Re: The Thread of Gold - Jane Carole Anderson
I have been attempting to follow the postings on this thread recently and feel there has been quite a bit of confusion. The title of this thread is The Thread of Gold, regarding the book written by Jane Anderson.
Post #9 by Terry quotes from this book and asks a general question, "What is the problem with encouraging ones to talk about their problems?" As one who has read The Thread of Gold, I see where Terry is coming from. His question is in light of Jane Anderson getting into trouble because (as is described on pages 161-162 of the book) she and an elder's wife were realizing the benefit of helping one another and praying for one another regarding problems/weaknesses. However, Ray Graver got upset when the discussion of opening up and getting help exposed that another elder (of all people---an all-knowing elder who is supposed always to have it altogether and have all the answers) was in need of help.
This is part of what triggered Benson Phillips' accusing Jane of being part of a "sisters' rebellion" in the Texas churches. This is what is described in The Thread of Gold.
ZNPaaneah then states in post #10, "I think the problem with sisters opening up about their problems is obvious, there were sisters in Anaheim that had problems with PL and if they felt they could open up about it the whole house of cards could come down. But as a result, in order to squelch any sense of fellowship and openness they create all kinds of erroneous teachings and practices.”
Such a statement is completely out of context of the prior conversations regarding "sisters' rebellion in the Texas churches." Therefore –even though ZNPaaneah uses the word "obvious" he is making an assumption regarding the LSM Ministry in Anaheim and stating because of that the elders "create all kinds of erroneous teachings and practices" when in reality these teachings and practices were already in play from the inception of the so-called local churches as is clearly illustrated in The Thread of Gold.
It appears this has caused a series of misunderstandings in the discourse on this thread. It pains me to see such words as "despicable" and "insulting" as seen in post #42.
|