sky4it

Galen: All critizism is not bad critisism. All critizism is not ridicule.

cynic: interesting stuff, do post more, I am interested in your thoughts.

Raf: I really didnt like (Galen's A CES member?) remarks to me. (It reminds me of the same tactics of other groups, you = devil me = saint) Accusing me of projecting anger fear and hatred. Certainly I will admit I could have used a few less adjectives, but that also makes you look less concerned about the topic than you really are. So then what happens? You get ignored. Why is it Raf, that when you disagree in principle with the obvious, that you get accused of degrading remarks (anger fear and hatred) in bountiful excess far greater than what you intended? Why does the paranoia (for lack of a better word) run so deep?

Invisible Dan: Don't overwork yourself on my account Dan. I have always wondered how to apply that scripture, and when you offered an answer on my original post, it got me thinking historically about how that might offer an explanation. Babtists , of course, take the narrow view that any divorced person should hold no position in the church. If polygomy was common practice at the time, one could probably rule out that view. It really doesnt make any difference to me, I am niether a leader in a church niether have I ever been divorced. While the Babtist view would certainly seem constraining, it certainly would have helped if it was applied at a Assemblies church where i once attended, when a formerly divorced Pastor committed fornication and the whole stinkin place fell apart. At any rate, I thought it an interesting topic. :)-->

Daryl: Thats kind of a loaded question isnt it Daryl? If I jump in the barrel of that one I know that you'll pull the trigger and give me a ride. Its not like we can get the "top ten awesome truths" of every christian org, put them in a bag, dump them off at a new church and have the perfect place either is it? Thats because its about what people do more than what they say they are going to do. I think that if we just did the simple things God was asking us to do everyday, we would never have to worry about wether we had enough "awesome truth." My answer to your question is therefore this, I see some living epistles doing "positively awesome things", around the GS. I think thats the awesome truth. If there are 100 different awesome roads that people used to know Christ, that would be awesomely ok with me.

Invisible Dan: I could use another one of your anphibious historical specialties, about a question that I have always had. ITim 3:2 A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife , etc. Do you know if in Greek culture polygamy was common pratice? Did the Greek's of which this scripture pertains have marital law?

John and Galen: John your comment: And praise the Lord Jesus for all he did, is doing, and will do for each of us, and that we really can be like him if we are willing to face the sin that dwells within us and allow him to do the appropriate heart surgery. Thats a wonderful comment John. For its God that works in us. See Galen, I am not always an orge.

dmiller: loved your last post, and thats great the things you say and are learning :)--> gotta get some shut eye niters

dmiller: your comment: I'm being semi-facetious here, because I know what you are saying, yet many things taught by vpw can be found in churches today. I agree that some of that is true. Thats why I think the TWI experience can be beneficial in some respects.

Galen: You say that you offer no insult, though you compare him to Hitler. Is that truly loving? Greet John, welcome him on-board and pray for him; as you would wish that we all did for you. Galen: I didnt see Adolf Hitlers name in that comment i made did you? Then why inflame the remark? Then why bring it up? I merely stating that I can question his stuff and theres nothing wrong with that. Still I didnt like your tactics trying to make me feel guilty. With regard to the other part, I agree with you and I will pray for John and CES. I think that is approbriate. And by the way John , hello, and welcome on board. I'm glad to hear your having new experiences with Jesus and I sincerely mean it. If your asking for peace galen ok peace. Still that doesnt mean I will agree with John on any topic, that I think is off base.

galen: Your comment: Others who are doing their best to study the Word, Worship their Creator, follow their brother Jesus, and help others. galen: And who said you couldnt do that? So why the rhetoric with me when I disagree with statements of CES?

MJ: I am not looking for your affirmation. I also agree with your post. I suppose that one should never engage another in doctrinal dispositions, with one exception, TWI started the doctinal war with its preassumed superiority position years ago. Therefore I think it is good subject material. With respect to the TWI experience, It did bring the Bible as a plumbline for truth, but thats really not a whole lot different than others were doing either. It was beneficial too me in so much as it kept my eyes on the teachings in the holy scriptures and less on the volumous books. Any way MJ, I like your post and God Bless.

mj: i posted for you and satori my differences with the Ways interpetation of doctrines. your comment please. I must also say that the stuff you posted on the John Lynn letter thread was somewhat unnerving. Unfortuneately I dont have any way to valid that.

galen: your comment: Did he say anything to insult you? Then why insult him. galen: ok How exactly did I insult him? Would you feel better if I said Sig Heil to everything he said? No thanks. Been there done that with those types. I dont remember anyone bieng considerate and understanding to me when I turned a deaf ear to The Way Doctrines. I've got a problem with those doctrines. In my opinion, if John were considering what I said, he would thank me and call me his friend. But he wont discuss specifics, so thats his problem not mine. Personlly I dont like your tactics, trying to make me feel guilty for differentiating on things I disagree with. Did I tell John and you that you had anger, fear and hatred toward me because he disagrees with me? No I did not. So why don't you go and get over it.

Galen: your comment: John is working full-time, trying to live by a solid set of ethics, and he is still studying G-d’s Word and teaching it. Why do you need to jump on him? You are projecting your anger, fear and hatred onto him. Whatever happened to you was a long time ago. Get over it. Galen: I aint angry at him, I dont hate him, and I dont fear him. I just simply disagree with him. As far as jumping on him goes, so what? Its a free country that our fathers fought for so we could think independently. So why dont you go beat your drum somewhere else.

satori and mj412: The words I posted are , I presume the direct quote of VP. They are not therefore Gods words. The Comment: A: VP said: 1) either there's no interpretation or 2) the Bible interprets itself. This quote is an either or situation. You get to pick one and only one. Everyone agreed that number one is not possible, therefore you must pick number 2. I say that's not true. I do not disagree that #2 isn't helpful. (#2 is simply the obvious) All I say is that #2 isn't the only situation for interpretation, that there is more much more. It interprets in other ways as well such as: 1) The Holy Ghost and God and Jesus I Cor 2:13, II Corinth 3:6 2) ongoing application (inconsistencies sorted through application) Gal 6:2 ,6:5 example 3) itself as above (the obvious but not only itself) ie( Adultry is sin) 4) some is unrevealed or hidden Rev 2:17 5) historical stuff (as invisible Dan mentioned above which I am horrible at.) 6) Typology of Old Test stuff - (the tabernacle are figures of the true) Heb 9:9,24 7) Seeking (The Kingdom of God Matt 6:33, His Face (The Lord God)Psalm 27:8 , II Cor 3:18) etc. Neither did I one thing that VP did not do himself. His view was that it is only #2. I say that it is not. The things I listed prove logically that it is not (only number 2) Neither do no. 1,2,4,5,6,7 fit into number # 2 of the VP comment that you quoted. Why? because they are from other sources than the Bible "itself." Therefore I have proved mathematically and with certainty this statement quoted is incorrect or an error. I agree therefore that you can learn some things from "the Bible itself" just not all things from the Bible "itself". B: The clincher: sincerity is no guarantee for truth. So now your really stuck because if you believe A above you have no way out. This statement made me feel no matter how hard I tried and how sincere I was , it may not work out for me at all. C: But just in case you try: preach the word not like since the first century. With respect to the Doctor himself: I don't know if the man was ever sincere about what he was doing or not. Sufficient to say, if he was selling vacuum cleaners or cars, I'd grab on to my wallet and run for life.

Shazdancer: It was good that you pointed out some good and some not good topical things from the TWI experience. Others have likewise pointed out some of the good, so that the whole experience doesn't have to be remorseful. Unfortunately, when I left TWI, there were no such comparisons around. I did my own studying to claw and scratch my way out of the meat grinder. Therefore I am reluctant to let masters of the word out of the box they created by comparisons with the same scripture. The reason being that does smacks mockery to the same word which I thoroughly love. Interestingly I John 4 discusses the spirit of truth and the spirit of error in the context of "he that knoweth God." It is therefore by experience and knowing our Lord that is the difference maker in the handling of the scriptures and the "rightly dividing them. With respect to me being harsh, I can only say when someone throws that fastball over the plate, I am going to deposit it right were it belongs, in the bleachers. I am just glad someone was on base. :)-->

mj and Satori: MJ: Your right MJ it does take a while to get the webs out, and if you read my second post, you know i have been thro the same thing man , and its tuff, all im saying is God is bigger than these goofs and he can turn it around so you walk out with the crown of gold thats all. Satori: nope i aint saying dont discuss the negative, especially if you feel you can assist someone who is debating the merits of that org. In my opinion its the same word that they quote that causes them more harm than anything else. But I think your right Satori ,if you think its that destructive, you pbly should be speaking up. From my own perspective, it wasnt until I had completely forgot about the damage a org had done to me that i really began to feel healthy again, thats the only reason i mentioned it to yah.

Mr: Lynn: Your Comment: The Enemy saw clearly that VPW/TWI did have (1) a package of biblical truth unlike anything for centuries. This is literal hogwash. Why is that that the ministry you received was greater by comparison than those around you? Why must you hyperventalate in such fashion to valid it? To me Mr. Lynn its the same ole Me Big , you Little arguement that TWI used to have and I am wondering why you still do this?

MJ: I Know it man, I hear yah, just be careful that you arent just giving them the constant attention. It doesnt bother them man. I think they like it. Maybe were just dealing the deck that they want dealt. All I'm saying is that it will be fun to move on to something positive. :)-->

Question for you guys: satori, mj, oldie others: What good does it do to just continue lambasting away at it tho? Could you be doing exactly what he wants? In show business they have a saying, "All publicity is good plublicity". Could you possibly just be giving him the forum that he seeks? Since he doesnt defend himself that is certainly the question that comes to my mind. I understand providing details for the uniformed, but what about the rest? Could it be that the prevailing attitude that was in The Way about correctness could be just as easily turned around to punish?

Guys: I also went for 3-4 years to an Independent Assembly of God type place after i had been thro some way teachings. This place started good and the last straw was almost the same thing - Adultry at the top coupled with an aritocratic governing way and assuptions near the end that there way of doing things was significantly better than others. There is that one verse in philip that talks about preaching Christ in pretense or in truth. I think I have found great benefit from both experiences with the 2 different groups. I prefer to poke the holes in the stuff that was terrible that you couldnt wear, and find consolation in the rest. TWI people are very analytical in nature. I think theres some really good stuff to deal with here when we move on.

Sugar Sugar, daha dah dah dah dah aaaaaaaaaaahhh honey honey,,,,, I predict a bowl of Captain Crunch with five pounds of sugar on it. The earth had to wait 1900 years for the word to come back to full strength again. The earth is now also very impatient. Get it on man! Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeee's JJJJJJJJJJJJJJoooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhnnnnnnnnnnnie dah dah da dah da dah nana dah

wordwolf: I quicked over the thread you posted. Certainly I agree with the Lordship of Jesus Christ. If disagreeing with certain Way teachings left you feeling that I do not agree with the Lordship of Christ, then I have failed at my attempt to be useful. Where should one draw the line tho and say to stop at this or that? It appears to me there are some posters who are either agnostic or athiest in there views of God because of the experience.

wordwolf: Your comment: I have the impression that you and I are reading different threads.... am i missing something here what left you with that impression?