Loading...

Wednesday, 22 January 2014

These 'great men' : J.T jnr, JHS, JSH

Would the above illustrious leaders of the Exclusive brethren be best described as brutal, savage, barbaric, harsh, rude, ruthless, inhuman, callous, vicious, severe, ferocious, rough, merciless, bloodthirsty, gruff, hard, heartless, impolite, insensitive, pitiless, remorseless, uncivil, unfeeling, and unmannerly men?

Or, would they be better described as kind, polite, courteous, compassionate, friendly, calm, refined, gentle, sympathetic, humane, temperate and above all Christlike?




5 comments:

  1. That is one question on which you will not find any common ground at all between EB and ex-EB, because total, unconditional loyalty to whoever is currently the top man is what defines you as a member of that branch of EBism. Some of their trust deeds and other documents more or less say so. Your opinion on anything else is immaterial: you just have to support their pope. That is what makes you one of the tribe and, if J.T.Jr is to be believed, that will get you to heaven.

    Up until the 1950s it was not like that. The Brethren could have got along just fine without anyone being recognised as a supreme leader, and sometimes they did. But the HEB couldn’t manage that today. If they had no supreme leader now they would be completely at sea. They would have to work out for themselves what is right or wrong, good or bad, true or false, and they would disagree among themselves about all of these. The opinion of a single dictator has become the ultimate criterion for settling every question, and if they didn’t have it, it could take them years to find the best way of making decisions, accepting uncertainty and respecting divergent views. During these years there would be one schism after another after another, because they have a deeply ingrained tradition of refusing to tolerate differences.

    Having a single, virtually infallible dictator makes it easy to answer difficult questions. His word settles everything. If he says it is OK for him to go to bed with someone else’s wife, or to beat women, or to over-rule scripture, then that settles it. He says it is OK so it is OK.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bit like North Korea, really.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The above gentleman resembles a pigeon fancier from Wigan.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That last one looks suspiciously like Harry Trundletwerp's father.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ahaa, its pleasant conversation about this post at this place at this website, I have read all that, so now me also commenting here.



    my web site ... SEO

    ReplyDelete