent situtaion on another forum. Butterfly

Well actually if you read all the post by Innerlight, he started by saying Quacker and infact endorsed George Fox, very much a Quacker. Later when I posted my points, you can see that only in Post # 16 the claim of a "modern Quaker movement" was made by Innerlight.

Hope you see thru' this

[Butterfly]

Good point.

Butterfly

[Butterfly]

I went away and ' pondered ' ( it's okay I do a lot of that!! ) Something doesn't feel right in what I have conveyed and you have said- not sure I can explain though.

You said that you were making the recent statement not in reference to the modern day quakers, but in the Quakers in the past but you used a ' present day ' context ie: ' Quakers DO NOT ' ect ect Surely that is saying ' NOW ' they do not....( as opposed to saying ' Quakers DID NOT ' ) which would have implied Quakers from the past. So when you said ......

.Also Quackers do not respect others who do not follow their doctrine of God. That makes them arrogant. Also they are arrogant towards God because they do not approach God with a broken and contrite heart. They consider themselves competent to question God with whatever resources were given to them by God Himself. Their doctrine lack humility and blind faith

It sounded to me as if you were stating that ' Quakers NOW are those things, and knowing that Innerlight isn't any of that and he is a Modern day Quaker I felt I needed to say something.

Does that make sense- if not just totally ignore my words.....

Butterfly

[JIP]

Dear Butterfly...I didn't bring the topic of modern Quakers. I don't know them or their doctrine. Also in the meantime please read about Quakers first and it will help you to understand. If I do not know about the doctrine that you may support, I also cannot support you just because you may be my friend or a gentle lady. I prefer to give justice to the topic in discussion.

I wish to know what modern Quakers he is talking about and also from his posts there seemed not much of a difference of the traditional Quakers.

I support many of the Quaker doctrines too Butterfly
Now let us leave all that and allow Innerlight to reply

[Butterfly]

Thats fine JIP, please I would hate it if you didn't say anything, regardless of who I am. However I can tell from your response that you have misunderstood my point- so I won't continue as it will just go round in circles, not helpful and very unwise.

Over to you and Innerlight...........

Butterfly

[Innerlight]

Wow, what a lot of posting I missed last night! Ironically I was at a Quaker Bible Study (we were discussing Jesus turning over of the tables of the money changers in the temple)

I am a new Quaker, 'straight out the box' (so to speak) so I am aware that my answers to your questions may not be as good perhaps as a ‘seasoned’ Quaker but I remember the words in the Bible which say God will give you the words to say (type) when you are asked questions about Him so here goes…

Since your questions are numbered I guess it would be best to answer them numbered too;

1) I know very well that Quakers were mistreated, persecuted, mocked, imprisoned and even executed. Yes, I believe they were martyrs of Christ. Franky the persecution is still going on as I myself have faced critsim, judgements and unpleasantness from other online Christians by meerly saying I am a Quaker. My point about the Hall Worthington website is that I feel there is not much point in reading a website when I have a reprint of George Fox’s original journal in front of me which is written in the original language he used (lots of Shakespearian thee, thou etc)

2) The Bible was not hand written by God. It was written by men who (at the risk of causing outrage) I believe had their own ideas and agendas when they wrote the pages. They were inspired and led by God when they wrote it but does that mean we should accept it without question? You would probably say ‘yes’ but a Quaker (modern or traditional) would most certainly say ‘no’. Yes, the men who wrote the Bible were ordinary and yes Quaker men and women were and are still today ordinary men and women but Quakers do not just accept everything another Quaker tells them…when a Quaker suggests ways the Society can change the decision is not just accepted…there is a process it has to go through to ‘test’ the conviction…that’s all Quakers do when they look at the Bible, they ask God for clarity on certain issues. God is welcomed into every facet of their life by Quakers. This is what is meant by saying 'Christianity is a notion not a way' is saying that anyone who says they fully understand God and everything He is and ever was is delusional. How can anyone truly know what God is? He is so mindblowingly awesome and powerful we cannot fathom what He truly is. Each persons experience of God is different and who are we mere mortals to say 'that person is wrong, that person is right' wasn't it Jesus who said in Matthew 5:22 "But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell" Since Quakers do not believe God personally wrote the Bible they do not see why they should not seek discernment on the work of fellow men (please remember equality is a central teaching of the Quakers)

3) Amen

4) I’m not sure what you are trying to say on this question so I’ll leave it

5) You say all true believers discern. I do not believe this to be so. I have met Christians (I do not put you in this bracket JIP as I do not know you) who simply read the words and accept them without any genuine intelligent thought process. When you ask them to justify their views all they can say over and over is ‘because it says so in the Bible’ and although to a degree I respect such strength of faith I also cannot help but think it can be dangerous too. I personally cannot accept those testimonies. On the other hand I agree with your statement that Quakers are not the only ones to discern. Before we go any further I should say that even Quakers accept that we do not have it perfect. We are not perfect and our outlooks are not perfect either but this is how God guides us so we do our best. Early Quakers were and many still are true believers in Jesus Christ I can assure you of that…you may notice I said ‘many still’ not ‘all still’ and I will cover that point in more detail later.

6) If any teaching on paper is given to a Quaker to read they will not just disregard it because it does not agree with their views. Quakers are open minded and will read through these words and decide for themselves rather than just accept a teaching. This is not ego my friend as we cannot learn anything unless God opens our eyes first Anyone can do this, not just Quakers! In fact I have read some Quaker views in books that I have not agreed with myself! My dear friend JIP I’m afraid it is simply not true when you say Quakers do not respect others unless they follow their way and that Quakers are arrogant. Have I come across as arrogant? I hope not! Please do not assume that because Quakers question the Bible that they question God and claim to know everything. The Bible is a book, it is not God Himself. Quakers ask God for help and He gives it to them, how can this be disrespectful or arrogant? I have several religious friends whom I have had religious 'debates' with; one is an Evangelist, one an Anglican, two Baptists, one Methodist and one Buddhist! I would never tell them they are wrong. Never. We always discuss our differing beliefs and worship styles in the most calm, respectful manner. They do not disrespect me and I do not disrespect them. God leads us all on a different path my friend and who am I to question a person’s faith?

7) I am sorry if I offended you by referring to the Bible as a ‘tool’ it was not my intention to offend you. It was just the best way I could think to describe it, obviously it was a poor choice of wording

8) My knowledge of scripture is very limited but I am not sure I understand the question anyway. Since Quakers do not rely on scripture to live their lives how can I use scripture to justify their beliefs? It’s a contradiction…

9) Quakers were not the first to arrive in America, it was the Puritans I believe however the state of Pennsylvania and the city of Philadelphia has close ties to Quakerism because of the famous early Quaker William Penn;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania


I would love to continue with this study; speaking about Quakerism not only helps others to learn more about them but it develops my own understanding as it requires study on my behalf to find the answers.

I did however notice that you didn’t really pick up on any of the positive things I said about Quakers and the Bible, only the negative. Please re-read my original and see that Quakers, including myself, are not enemies of other Christians. We wish to support and play an active part in Christian communities. We do not like being shunned or persecuted (though we have learnt to expect it) and we are not trouble makers. We are simply a religious group living and worshipping as we believe God wishes us too. I am not here to cause trouble. If I did not wish to speak to, learn about and praise God with people like yourself JIP I would not be here.

I recently left my other Christian forum because the Admin there was attacking the Quakers. Several of my friends followed me from that forum (including Butterfly) partly because they did not like the way I was treated. I truly hope nobody here decides Quakers should not be heard as it would sadden me greatly to be forced to leave again…

I know your questions are genuine JIP and I do not mind answering them but I would kindly request that the questions remain civilised and no-one allows their passions to infiltrate the study. Mud-slinging never helps these kinds of discussions.

Lastly I would say JIP; a Quaker is a Quaker is a Quaker. Although there are different approaches in Modern Quakerism (I am sure other churches are not the same as they were 300 years ago) I think perhaps referring to ‘Traditional Quakers’ and ‘Modern Quakers’ will only confuse matters. I will try and speak a little later on about how Quakerism has changed over the last few hundred years…

Butterfly; thank you for your input and for defending me but I suspect JIP was not trying to attack me but was showing the frustration that is common among Christians when Quakers announce their beliefs regarding Holy Scripture. It is nice to know I have a ‘guardian angel’ (or guardian butterfly) who is keeping her eye on me and making sure I don’t get hurt again.

God bless you both

[Butterfly]

Thanks Innerlight- that was my motive.

Alphamale has started to call me ' Flutterby ' - it's kind of stuck with me and him- so I will just ' flutter-by ' from time to time!!

Butterfly

[JIP]

Originally Posted by Innerlight

Wow, what a lot of posting I missed last night! Ironically I was at a Quaker Bible Study (we were discussing Jesus turning over of the tables of the money changers in the temple)

I am a new Quaker, 'straight out the box' (so to speak) so I am aware that my answers to your questions may not be as good perhaps as a ‘seasoned’ Quaker but I remember the words in the Bible which say God will give you the words to say (type) when you are asked questions about Him so here goes…

Since your questions are numbered I guess it would be best to answer them numbered too;

1) I know very well that Quakers were mistreated, persecuted, mocked, imprisoned and even executed. Yes, I believe they were martyrs of Christ. Franky the persecution is still going on as I myself have faced critsim, judgements and unpleasantness from other online Christians by meerly saying I am a Quaker. My point about the Hall Worthington website is that I feel there is not much point in reading a website when I have a reprint of George Fox’s original journal in front of me which is written in the original language he used (lots of Shakespearian thee, thou etc)

2) The Bible was not hand written by God. It was written by men who (at the risk of causing outrage) I believe had their own ideas and agendas when they wrote the pages. They were inspired and led by God when they wrote it but does that mean we should accept it without question? You would probably say ‘yes’ but a Quaker (modern or traditional) would most certainly say ‘no’. Yes, the men who wrote the Bible were ordinary and yes Quaker men and women were and are still today ordinary men and women but Quakers do not just accept everything another Quaker tells them…when a Quaker suggests ways the Society can change the decision is not just accepted…there is a process it has to go through to ‘test’ the conviction…that’s all Quakers do when they look at the Bible, they ask God for clarity on certain issues. God is welcomed into every facet of their life by Quakers. This is what is meant by saying 'Christianity is a notion not a way' is saying that anyone who says they fully understand God and everything He is and ever was is delusional. How can anyone truly know what God is? He is so mindblowingly awesome and powerful we cannot fathom what He truly is. Each persons experience of God is different and who are we mere mortals to say 'that person is wrong, that person is right' wasn't it Jesus who said in Matthew 5:22 "But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell" Since Quakers do not believe God personally wrote the Bible they do not see why they should not seek discernment on the work of fellow men (please remember equality is a central teaching of the Quakers)

3) Amen

4) I’m not sure what you are trying to say on this question so I’ll leave it

5) You say all true believers discern. I do not believe this to be so. I have met Christians (I do not put you in this bracket JIP as I do not know you) who simply read the words and accept them without any genuine intelligent thought process. When you ask them to justify their views all they can say over and over is ‘because it says so in the Bible’ and although to a degree I respect such strength of faith I also cannot help but think it can be dangerous too. I personally cannot accept those testimonies. On the other hand I agree with your statement that Quakers are not the only ones to discern. Before we go any further I should say that even Quakers accept that we do not have it perfect. We are not perfect and our outlooks are not perfect either but this is how God guides us so we do our best. Early Quakers were and many still are true believers in Jesus Christ I can assure you of that…you may notice I said ‘many still’ not ‘all still’ and I will cover that point in more detail later.

6) If any teaching on paper is given to a Quaker to read they will not just disregard it because it does not agree with their views. Quakers are open minded and will read through these words and decide for themselves rather than just accept a teaching. This is not ego my friend as we cannot learn anything unless God opens our eyes first Anyone can do this, not just Quakers! In fact I have read some Quaker views in books that I have not agreed with myself! My dear friend JIP I’m afraid it is simply not true when you say Quakers do not respect others unless they follow their way and that Quakers are arrogant. Have I come across as arrogant? I hope not! Please do not assume that because Quakers question the Bible that they question God and claim to know everything. The Bible is a book, it is not God Himself. Quakers ask God for help and He gives it to them, how can this be disrespectful or arrogant? I have several religious friends whom I have had religious 'debates' with; one is an Evangelist, one an Anglican, two Baptists, one Methodist and one Buddhist! I would never tell them they are wrong. Never. We always discuss our differing beliefs and worship styles in the most calm, respectful manner. They do not disrespect me and I do not disrespect them. God leads us all on a different path my friend and who am I to question a person’s faith?

7) I am sorry if I offended you by referring to the Bible as a ‘tool’ it was not my intention to offend you. It was just the best way I could think to describe it, obviously it was a poor choice of wording

8) My knowledge of scripture is very limited but I am not sure I understand the question anyway. Since Quakers do not rely on scripture to live their lives how can I use scripture to justify their beliefs? It’s a contradiction…

9) Quakers were not the first to arrive in America, it was the Puritans I believe however the state of Pennsylvania and the city of Philadelphia has close ties to Quakerism because of the famous early Quaker William Penn;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pennsylvania


I would love to continue with this study; speaking about Quakerism not only helps others to learn more about them but it develops my own understanding as it requires study on my behalf to find the answers.

I did however notice that you didn’t really pick up on any of the positive things I said about Quakers and the Bible, only the negative. Please re-read my original and see that Quakers, including myself, are not enemies of other Christians. We wish to support and play an active part in Christian communities. We do not like being shunned or persecuted (though we have learnt to expect it) and we are not trouble makers. We are simply a religious group living and worshipping as we believe God wishes us too. I am not here to cause trouble. If I did not wish to speak to, learn about and praise God with people like yourself JIP I would not be here.

I recently left my other Christian forum because the Admin there was attacking the Quakers. Several of my friends followed me from that forum (including Butterfly) partly because they did not like the way I was treated. I truly hope nobody here decides Quakers should not be heard as it would sadden me greatly to be forced to leave again…

I know your questions are genuine JIP and I do not mind answering them but I would kindly request that the questions remain civilised and no-one allows their passions to infiltrate the study. Mud-slinging never helps these kinds of discussions.

Lastly I would say JIP; a Quaker is a Quaker is a Quaker. Although there are different approaches in Modern Quakerism (I am sure other churches are not the same as they were 300 years ago) I think perhaps referring to ‘Traditional Quakers’ and ‘Modern Quakers’ will only confuse matters. I will try and speak a little later on about how Quakerism has changed over the last few hundred years…

Butterfly; thank you for your input and for defending me but I suspect JIP was not trying to attack me but was showing the frustration that is common among Christians when Quakers announce their beliefs regarding Holy Scripture. It is nice to know I have a ‘guardian angel’ (or guardian butterfly) who is keeping her eye on me and making sure I don’t get hurt again.

God bless you both

If you are ready to discuss without interference from Butterfly as she discusses the poster and not the post, I am not ready to continue. We are not looking into any groupism here. Please avoid that from the start itself.

Another point you are deviating from the rules of the forum when you belittle Christians with statements like this, "I suspect JIP was not trying to attack me but was showing the frustration that is common among Christians".

Please stay focussed.

Be Blessed
JIP