Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

**Daniel M B** · 05-06-2010, 03:11 PM

(05-04-2010 09:54 PM)birdma Wrote:
(05-01-2010 06:13 AM)Guest Wrote: And whose fault is it when your Molokan children leave the church,drink,smoke dope,have sex because they don't understand what is being said and go some where else to hear God's word?

And which church is this? That you "drink,smoke dope,have sex" ..."to hear God's word" ?

By that way, I think this qualifies as the:
Greatest post ever from "guest"

Steve

"..YOUR Molokan children.."?
If you're not a Molokan, how do you know?

Birdma, I put a question mark in there to make it funnier,
I hope that's what you meant.

I'm sure the elder meant, that's your fault that your children don't
understand Russian. How are they going to learn if you don't take them
to school?
How are they to know that drink, drugs, sex etc is against Gods will
and you will have to answer for those things, if you didn't teach them?

There was a mention of being "American Molokans"
I would like to define that abit, what we have now are "culture"
clashes. Not only Russian - English but LA - Kerman - Oregon - Australia.
(I'm not going to put Armenia in there 'cause that's a totally different pot of borsh) (Think about what happened when the people from Persia came to America)
Same people and faith but different cultures.
One gets accustomed to a life style of the land/people so that's how they live. Look at your surroundings and think about your life style.
Why did God say "..come out and leave your estranged wives and children..." ? Physical but also Spiritual life style.

As per scripture, I believe we are of those chosen people of God, the
inheritors of the ever lasting peace, and we should live accordingly!

***RedOctober*** · (This post was last modified: 05-07-2010 08:16 AM by RedOctober.)

Kevin,

Two points I wish to bring up:

1. Does a church share some responsibility? Sure, but its liability is about as much or LESS that of an individual influencing another. A church is nothing more than a gathering of like minded believers doing so in the name of Christ, for the primary purposes of worship. Such as prayer for those in need (its a beautiful thing and blessing to God when in time of need you can petition God and have others join you in that petition, then a Minister prays vocally but everyone in that church is praying with him in mind and spirit), giving thanks, praising God, etc.

Why is it less responsible? Its a community of like minded believers. If you are not like minded then you have no business being there. If you feel like you are not getting anywhere spiritually and you still attend, then whose fault is that? Your own for continuing to attend. To sit there and blame the church is no different than Adam blaming Eve, and Eve blaming the Serpent. Sure the Serpent was responsible, but Adam and Eve own the actions. Likewise, you own your actions. The minute you start absolving yourself and placing the responsibility somewhere else, is the minute you don't belong in paradise.

2. Be careful when you quote scripture here, most do check it and can spot right away when your torturing it to fit your own personal objectives. You may be used to using a verse here a verse there on the other site and get away with it, but it won't fly on this site. What you quoted would seem to indeed promote your point of view, but when I took a look at it in the whole context, it changed quite dramatically:

[12]Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal which comes upon you to prove you, as though something strange were happening to you.
[13] But rejoice in so far as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.
[14] If you are reproached for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.
[15] But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or a wrongdoer, or a mischief-maker;
[16] yet if one suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but under that name let him glorify God.
[17] For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?
[18] And "If the righteous man is scarcely saved,
where will the impious and sinner appear?"
[19] Therefore let those who suffer according to God's will do right and entrust their souls to a faithful Creator.

This has nothing to do with "blaming the church" and everything to do with those suffering for Christ. Also, when you state "What does this scripture mean?".....Right away it tells everyone that your a self-righteous self-promoting individual and it will be your eventual fall.

(05-05-2010 12:58 PM)Guest Wrote: I agree that it is the parents responsibility to raise their kids.

But, don't you think the church has some responsibility?

What does this scripture mean?

17 For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? 1 Peter 4:17 NKJV

Kevin Nazaroff

P.S.
This is my first post here.
I well never post anything unless my name is attached.

(05-04-2010 07:10 AM)RedOctober Wrote:
(05-01-2010 06:13 AM)Guest Wrote: And whose fault is it when your Molokan children leave the church,drink,smoke dope,have sex because they don't understand what is being said and go some where else to hear God's word?

Good point!

So the parents upbringing of a child has no effect in your contorted opinion. If they turn out bad, blame the religion, blame the language. etc....absolve yourself of any and all responsibility. Apparently in your mind its the job of the church, not yours, to raise children and prepare them for the dangers of the world. If thats the case, then why are many of the same problems are found in other religions where it be Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant? Or do you go to a church that just sweeps them under the rug (as many do), do a little prayer, forget about them and move on?

05-07-2010, 01:11 PM

Thanks for posting my post.

I am all about keeping scripture in the context God intended it to be.
I will spend a couple more days reading and praying about it...

Also, I do not, did not, and never will blame Lake Ave or any molokan gathering for anything.
I am/was responsible for my actions.
I used to blame-shift in the past, but I have repented of that.

So, what I am saying, is that there is some responsibility that lies on the church.
And the church should take this responsibility and be held accountable.

There is a difference between blaming and being accountable.

Kevin Nazaroff

(05-07-2010 08:06 AM)RedOctober Wrote: Kevin,

Two points I wish to bring up:

1. Does a church share some responsibility? Sure, but its liability is about as much or LESS that of an individual influencing another. A church is nothing more than a gathering of like minded believers doing so in the name of Christ, for the primary purposes of worship. Such as prayer for those in need (its a beautiful thing and blessing to God when in time of need you can petition God and have others join you in that petition, then a Minister prays vocally but everyone in that church is praying with him in mind and spirit), giving thanks, praising God, etc.

Why is it less responsible? Its a community of like minded believers. If you are not like minded then you have no business being there. If you feel like you are not getting anywhere spiritually and you still attend, then whose fault is that? Your own for continuing to attend. To sit there and blame the church is no different than Adam blaming Eve, and Eve blaming the Serpent. Sure the Serpent was responsible, but Adam and Eve own the actions. Likewise, you own your actions. The minute you start absolving yourself and placing the responsibility somewhere else, is the minute you don't belong in paradise.

2. Be careful when you quote scripture here, most do check it and can spot right away when your torturing it to fit your own personal objectives. You may be used to using a verse here a verse there on the other site and get away with it, but it won't fly on this site. What you quoted would seem to indeed promote your point of view, but when I took a look at it in the whole context, it changed quite dramatically:

[12]Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal which comes upon you to prove you, as though something strange were happening to you.
[13] But rejoice in so far as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed.
[14] If you are reproached for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.
[15] But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or a thief, or a wrongdoer, or a mischief-maker;
[16] yet if one suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but under that name let him glorify God.
[17] For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?
[18] And "If the righteous man is scarcely saved,
where will the impious and sinner appear?"
[19] Therefore let those who suffer according to God's will do right and entrust their souls to a faithful Creator.

This has nothing to do with "blaming the church" and everything to do with those suffering for Christ. Also, when you state "What does this scripture mean?".....Right away it tells everyone that your a self-righteous self-promoting individual and it will be your eventual fall.

(05-05-2010 12:58 PM)Guest Wrote: I agree that it is the parents responsibility to raise their kids.

But, don't you think the church has some responsibility?

What does this scripture mean?

17 For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? 1 Peter 4:17 NKJV

Kevin Nazaroff

P.S.
This is my first post here.
I well never post anything unless my name is attached.

(05-04-2010 07:10 AM)RedOctober Wrote:
(05-01-2010 06:13 AM)Guest Wrote: And whose fault is it when your Molokan children leave the church,drink,smoke dope,have sex because they don't understand what is being said and go some where else to hear God's word?

Good point!

So the parents upbringing of a child has no effect in your contorted opinion. If they turn out bad, blame the religion, blame the language. etc....absolve yourself of any and all responsibility. Apparently in your mind its the job of the church, not yours, to raise children and prepare them for the dangers of the world. If thats the case, then why are many of the same problems are found in other religions where it be Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant? Or do you go to a church that just sweeps them under the rug (as many do), do a little prayer, forget about them and move on?

**Daniel M B** · 05-11-2010, 12:52 AM

Quote:So, what I am saying, is that there is some responsibility that lies on the church.
And the church should take this responsibility and be held accountable.

There is a difference between blaming and being accountable.

Kevin Nazaroff

Hi Kevin,
The church has not changed the way it goes about it's order since the early 1900's (the Spiritual placing of the S&L on the prestol) where, over time, the orders were changed and the spiritual boundaries put up.
That split many groups, but as far as I know all the churches still have the S&L on the prestol. It has been this way for almost 100 years.

Over here (Sth Oz) there are 5 churches and 4 young churches every Sunday night.
As far as I understand there is 1 (?) young church for the whole LA area.
1 in Kerman and 1 in Madera(?) Is there still one in Oregon?
How many churches (molokan) are there in the US?
How many young churches?

Most of the people that came here in the 60's and 70's, who were all about your age, saw the importance of teaching and preparing the young to be servants of God and giving them opportunity to partake in the services and orders.

Is your church doing this? Maybe you should get together with some like minded people and do this for the young people. I'm sure the elders would be happy to help!

By telling you this, I'm not rising above any body, I'm looking at the whole picture and feel that there should be more opportunity for the young people to partake in church.

Reading your posts at .net, why are you concerned with what happens in the molokan churches. Aren't you one of those that say "Molokanisim is a cult and is not Christian"? and are trying to make people leave to go to a "Bible based church"?
Or have you finally seen the blasphemy that is used there?
Or have you come here (MU) just to "кавирять"?

I hope you have seen the light!
NAD

05-11-2010, 12:52 PM

(05-11-2010 12:52 AM)Daniel M B Wrote: Hi Kevin,
The church has not changed the way it goes about it's order since the early 1900's (the Spiritual placing of the S&L on the prestol) where, over time, the orders were changed and the spiritual boundaries put up.
That split many groups, but as far as I know all the churches still have the S&L on the prestol. It has been this way for almost 100 years.

I do not feel it is my calling to prove the s&l right or wrong.
So I really try not to get involved in debates about the s&l.
Most people don't read the s&l anyway.
So I don't feel that it is affecting as many people as some believe.
I personally believe all we need on our prestol is a bible.
Russian or english bible, either one.

(05-11-2010 12:52 AM)Daniel M B Wrote: Over here (Sth Oz) there are 5 churches and 4 young churches every Sunday night.
As far as I understand there is 1 (?) young church for the whole LA area.
1 in Kerman and 1 in Madera(?) Is there still one in Oregon?
How many churches (molokan) are there in the US?
How many young churches?

Most of the people that came here in the 60's and 70's, who were all about your age, saw the importance of teaching and preparing the young to be servants of God and giving them opportunity to partake in the services and orders.

Is your church doing this? Maybe you should get together with some like minded people and do this for the young people. I'm sure the elders would be happy to help!

By telling you this, I'm not rising above any body, I'm looking at the whole picture and feel that there should be more opportunity for the young people to partake in church.

Ok....I don't really have a lot to say about all the different churches.
The reason I want to post on the underground is to have healthy dialog.
I have more questions then answers.

(05-11-2010 12:52 AM)Daniel M B Wrote: Reading your posts at .net, why are you concerned with what happens in the molokan churches. Aren't you one of those that say "Molokanisim is a cult and is not Christian"? and are trying to make people leave to go to a "Bible based church"?
Or have you finally seen the blasphemy that is used there?
Or have you come here (MU) just to "кавирять"?

I hope you have seen the light!
NAD

I am concerned because God has put a fire in my heart for all of my friends and family within molokanism.
Sometimes I get a little fired up, but for the most part, I like to have healthy dialog for the purpose of seeking God's will and God's truth.
I too am learning of the Lords dolga tepenia.

I want to please God, and as much as possible, live at peace with all men.

I don't tell anybody to leave or to stay in any church.
I tell them to seek the Lord and pray to Him for His will.
But I will warn somebody of dangers that exist in certain churches that are not healthy.
And I will point out to people that it is possible that God will answer yes or no in regards to what church you attend.
So, if we pray and ask God for His will, we should prepare for an answer we might not want to hear.

So, to the topic of english and russian...
What if the churches had two morning church services?
First service is all in russian.
Second service is all english.
So what if the english service is a little choppy?
At least the elders will feel good that they are keeping the service fully in russian, and still reaching out to the many who don't know russian, all at the same time, all in the same day.
Doesn't that sound like a good compromise?

Kevin Nazaroff

**Daniel M B** · 05-11-2010, 04:07 PM

Kevin is this really were your coming from?

Quote:Maybe a split is necessary.

All those molokans who believe in racism and maxim can remain in their current "church".

The rest (the silent majority) can start a bible preaching, teaching, believing church that has an open door for all of God's children.
There is no s&l book.
There would only be a slight, (very slight) hint of russian tradition, but never a requirement.

All members would have to face the reality that their families may not ever be accepted by the prigun molokans ever again.

Does that sound reasonable?

Maybe call it the, Postayane Christians.

Easy now, it's just a thought....
Kevin Nazaroff

That's the best thing I've heard from you guys in a long time.
But of course your just dreaming, nobody will be a part of it, to hard.

***RedOctober*** · (This post was last modified: 05-12-2010 08:49 AM by RedOctober.)

All right, I'll play along. But let me preface due to some choice words you used, I'm suspicious. You mentioned that you wanted dialogue...well, that line has been used before. Dialogue usually include two or more party's conversing, when that term is used by so-called "Christian-Evangelist" it means they dialogue and you shut up and accept whatever they cram down your throat. And should you speak up or disagree, then you are called a cultist, heretic, etc.

So basically, you want two versions of Church, one in English the other in Russian. For some reason I recollect this idea floated around once before. The response was if you want to do this, then form your own group and do this house to house. If it works out and appeases the peoples needs, then it will grow into its own church. Essentially, the response from those that wanted to keep Russian was "prove us wrong". And I have agree with that sentiment.

Some like to indulge in the myth that the leadership is somehow imposing its will and there is some sort of silent majority and the leadership is somehow preventing this from happening. The reality is, if this were true, then there would never ever be a church breaking away from the main ones to form its own. And as everyone knows, this isn't the case by a longshot.

Furthermore, a church in Oregon did break away, removed the S&L and went to english. At the beginning, it appeared strong....but beginnings are not an indication of endurance. Eventually most left or returned for one reason or another. I'm only privy to just a few of those. Which brings me to my next point, have you tried visiting the church up there? Granted its just a handful now, but perhaps this is up your alley? If you don't know who to contact, register and PM me, I have a couple of relatives that attend and I can give you their contact info. And if you want to stay in the central valley, you still can visit and find out what worked, what failed, what went wrong, etc. Although I can tell you one of the reasons. They video taped their proceedings once and distributed it. Some very staunch Maximisti saw it and everyone stated roughly the same thing....there was NO glorification of our Lord Jesus Christ, it was all about how "bad" we were (surprised?). This was further confirmed by some of those who returned and some who visited. If you take note, on the other site, its roughly the same thing. All in all, no one is going to give it any consideration given past experience and others after hearing or looking at .net will assume it will be more of the same.

Finally, if you do decide to break away and give it a shot with some supporters, I mean this with the deepest of sympathies....good luck. You will have some hurdles no doubt, but I'm going to argue that the issues posed by Priguni Molokans will pale in comparison to those whom you thought supported you. I mean take a look and the admin (and a few others) of .net, he's already trying to slightly dissuade you. Only thing he wants is total dissolution and humiliation of the Molokan's and their churches. The guy has issues and a huge axe to grind, why do you think most don't take him seriously?

Believe me when I say it, most Molokans will probably just wag their finger at you should you try to form a Postyanni Church or something in between the two, if that. Yeah some will speak out against it (perhaps even me included), other churches may even require you sit in the back right next to the visiting people from Clark Street, but if you really feel strongly about it, then none of that should bother you. As you can tell, the ball is really in your own court.

05-13-2010, 11:27 PM

(05-11-2010 04:07 PM)Daniel M B Wrote: Kevin is this really were your coming from?

Well, I was not planning on bringing that up here on the underground.
But, since you mention it...yes, it is a possibility.
But I will not do anything in the flesh (without the Holy Spirit)
1 Unless the Lord builds the house,
They labor in vain who build it;
Unless the Lord guards the city,
The watchman keeps awake in vain.
Ps 127:1 NASB

I feel that it is better to bring stuff out into the light, rather than keep ideas and thoughts hidden in secret.

(05-11-2010 04:07 PM)Daniel M B Wrote: That's the best thing I've heard from you guys in a long time.
But of course your just dreaming, nobody will be a part of it, to hard.

Yes, it will be hard. But isn't the life of a Christian hard?
And, if it is God's will, it will be done, with our without you or me.
And if it is not God's will, then it will not be done.
I never want to be in opposition to God and His will.

Kevin Nazaroff

05-14-2010, 12:25 AM

(05-12-2010 08:33 AM)RedOctober Wrote: All right, I'll play along. But let me preface due to some choice words you used, I'm suspicious. You mentioned that you wanted dialogue...well, that line has been used before. Dialogue usually include two or more party's conversing, when that term is used by so-called "Christian-Evangelist" it means they dialogue and you shut up and accept whatever they cram down your throat. And should you speak up or disagree, then you are called a cultist, heretic, etc.

You have a valid point.
I try to keep conversation civil, but have been known to get a little "angry" from time to time.
I lost my composure a couple times on .net, but that was because of some false accusations, and had nothing to do with the bible, brotherhood or religion at all.

Jesus said that people will know we are Christians by the way we love each other.
35 “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” Jn 13:35 NASB
So I assure you that I have no motive here other than to discuss God's good news.

(05-12-2010 08:33 AM)RedOctober Wrote: So basically, you want two versions of Church, one in English the other in Russian.

I don't know.
Maybe.
It was an idea.
That is what makes the most sense to me.
But I have been wrong before, so I thought I would bring the idea up and see what others think.

(05-12-2010 08:33 AM)RedOctober Wrote: For some reason I recollect this idea floated around once before. The response was if you want to do this, then form your own group and do this house to house. If it works out and appeases the peoples needs, then it will grow into its own church. Essentially, the response from those that wanted to keep Russian was "prove us wrong". And I have agree with that sentiment.

Some like to indulge in the myth that the leadership is somehow imposing its will and there is some sort of silent majority and the leadership is somehow preventing this from happening. The reality is, if this were true, then there would never ever be a church breaking away from the main ones to form its own. And as everyone knows, this isn't the case by a longshot.

I would not want to be a part of any church that had as it's main goal to prove people wrong.
I just want to have fellowship in the name of Jesus Christ with as little "religion" as possible.
There is a difference between religion and tradition.
I like tradition.
I like a little bit of religion.
But neither one of those should ever take priority over a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

(05-12-2010 08:33 AM)RedOctober Wrote: Although I can tell you one of the reasons. They video taped their proceedings once and distributed it. Some very staunch Maximisti saw it and everyone stated roughly the same thing....there was NO glorification of our Lord Jesus Christ, it was all about how "bad" we were (surprised?). This was further confirmed by some of those who returned and some who visited. If you take note, on the other site, its roughly the same thing. All in all, no one is going to give it any consideration given past experience and others after hearing or looking at .net will assume it will be more of the same.

I have never seen these videos.
I believe that the purpose of gathering is to give glory to God, pray, and hear-teach-preach His good news.
Anything less is not Christianity, whether it is postayan, prigun, or main stream evangelical church service.

(05-12-2010 08:33 AM)RedOctober Wrote: Finally, if you do decide to break away and give it a shot with some supporters, I mean this with the deepest of sympathies....good luck. You will have some hurdles no doubt, but I'm going to argue that the issues posed by Priguni Molokans will pale in comparison to those whom you thought supported you. I mean take a look and the admin (and a few others) of .net, he's already trying to slightly dissuade you. Only thing he wants is total dissolution and humiliation of the Molokan's and their churches. The guy has issues and a huge axe to grind, why do you think most don't take him seriously?

I will never break away unless I have the full support of my wife and the leading of God's Holy Spirit.
I felt God calling me out of molokanism over two years ago, but other circumstances prohibited leaving.
I can not explain it.
I know people will judge me for even admitting this, but I am transparent and believe that the only way revival will ever happen, is if we all get a little more honest with ourselves, with God, and with other people.

(05-12-2010 08:33 AM)RedOctober Wrote: Believe me when I say it, most Molokans will probably just wag their finger at you should you try to form a Postyanni Church or something in between the two, if that. Yeah some will speak out against it (perhaps even me included), other churches may even require you sit in the back right next to the visiting people from Clark Street, but if you really feel strongly about it, then none of that should bother you. As you can tell, the ball is really in your own court.

I don't mind getting the finger, won't be the first time. Smile

And you know, the back row might not be that bad...

Kevin Nazaroff

**Daniel M B** · 05-14-2010, 03:08 PM

Kevin Wrote:I just want to have fellowship in the name of Jesus Christ with as little "religion" as possible.
There is a difference between religion and tradition.
I like tradition.
I like a little bit of religion.
But neither one of those should ever take priority over a personal relationship with Jesus Christ.

Jesus is nice, but-
How would you envision the services to be?
Would it be same as the molokan? Postayiani do it the same way(?).
Would you call it a "Molokan" group? No? What would you call it?
Would it be main stream? With pews or rows of seats?
Who would be your pastor? (Someone has to head the services, I can see a problem there already)
What about a place to gather? A few can go house to house, but what if there was a rush of people wanting to come?
Are you popular enough (let's leave God out of it for the moment) to go get a building, set up church (assuming that you were going to fund it), and be confident that "they will come"?
These are all serious questions that have to be addressed even before you open the Bible to start "fellowship".

Anyway if this is the path you feel you have to take, like Red said "good luck"