Jesus Christians UK

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Kyle 
To: Alan Wright; Dave < >; Cherry < >; Ronnie < >; Jude < >; JDK < >; Sven < >; Truth Believers < >; Bruce and Tina < >; Felipe Y Lisa < >; John < >; FLR < >
Sent: Friday, 31 May 2013, 12:59
Subject: UK thoughts on Alan email

 

 

 

Dear brothers and sisters,

 

Kyle here.  We've just read this email of Alan's out here with Bruce, Tina, Jack and Jude present also.

 

Bruce, Tina and Jack were all present in the UK when the issue of Alan needing to forsake his family came up. 

 

Jack says that it is not true that there was not a proper grievance, although he remembers it starting on second stage, because everyone in the UK was there discussing it at the time, after Dave first raised the issue.

 

It may be that Alan is saying that it never went properly to third stage (i.e. with the rest of the worldwide community).  However, it was during implosion (Feb 2011), so the UK team had every right to make a final decision themselves.  Of course the Make It Real team do not recognise the validity of implosion, so this may be a moot point to them (but it's worth us at least remembering).

 

What was shocking to Jack at the time was when Alan said something like "God will do alright without my money", after being asked (by Jay) whether it was better to forsake everything to God or just half of what he had to God.  The fact is, he had never properly forsaken all. 

 

It was clearly not about the community wanting more money (which is what Alan may well be thinking/saying between the lines), but about whether he was willing to properly forsake all and take a stand.  Jack remembers Alan saying that he didn't want to push his daughters away through the sale of the house, so it is about his unwillingness to forsake his wider family too.

 

The issue with "conscience" is that we can use that to justify our unwillingness to do something, along the lines of it doesn't feel right.  So, our will can masquerade as God's will which therefore becomes unquestionable.

 

The timing of this email seems significant, with Sue's recent push for a "whistleblowing" campaign.  I think it's likely that the Make It Real team have pushed Alan to write this email.  We feel it is best to say nothing in response because this is consistent with what God seemed to be saying recently in our approach with R/S (along the lines of what Dave shared about "not arguing with terrorists").  It may well be that they have included the wider community because they want to "bring all this to light" and so it is quite likely that if we say nothing they will publicly criticise ALL of the imploders.  So, they can say that "well we did try to resolve things with everyone but they weren't interested, so we're justified in our approach of involving the public now".  The problem is that they aren't willing to address the real reasons there were problems with the community.  I'm reminded of the four explosions dream someone (KC?) had a week or so ago, which may tie in with this in some way (i.e. them attacking us on four continents).

 

(Update: we've just read Jay's email on the subject, which lines up with Jack and Bruce/Tina's memory too, regarding the forsaking of the house/percentages.  To answer Jay's question, it's likely Alan has all these email addresses because he took part in implosion too, so he probably just checked an earlier email with those addresses on.  This is consistent with the fact that he has an earlier address of Sven's. 

 

We also had a listening time here about this issue.  Jack received a vision of an ultrasound with no image/baby in it.  He felt it may mean that they are fishing for more information and we shouldn't give them any more.  Interestingly, Bruce received the word "ultrasound", so we feel God is trying to say something through this, perhaps regarding seeing the emptiness of what their gripes are - i.e. seeing through them spiritually?  Bruce also got 1 Tim. 6:10 about the love of money, which could well relate to Alan's situation regarding the house and his unwillingness to forsake all for God.  Tina saw an explosion of darkness from a hole and remembered the word "bombshell" which Roland used back in 2010, which could also be consistent with the dark/ultrasound.  I thought I received the word "candid", which may be a leading to say something short and to the point (like we just read from Bob), stating the issues candidly, but making it clear that we aren't interested in discussing things further).

 

We hope these thoughts are helpful.

 

Love, Kyle et al.

 

 

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Kyle < >
To: Kyle < >; Alan Wright < >; Dave < >; Cherry < >; Ronnie < >; Jude < >; JDK < >; Sven < >; Truth Believers <>; Bruce and Tina < >; Felipe Y Lisa < >; John < >; FLR < >
Sent: Friday, 31 May 2013, 13:06
Subject: Afterthought re. Alan situation

 

 

 

Kyle here again.  I had the thought as well during the listening time that if we did decide to send something to Alan, perhaps Cherry could email the letter, just to take the focus off Dave a little, even though it's likely this won't change much.

 

We discussed the idea of someone other than Dave or Cherry (e.g. me) signing off a letter, but thought it's not worth it, especially in light of the ultrasound revelation (about not giving extra information), as it it is more likely to encourage further questions.

 

Love, Kyle

 

----- Original Message -----