Twinky

"Literal according to usage". Now break this down. It's either "literal" or "according to usage" "Literal" means "actually" so frequently doesn't make sense because of the idiom of the original language, or the idiom of the language into which it's translated. "According to usage" must mean according to local idiom. So you could have either a literal translation or a translation according to usage but not sure that you can have both. Thinking about it now puts this expression on the same level as "genuine spiritual suspicion" - a topic which has received its own discussion elsewhere in these forums.

Does this only work for Amazon.com or for other bits of Amazon?

It's a great song but I don't particularly like this version of it, a bit too slow and dirge-like. And as somebody remarked above, very "Singing Ladies" style, over-synchronized moves. I like the song based on Ps 103, "The Lord is Gracious and Compassionate" - there isn't a nice one on Youtube. So healing after the condemnation of TWI. Like Jen-o says, brings tears to the eyes. I wish 'em well with it but don't see it making the winning post. That's probably reserved for some soppy love ballad or whatever about nothing important.

30 years ago... I was standing at the kitchen sink and quite clearly remember thinking, "What is life all about? There has to be more to it that just getting up and going out to work, living and dying." I started to get interested in religion again, visited a few local churches, met some nice people but heard nothing of substance...started to read the Bible in Genesis (why is this relevant to me?), Matthew (why is this relevant to me?), Romans (what the heck is this stuff?), Revelation (huh??). Some years later I lit upon Acts (WOW, how exciting is this!!!) and got seriously interested, met a WoW and ... My first RoA was immediately before entering the Corps. (My Country Coordinator dissuaded me from going before, saying it would be not the best (don't recall the words) - it would have been the first after PoP.) As apprentice Corps I had to work dishroom nearly all the time and felt rather disappointed because I saw hardly anything of this wonderful festival that everyone had talked about. Little did I know that that was the start of a whole lot of work and being at events but never seeing them. 30 years ago if you'd told me all this was going to happen I would have laughed in your face. Now? No regrets, but no going back!

I covered this right in the first post starting this thread but The Message is a little different from the more familiar KJV: Acts 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. or in Young's Literal Translation: 4 And being assembled together with them, he commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he,] `Ye did hear of me; The implication to me is clear: they were to wait until a specific event, then do something. (along the lines of, "Go to Wal-Mart, the drugstore and the cafe - but wait for Susie to join you, as I told you she'd be coming" - or, "...but wait till pay day, which you know is due tomorrow." They certainly were witnesses straight away in Jerusalem and Acts 2 records not only the arrival of holy spirit but the first great Christian sermon. It's closely followed by many new converts, and wonders and signs. It must have been a thrillingly heady time. I can so understand why they would want to stay around. But by Acts 3 they are already having altercations with the religious hierarchy. Acts 6 shows the "murmurings" of the "Grecians" against the "Hebrews" which has been discussed above in this thread. So already there is division beginning in the new Christian church. If they had moved off soon after Pentecost, the sermon and the conversion of the 3,000, would this division have occurred? These 3,000 didn't all live in Jersualem, they were there for the Festival (Feast of Weeks) and would have to return to their homes and livelihoods. The Samaritans we know from the gospels were also ready to receive and they definitely would not have been at the Feast of Weeks. (I don't know that they ever got the opportunity to hear the good news - a revisit to the village where JC spoke with the woman at the well? Not recorded) Maybe in some parts of Galilee they would not have been received ("a prophet is not without honour except in his own country") - but some people would have received. From there out to all points north, west and east? In fact - if they are to witness in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and to the uttermost part of the earth - Jerusalem, Judea and the uttermost part got to hear - but we really don't know a lot about how much Samaria heard!

The thing is, jen-o, that in all versions you will see that the twelve declined to do the food distribution. Here's just a few, but you can look on Crosswalk.com and plug this scripture reference and read it in any of a score of translations. KJV Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. New KJV Then the twelve summoned the multitude of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. NSB So the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables. RSV And the twelve summoned the body of the disciples and said, "It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables. Weymouth NT So the Twelve called together the general body of the disciples and said, "It does not seem fitting that we Apostles should neglect the delivery of God's Message and minister at tables. Young's literal translation and the twelve, having called near the multitude of the disciples, said, `It is not pleasing that we, having left the word of God, do minister at tables; NIV So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, "It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. The longer these guys stayed in Jerusalem, the more they got sucked into the legalism of the Pharisees and returned to their old ways, like not eating with Gentiles and other ritual behavior. Their homes were in Galilee, for goodness sake, which was a fair way from Jerusalem. Galilee was not subject to the same Pharisaical legalism that had hamstrung Jerusalem (according to Josephus there were no Pharisees there until about AD70). True there were synagogues and establishments of religious learning but the area was far from the legalism and control aspects of worship based nearer Jerusalem. It would perhaps be a bit like churches nowadays, the further from the seat of government the less stringently applied was the church's doctrine (as opposed to the basic elements of Christianity). So Mother Theresa gave out contraception to Indian women though the RC Church is dead against contraception. Churches and chapels in smaller towns and villages often have a looser and less ritualistic church service than the great Cathedrals in cities. So perhaps the apostles should have gone back to Galilee if they for whatever reason didn't want to set off straight away for the uttemost parts of the earth, and if they wanted a base, establish it in Galilee, and not lying down with the temple dogs in Jerusalem and catching their fleas. In Acts 19 we read (NIV as jen-o does not like The Message): 8 Paul entered the synagogue and spoke boldly there for three months, arguing persuasively about the kingdom of God. 9 But some of them became obstinate; they refused to believe and publicly maligned the Way. So Paul left them. He took the disciples with him and had discussions daily in the lecture hall of Tyrannus. 10 This went on for two years, so that all the Jews and Greeks who lived in the province of Asia heard the word of the Lord. 11 God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, 12 so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them. Things only moved when Paul and the disciples with him got out from the legalistic environment. Paul had tried to take the gospel to the Jews first. It simply would not take off whilst he preached only in the synagogue. And that was without a huge contingent of Pharisees present in Ephesus. But when he moved to a neutral environment - all the Jews and Greeks heard the word of the Lord.

Mmm - is the girl willing to come to church with you? To listen to some other views? To discuss without an agenda any points of difference - where she might believe differently? Does she and do her parents consider your biblical views? Or do they just try to show you where you are "wrong"? Not everything TWI taught is wrong (if it were, we wouldn't all have stuck around so long). But it is very difficult to sort out the truth from the private interpretation sometimes. And the practice, the stuff that's not written down, ... enjoy the good side of it. The greatest, most wonderful loving Christians I have met have been in TWI or ex Wayfers. The worst, most vicious and spiteful Christians I have met have been in TWI or ex Wayfers. Some started by being the first and stayed that way. Some started by being the first and the legalism turned them into the latter. Some started by being the latter and disguising it under religious piety. ...Stay sharp...!

For those still deeply rooted in "the Law of Believing," may I suggest a review of Ecclesiastes? Here are some excerpts: Ecclesiastes 8:14 There is a vanity which is done upon the earth; that there be just men, unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked; again, there be wicked men, to whom it happeneth according to the work of the righteous: I said that this also is vanity (In other words, you don't always get what you work towards - work towards presumably believing to attain. And the wicked get better than they believe for) Ecc 9:11 I returned, and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all. (Those who have worked hard, trained, and acquired skills and abilities don't always get the benefit. Is not the acquisition and application of skills part of "believing"? - but chance overrides that!) If the Law of Believing works for saint and sinner alike - why are there so many people in prison? Presumably most of those who commit crimes do so usually in the belief they will get away with it. Indeed, fraudsters go to most elaborate ends to disguise what they are up to, setting up fake companies and all sorts. And no mugger would attack under the watchful eye of a police officer. (Oops, edited because seems to have posted wording twice)

Ain't that true! He (and TWI) did specialize in black or white. It was a way of cutting us off. Turning off our thinking skills. There are better (more scholarly) books than JCING around to make the point. I guess the best that can be said is that he got us to think about it at all, after a fashion.

Slightly off topic: As well as JCNG, here is another little beauty that looks plagiarized by yours untruly: In PFAL VPW does say, "there will be blood on the moon" or "men killed on the moon" - just says it real quick and moves on. No discussion. Always seemed a little odd to me, as the verse quoted (Joel 2:31) says that "the sun shall be turned into darkness, and moon into blood..." which is clearly figurative (it's not going to be real blood, as in that which flows through the human body) and the "space race" had been going on for a long time when PFAL was recorded, still Cold War stuff. I don't know that this means that men will be physically fighting ON the moon so much as ABOUT (alleged ownership of) the moon. So perhaps this was a plagiarism too. The quote's lifted from the BG Leonard website that Waysider noted above.

This has been extremely controversial in the UK. Especially in Christian circles, with many people claiming to speak for various Christian groups denouncing it. Apparently the DNA from the host egg donor is removed before being filled with human material, so in effect the scientists are using the "egg shell" only. Or some such (I'm no expert!). This is heralded as a new frontier and if it doesn't happen in the UK the technology will go overseas and we will be left behind again. Is is threatened that the technology will be removed to Asia where there are fewer ethical controls so it is better to grant permission and let it stay in the UK "where it will be subject to strict controls." (Yeah, like how far they can push the envelope.) I think it's all too gruesome - but don't certain animal parts already get transplanted into humans for spare parts? Bits of pig blood vessels? Or is that also still experimental?

Well, they are getting a little bolder. Tillie gazes at the kitchen door as if longing to go out. However, lately she has happily observed me from the dining chair and made no effort to get out. She will not even enter my "study" which she has not been allowed in since she arrived. Today was the first time she came into the study despite my urgings and enticings with her whip/chasing toy. A few times recently I have noticed Tallie also on a dining chair. They may be cuddled up on the same chair. Then Tillie has a stretch and shoves off onto a different chair. Tallie initiates nothing. However if I am playing with Tillie with the whip she is attracted by the noise it makes as it flops onto the carpet or the floor and she emeges quite quickly from her hiding place. I have to flick it at her quite a lot before she makes a desultory effort to catch it. But then she will play (again with half an eye on Tillie). So that is progress for Tallie. She watches with great interest at Tillie, the great galumph, frolics around with great glee. I think she likes to play but can't relax and enjoy because she is scared of the other cat. I am thinking of renaming them now I've got to know them better. Tillie may become "Tuxedo." She looks so smart and dressed up with a perfectly symmetrical white throat and bib which points down her chest. The point tapers delicately to loop round each armpit and delicately trails down the center of her torso to near the crotch region where she has a white circular patch. Her front toes are white and her back toes and heels are also white, like she's wearing spats. Her whiskers are also white. The black is very dense and glossy. She looks all dressed up. Tallie may become "Crypto" (hidden). She also is black but next to Tillie (Tuxy) she is a really really dark brown with a little white circular patch a bit like a necklace at the throat. As far as I know, all the rest is black. Doesn't matter what you call them. They don't respond anyway. ...Ugh. On the other hand Tillie (Tuxy) may become "Crapto" (sorry about the poor taste) - she eats a lot and therefore eliminates a lot (*very* stinkily). As the alpha cat she doesn't consider it necessary to cover her leavings. ...I have to go and attend to the litter tray... (gag). (Edited for spelling)

So-Cal, I really can't imagine this. Which WC were you in ? You certainly didn't have LCM sharing his spiritually enlightening views at lunchtimes as Skyrider says. My in rez Corps couldn't leave the premises at all (at any time) without permission (which of course no-one dared to ask for) - it would have to be for something very special. Even who you spoke to was quite strictly circumscribed. (I was forever getting yelled at for spending "too much" time with staffers.) On the other hand you could arrange quite simple pleasures like a surprise birthday party in the woods, with just what was available to hand. The quiet location at HQ was pleasant (I'm at heart a country girl) but the isolation was shocking. We got very little up to date news about anything. For instance, the Berlin wall was destroyed while I was in rez. You would think that would be a cause for spiritualizing on Corps Night but actually I think it wasn't mentioned or it it was mentioned, just barely. I don't think I learned about it till after I was back out on the field and didn't believe it had happened even then. There were lots of things of, let's say, international significance, that I never knew about until after I got out on the field. But on the other hand, we were given an evening off (maybe a Saturday?) and LCM mentioned that the Superbowl was on TV and we could watch if we wished. Some of us having no interest in that, or preferring quiet time/catching up time/sleep/laundry didn't go and watch TV. Next day we got a bolloxing because if we had had any real interest in The Word and in LCM as the MoG, we would have watched the Superbowl because it was of interest to him and we would then understand him better. Or some such. True!

Excuse me one moment... ...Okay, back from throwing up... So this guy of 49 or 50 "spiritually marries" one or several kids of 15, gets indicted, does a plea bargain and gets 45 days in the nick??? Ah - something wrong with this picture?? Doncha just love the acceptance of the "spiritual marriage" (as opposed to the legal marriage, which clearly didn't happen)? Doncha just love the way the girl's parents themselves are no longer at the Ranch: what is this place, a corral for wayward girls? Does this make the parents procurers (like Rosalie?)? Parents sound deep into the program themselves, normal parents would cut the b0lls off any male that messed with their 15 year old daughter - especially some pervert 3 times her age. Yeah, I can relate. All too well. Sorry for the girls, sorry for the parents - and greatly angry at the old goats that rape the children.

Hey Babe, how's book sales going? (Off topic) I was looking at my pix of the BBQ today (having just loaded them on my "new" (second hand or tenth hand) computer) - there's some great ones especially of you and Dooj. Do you have copies or would you like me to try and send?

Thanks, George, I miss the Cafe when I can't drop in for a cuppa on a frequent basis.

Get a kick out of fuel prices as well, then. In the UK petrol (gasoline) is now a stunning £1.07-£1.10 or thereabouts per litre (that's a non-London price). It just went up. I think that's about US$7 per US gallon. You see why we prefer smaller less thirsty cars over here... I just filled up - in a snowstorm. This is April - huh?

Well, I'm back. Someone Freecycled me a computer with internet connection just this morning. Aren't people kind? It's a few years old and it's dial-up but he has fitted it with whatever is necessary for broadband when I can get round to organizing that. So i can talk to you guys again !!! It's slow after the broadband connection at work but hey, I'm very grateful. It may not be long before I have to get broadband... If any of you don't know what Freecycle is - check on Google. There may be a group near you. People just give stuff away. Some of it's pretty good stuff. All free. Everyone I've met has been lovely. Thank you all for your birthday greetings. Had a lovely day out. As customary at the church I go to, the congregation sings to everyone who had a birthday that week and the birthday people choose a choccy from a basket of Quality Steet. And the birthday people are prayed for. It's rather nice. And I have seen two jobs that i really like the sound of. Only two - but then I only need one...

This thread is not to discuss one version of the Bible but to discuss whether Peter and the other apostles really carried out the instruction of the Lord Jesus Christ in speaking the message, the good news, the gospel, the tidings of his resurrection and all that meant, in the way instructed - or whether they did what they thought was right and did in fact seem right - but a better way had been directed. The difference, perhaps, between sense-knowledge thinking ("Look at all these people! Let's stay here and teach them!") and following the instruction to get out into Judea, Samaria, and everywhere else known about.

Thanks, Pond. Well I guess I have to leave it to them. I do think Tallie is getting a raw deal but if she won't stand up for herself, I can't make her. Would like to encourage her though. She looks miserable, slinking around very low on her legs and ultra wary. It's easy to forget Tillie is also fragile. She acts very bold in the house, following me about, rubbing up against anything she can (even my bicycle chain today, yeuk, and she wouldn't be scared away) but she is easily frightened and is being untouchable again today. They do seem to play together and sniff at each other in greeting. Tillie is the instigator with everything.

Too true, Pond, cats do watch and enjoy TV! Just dropping in briefly, got i/net access but not for long. Guess what? PROGRESS!!!! Tillie allowed me to stroke her yesterday and again today. She also made a low gutteral sound that was rather like purring. My, she has a wonderfully soft coat. She seemed to enjoy a good ear and neck scratch and let me stroke her back and tail both times. She does not welcome it but was submissive enough. She jumped over the food bowl which is by a wall and let me touch her as she did that and gradually let me stroke her more strongly. She put up with it for several minutes and then turned and hit me (drawing blood) but hey, I'm happy. I need to stop her beating up on the other cat, which now comes out to play but is very hesitant and plays with half an eye on Tillie. She can only play with Tillie's permission and likewise eat only with Tillie's permission. I may need to imprison Tillie in the kittening cage (if I can catch her) when I play with Tallie. I have been putting 3-4 drops of Rock Rose and 3-4 drops Mimulus in their drinking water (which is a good sized mugful every day). I wonder if the product has a diuretic effect, as they seem to wee a lot, but they definitely seem calmer. They also get a quick squirt of Feliway near the food bowl and behind the couch (Tallie's current residence). So getting there - slowly slowly but moving forwards.

Thanks, Pond: Thanks for the suggestions.

Leaving my job today...it would be nice if I had another to go to... No internet access at home yet so will be offline for a while. I will miss you guys. Have a piece of birthday cake and a cup of coffee on me, on Sunday.

Dooj - "eliminate strong smelling chemicals"? This for two cats - that had to be ejected by force from their home inside the sink unit, with all the smelly cleaning chemicals in there? Ha ha. Seriously, Tallie is a very timid cat. She was the runt of the litter and even in the womb seems that she wouldn't stand up for herself. I got them playing last night (well, 2 am - yawn) and Tillie is bigger and more outgoing and just pushed Tallie aside or cuffs her, and Tallie just slinks off and might have another go at playing if she can't see Tillie - or if Tillie will let her. They use the same litter tray which by their choice is in the bathtub (they started using that instead of the litter tray!). But Tillie does not cover her leavings. Tallie does. Tallie now lives behind the couch on top of the cushions for the garden furniture, which are inside for the winter. She stays exactly in the middle just out of arm's reach. But I can peek at her from time to time. Any more suggestions from your book greatly appreciated. They will be starting on Bach stuff from this evening.

"The Word of God is the Will of God" How many times have we all heard that? Who believes it? Some of the splinter groups still proclaim that on their websites and other information. First, we have to define what is “the word of God”? Do it mean, the entire Bible? Or does it mean, the prophecies contained in many books? Or does it mean, the Old Testament? Or just the New? Does it mean everything that’s in the book known as “the Word of God”, like the bad behaviour of David, for example, in his adulterous behaviour with Bathsheba or the engineering of her husband’s death? Surely that is not the will of God? For instance: 2 Kings 20:1 (NIV) 1 In those days Hezekiah became ill and was at the point of death. The prophet Isaiah son of Amoz went to him and said, "This is what the Lord says: Put your house in order, because you are going to die; you will not recover." So that was the word of God to the prophet. Was that God’s will? I don’t think so. Because Hezekiah prays and lo and behold, God “changes his mind.” 4 Before Isaiah had left the middle court, the word of the Lord came to him: 5 "Go back and tell Hezekiah, the leader of my people, 'This is what the Lord, the God of your father David, says: I have heard your prayer and seen your tears; I will heal you. On the third day from now you will go up to the temple of the Lord. 6 I will add fifteen years to your life. But – there is no shadow of turning with Him? That seems to me a complete about-face! There are many other such examples in the OT. From the NT: Acts 5:1 (NIV) 1 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. ... 8 Peter asked [sapphira], "Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?" "Yes," she said, "that is the price." 9 Peter said to her, "How could you agree to test the Spirit of the Lord? Look! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also." 10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. That was the word spoken of prophecy. But was it the "will of God"? Who is the author of death? Wouldn’t God rather have had her (and Ananias, when he was confronted) rather to stay alive with the possibility of repentance? Paul’s address as he sets sail for Jerusalem: Acts 20: (NIV) 29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. This happened! Was it the "will of God"? I don’t think so!! I know we all believe the “good things” (prosper and be in health; healing, etc, not to mention the return of the Lord Jesus Christ and all the stuff in Revelation) and accept those as “the will of God” – but do we accept the bad things that are foretold also as being “the will of God”? What I’m saying, basically, is that this cute little phrase that slides so nicely off the tongue sometimes conceals more than it reveals. I’m just being a bit provocative here. I know what I believe, and I know what (who) I believe God to be and what he is willing to do. Do we think, ie, engage brain, about this phrase?? (edited because some of the punctuation came out strangely)