I find it very interesting to see how many differing opinions ex-members now have concerning their Faith.
On the one hand we have the zealously legalistic camp,whose adherents appear to find comfort in the structured confines of the law. Not being of that faction, I would like to ask for an explanation on the validity of such reasoning. For example (please forgive me, Lydia, for using you as an example, but you are confident and outspoken on this board, so I feel it will be easier to use you), Lydia says that we have to see all the sayings of the Bible in a literal perspective. To me, this seems self-condemning. For instance, I believe I have read previous posts where Lydia was verbally attacking the Fam. for husbands neglecting their wives and children,which the Bible frowns upon, but then I read that Jesus says, "And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life." So it is impossible to literally fulfill your Christian obligation to both...also there are the verses that support the exclusive husband/wife arrangement, that may go against the above quote from Mt.19:29.

On another hand, we have the liberal-thinking camp, who seem to have the faith to explore, investigate and challenge these literal interpretations, and yet still keep their faith in Jesus and salvation intact. Granted they will come out with a lot of weird and unusual theories, but is it not up to us to discern whether or not it complies with the prerequisites of our faith?

Then on another hand...oops, I've only got 2 hands...well, now isn't that a coincidence!

Is it not a bit like the proverbial elephant and the blind men, each touching a different part of the whole, and coming up with a different conclusion as to the complete description of the elephant? In like manner, do we not need all manners of input to better understand the true nature of our Creator. Paul said the kingdom of God is a mystery, and now we see through a glass darkly, but then we shall see clearly, now we know in part, but then we shall know even as we are known. None of us in this mortal sojourn can claim the right to the whole elephant. And we can each best describe it from the angle of our approach, which part of the Mystery we are touching. Is that not better than blindly saying that an elephant is like a rope, or a wall or a tree? And really none of these objects give a truly clear picture of the elephant, even when analyzed together, but are interpretations of our indivdual human understanding and personal reference system.

Personally, I think we need all aspects and ingredients of our collective faith included in the pot if the recipe is to turn out right. And according to how you add the ingredients, different proportions,etc., that same delicious meal that we are cooking can have a variety of different flavours, which makes for an unending appetite.

I have seen several brethren after leaving the Family, do intensive studies on alternate religion, UFO's, etc.,etc., as to how these things fit into the overall plan. But...my criteria is that if it keeps a person searching for truths that are collaberated by the Word, and keeps them excited @ the Lord, a new awareness of His omnipotence, and keeps them excited @ the end-time we are living in, then it bears good fruit, even though I may have personally explored and read the same things only to find it didn't hit me the same way.

We need the legalistic input to remind us of sin and conviction. We also need the liberalistic to expand the limits of our faith to borders that are beyond the law.

So, IMO, we should try to learn from each other, as we surely will not grasp the whole pic until the coming of the Lord.