another spot

You know, I can see everyone’s point. Larry, I know you well enough to get where you’re coming from. Whether anyone else can discern it from his posts, I know him to be a kind and gentle man. I also know, no one knows what is in the heart of a man except God and the man himself. We can look at personal experience, the experiences of others, but when it gets down to it, we are responsible for our own actions. We have no control over anyone but ourselves. My ethics may differ from yours, but I don’t feel I have the right to decide the ethics of anyone but me. What should someone else should do? They have to decide that. Good, bad, or indifferent, we each pave our own way.

Wow, Mark. That’s some really profound stuff. Had I read that book before twi, my involvement would have been much shorter. (Maybe 2 minutes…) I looked up the book in Amazon.com. I would like to buy it. There are 3 others. Do you have them? If so, what do you think of them? I was having a hard time getting a feel for them based on what was at Amazon. One other question: I have talked to two Catholics, briefly years ago. They both said they weren’t Christians. Do you know why that is? I’m real glad you’re not in Iraq…My middle son was there (Army). I’m glad he’s back home…aside from the danger, it’s just not a fun place to be. Temperatures during the summer get to 130. The air conditioning in their qtrs. doesn’t work at all when temperatures exceed 120. He said the metal on his cot would get so hot it would literally burn him when he accidentally touched it. They have big problems with dehydration, as it is very difficult to drink enough fluids to keep up with what is being sweat off. The soldiers often get kidney stones because of it. For folks who don’t know, the hardship isn’t just the danger…

Mark, that’s a great post. Your comment about “cracking the books” nails it very well. I was reading your post in the prayer room. Are you still in Iraq? What happened to the little girl? Do you still want prayer about that? Eyes: Yep. Funny how we all read about knowledge puffs up and never saw the forest for the trees. Right after leaving twi, I did get it about being “right,” the arrogance, etc. I just didn’t get it that it was still impacting me. Sort of like chopping at the roots without really seeing where they all were. That is really what I meant about the poison. Leaven would be another good description. Thinking you’ve gotten past something may not be the same as really getting past it. This I know now, loud and clear. You mentioned on another thread about it’s almost easier to toss it all out and start over. I agree.

That's sweet, Jean. Tell us about your vacation. Do you have any cool pictures you'd like to post? Who was Jesus while on earth? First off we know he was holy at conception. He had fantastic ability. That is, he walked on water, vanished into thin air from the Pharisees that wanted to kill him, and performed amazing miracles. Other things: 1. He could ask God for angels: Mat 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? 2. He had the authority to forgive sins: Mat 9:6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. 3. He had life in himself: Jhn 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself. 4. He had the authority of judgment: Jhn 5:27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man 5. He had authority over sickness and devils: Luk 4:36 And they were all amazed, and spake among themselves, saying, What a word [is] this! for with authority and power he commandeth the unclean spirits, and they come out. 6. He had the authority to give it to others: Luk 9:1 Then he called his twelve disciples together, and gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases. Here is something interesting: Jhn 5:19 Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise. Jhn 5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel. Jhn 5:21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth [them]; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. Jhn 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son: Jhn 5:23 That all [men] should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. I’ve read these verses many, many times and just let it sink in. (Actually I’ve been all over the gospels doing this). The picture I am starting to get is: let’s say I have a son and I am a wealthy person with great resources. I then would bestow to my son all that I have and give him access to it. I would teach him all I could. I would by sheer biology give him my genetic makeup. Verses 19 and 20 above are saying to me that Jesus wasn’t making up his own rules, but following the example of God’s nature and God was revealing that to him. What God does, he showed to Jesus. God gave Jesus the ability to carry it out. “If you’ve seen me, you’ve seen the Father.” He was a reflection of God. He had the resources and authority God had given him. He was given authority of judgment so that God no longer judges man, Jesus does. He was holy. He was a man. He was also literally the Son of God.

PS When I said I don't know about rankings, I meant it literally. As in ignorance...

As I studied Matt. 5, I began to see that Jesus was explaining the difference between obedience to the letter of the law and the heart of it. Verses 21-22: "You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, ‘Raca!’ shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of hell fire." The unrighteousness of the Pharisees had to do with performing only the letter of the law, in the sense of outward appearance, ignoring unrighteousness in thinking. “The point is does your life and your words line up with each other?”—Eyesopen. I understand your statement now. Then we have: Phl 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: We become righteous by believing. It remains to act righteously. In reality, we are “approved” by God according to believing unto righteousness and expected to live rightly, which I am sure God approves of also. I guess I should add, the definition “the right to stand before God without any sense of sin, guilt, or condemnation” doesn’t really work for me. Righteousness to me is something added as opposed to the absence of something in my mind. I suppose it could include that definition, but it would be more of a by product than the thing itself. Not to mention, if I sin, I should feel guilty. That really did cause me some confusion while in twi. Also: “How righteous are we? As righteous as God.” I dunno. There is a big difference between righteousness of God and as righteous as God. Even Jesus said there was none good but God… 2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Ti 2:15 (NIV) Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. There is a really vast difference in meaning between these two translations. In any case, the “approved” is clearly (to me at least) conduct, as opposed to getting approval based on how one handles Scripture and one’s diligence. Although I am sure God would approve of it, if done rightly. In any case, I don’t think that working hard (or diligence) to acquire God’s approval is Scripturally correct, for the simple reason it ignores right conduct in heart and action and changes it to an intellectual and effort exercise. That conflicts with other Scripture and ignores the context, as T-bone pointed out. Having sorting that out, I think studying is fine. I just don’t do it to get approval. I do it so I can understand. So, Eyes, I think the correction to the error is righteousness. That is what puts us in harmony with God. And, yes, it was a big deal. I really had to see the root of the problem as it applied to me. I had to see how it stood between me and God and ate as a cancer. It was really quite a realization. That’s putting it mildly.

Wow, T-bone. Man alive, thanks so much for taking the time for all that. Insightful points also. Amazon.com here I come!!! Eyes, this thread is a living room. We take our shoes off and let our hair down. It is place of acceptance and mutual respect. At least that is how I want it. We got enough judgment in twi. I don’t see any reason to keep it up. I say things I think later are foolish, you ain’t the lone ranger. Do you know why I started this thread? Bet not. Once I understood I had bought into false doctrine, hook, line, and sinker, I felt really dumb. I felt a fantastic amount of condemnation. I knew I had sinned, sometimes greatly, because of my false beliefs. Then recently it sunk in that God worked in my life during twi. He also has worked in my life since then, in spite of my uncertainty on doctrinal issues. Then I understood it never had to do with knowledge, but my faith in Him. And lots of grace. And mercy. Knowledge is nice. I hope to clear up and eliminate the chaff out of my brain some day. I am saying it was still rooted in my brain that God approved or didn’t approve of me because of my knowledge and according to whether it was right or not. I now see that was never it. I can now forgive myself. Now I can heal. 1Jo 3:20 For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. 1Jo 3:21 Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, [then] have we confidence toward God.

I didn't think it was inane at all, and in reality, directly relevant to the topic. My first thought was do I really know what righteousness is, in the first place... Here's what Thayer's gives for the word. "1) in a broad sense: state of him who is as he ought to be, righteousness, the condition acceptable to God a) the doctrine concerning the way in which man may attain a state approved of God b) integrity, virtue, purity of life, rightness, correctness of thinking feeling, and acting 2) in a narrower sense, justice or the virtue which gives each his due"

Just stopping in to say I am much, much better. My choices were, get the swelling down or surgery. I wasn't excited about the 2nd one. Ignoring it wasn't an option. Thanks so much for your prayers, Mark, and any others. Be back soon on this thread. Deb

“The lure of TWI was its appeal to our ego. "We have the keys to the Word's interpretation and can't go wrong. We're the only group rightly dividing the Word." Once they have folks hooked with this arrogant attitude, their erroneous doctrines and practices eat away at the spiritual life like a cancer.”—T-bone. That’s it in a nutshell…(Eyesopen, I never have taken the time to learn the quoting thing at all. It’s much faster to me to copy and paste…) Here’s what’s strange to me. This class claims to be keys. What it really was: a system of theology that was man made and full of non-Scriptural terms. When I hear that kind of thing now, my internal yellow caution lights start flashing. I also find it odd that vp took a verse not addressed to us (violating his own idea) and elevated it to such an extreme. In reality, the pfal class was a collection of private interpretation. We didn’t get away from it, we just got a new system. I don’t know about the ranking thing. I know there are crowns and rewards. I know who wants to be greatest will be least. This is part of the err of twi, I am thinking about household, faithful remnant etc. The idea that we even should try to earn our way into a high opinion of God as the motivator is a bit weird. Even more weird, God likes me better because…(of the group I’m in?!) that is Pharisee thinking. For me, I think the point all along was faith. Adam disobeyed, thus demonstrating a lack of it. Abraham had righteousness reckoned to him because of it. God concluded all under sin that it might be by faith. At the same time, I see nothing wrong with endeavoring to live a life that is well pleasing to God. It’s the motivation that matters. T-bone, I remember your links to Greek and Hebrew pamphlets (I am planning to buy them). I was thinking about another post of yours (no idea where) talking about getting books on a cohesive theology (I think that’s how you worded it). Mark. Thanks for the pointers. I will check them out. You are a sweetheart. And funny too! Eyesopen. Re: degrees of righteousness. Just thinking about all Jesus’s comments about the Pharisees, (such as you are of your father the devil, whited sepulchers, etc) I think the statement is really saying they weren’t righteous at all, as opposed to degrees of it. Their idea of righteousness was based strictly on works and their knowledge. It didn’t matter how many miracles Jesus performed or what he said. When Jesus said if you’ve seen me you’ve seen the Father, they couldn’t get it. That’s tentative… Oh, one last thing. I remember reading but forget the detail. During the first century church, they didn’t have the N.T. They relied on letters and verbal teaching. I don’t remember when the N.T. came into being. The context of II Tim 2:15 was pointing out that other leaders were teaching the resurrection was past already. From this, I know it is definitely talking about what we know to be N.T. teaching. Basically the admonition was to teach this correctly. Avoid babblings, striving about words that resulted in ungodliness. It wasn’t a complicated thing. Going back to T-bone’s posts. Lacking personal integrity would of course pollute the teaching.

Nice post, T-bone. Really, really great. You mentioned in another post about books. Would you please post here some you think are good. I get really frustrated plowing thru this stuff. I feel so inadequate for the task sometimes. Most of the time...

I haven’t been feeling well lately. I have rheumatoid arthritis. One joint that is affected is at the base of my neck in my spine. There is a spur growing there. I am only 53. This joint is currently swollen and my left arm is numb. If this continues for any length of time, I will lose the use of my left arm. It will atrophe. So, I am asking for positive thoughts if not prayer. Whether you agree with my posts or not, I could sure use anything positive you would care to direct my way. Just as a human being. If you don’t have arthritis, then you don’t know. When it hits, it feels like an icepick in the joint. In addition, you feel like you have the flu. I am not whining. I would just appreciate support. Please know I am willing to pray for you as well, and do this already. Thanking you in advance, Deb

And so here we have it. Only twi rightly divides. All others are private interpretation. I need to be RIGHT so I can be approved by God. If I’m not right, God doesn’t like me. Feels like a carnal Christian based on intellect. Not much different than being a Pharisee and insisting on circumcision. Yet I know my brain is not righteous and is not holy. So please explain how my reason is going to make me acceptable to God? And if my brain could make me acceptable to God, then why did I need salvation? I actually know the answer to this question. It was never dependent on intellect.

And, just a general point about twi style research… Once upon a time I was almost as fluent in Spanish as English. My ex was military and we got an assignment to Spain. There was a long flight to Philadelphia and then a 12 hour flight to Spain. We traveled with three young children. Upon arriving, we were all hungry and exhausted. We proceeded to find a restaurant. Of course, once inside, the kiddos needed to go to the bathroom. Seeing no sign that indicated a bathroom, I signal the waiter. I say, “Donde esta al bano?” (Where is the bathroom?). He looked at me like I was from Mars and responded in Spanish, “You want to take a bath in my restaurant?” I couldn’t remember the word for “rest” so I could ask for a restroom, so I simply said, “Lo siento, no importa.” (I’m sorry, not important). I spied a sign over a hall way which said, “Servicio.” In English, that means “service.” Fortunately, I also saw in the hallway two doors. One was marked “Damas” (ladies), and the other “Hombres” (men), and aha! it was clear where the “bathroom” was. I would never have found it based on “servicio.” Even though I could speak the language, I still had trouble. If all I had was a Spanish/English dictionary, it would have been much worse. I am fine with using Greek and Hebrew materials, if used gently, with the understanding that it really isn’t the same as being fluent. Even being fluent has limitations.

If I wanted to, I could start my own religion based on “Jesus wept.” I could then supplement with verses about following Jesus, and then my followers would spend a great deal of time crying…(T-bone, I followed your cult, the least you could do is follow mine, lol). 2Ti 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. In the first place, this is something Paul was saying to one man, a church leader. It was never a mandate to the church at large. If I had a nickel for every time I heard that I had to rightly divide the Word in order to be approved by God, I would be rich. Somehow, the better I was at this, the higher God’s approval meter went up. Even if this was a mandate to the church at large, I really don’t think that is what the verse means. I found this nifty comment on the word “approved” in Thayer’s: “"In the ancient world there was no banking system as we know it today, and no paper money. All money was made from metal, heated until liquid, poured into moulds and allowed to cool. When the coins were cooled, it was necessary to smooth off the uneven edges. The coins were comparatively soft, and of course many people shaved them closely. In one century, more than eighty laws were passed in Athens to stop the practice of whittling down the coins then in circulation. But some money-changers were men of integrity, who would accept no counterfeit money; they were men of honour who put only genuine, full-weight money into circulation. Such men were called dokimos, and this word is used here for the Christian as he is to be seen by the world." (Donald Grey Barnhouse, Romans: God's Glory, p. 18.)” For myself, I think a better translation would be: work hard to present yourself with integrity before God…I am sure you Greek guys can verify this one way or the other. All the words in the verse to me concern what Timothy’s actions are to be and to insert one clause to be God’s approval downward doesn’t fit well. Regardless of the true meaning, this verse was hoisted out of context and elevated to an extreme in twi (see my opening paragraph). Even back then, I always thought that if God’s approval was in correspondence to one’s ability as a workman, then God was a respecter of persons. Not everyone has equal ability at this. What if I work hard and arrive at a wrong conclusion?

“Similarly, I think when he plagiarized he DIDN'T CARE about the law, the authors, the readers. He cared that he got to use the writing, and that he got the credit, and that he got the profit from the book sales (although I think that came last). What he wanted is what mattered, not what others wanted or what was even fair to them.”—Wordwolf. That’s right. Not to derail the thread further (Wordwolf I understand perfectly well and agree with the point of the thread…) But well I am… Vp claimed to be teaching the Word like it hadn’t been known since the first century. He lifted the work of others for the content of what supposedly hadn’t been known. Ahem, someone knew it. Contemporary writers wrote it. Vp lied about his credentials, he lied about the source of his knowledge (it wasn’t direct from God, it came from others), I could go on and on. You guys know this. He told these lies over and over in virtually every teaching. Bottom line, he pretended to be something he wasn’t over and over. Daily. He lived these lies as a lifestyle. Like an actor on a stage. Of course he didn’t care. Couldn’t have. Even pfal was geared to generate distrust in anyone else but him. He made himself out to be some great one (someone in the Bible springs to mind) using the work of others. He wasn’t. He was a liar in every possible way. I didn’t arrive at this in one day… Whether the content (the writing of others) is valid or not, is beside the point. And, considering it was collected and considered great by someone with no conscience, is worrisome to me personally. If I trust it without examining it, then I am relying on the judgment of someone who had no ethics. Scary, when we are talking about spiritual matters. And, that’s even ignoring the adultery issues.

Thanks, Larry. You’ve got a good head on your shoulders. Likewise the rest of the contributors on this thread. Yep, Kathy, I think that element is there too. I think that is why Jesus said he is the light of the world. Well one reason.

Thanks, T-bone! John 8:27 NIV They did not understand that he was telling them about his Father. That is a summary statement for the particular section of John 8 we’ve been talking about. I think that nails it down. Jesus addresses different people at different times in this chapter.

I pretty much avoid Greek since I am no expert and go to it only when helpful. However, ye are of (ek) this world, I am not of (ek) this world. Ek refers to origin which you can get that sense from the verse and context. So, we can understand you originate from this world (you have earthly parents). I did not originate from this world (my father is from heaven). If you read the entire chapter 8, then you see the argument was about their origins (we be of Abraham’s seed etc). From beneath I understood to mean below heaven because the next clause defines the first. Beneath equals world, above equals heaven. We talked earlier about Jesus when he was young. He had been missing for 3 days. When Mary and Joseph found him, he was in the temple. They were really upset. He was really surprised and said something along the lines of “don’t you know I am about my Father’s business?” By age 12, he clearly understood he was the Messiah, his father was God, and identified himself primarily in the sense of the Son of God. What was really important to him was God was his father. This was the great significance of his life and what made him who he was. Rev 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, [and] the bright and morning star. Jesus is declaring an earthly origin by way of Mary and his current status. It isn’t that he didn’t know about Mary (back in John 8), it’s just that the main thing, what made him the messiah, was the fact that God was the father. No God the father, no messiah, no Son of God. So, “I am from above” is literally true because God was the source and the cause. God originated Jesus. Jesus is from above because God is from above. Also, Jesus was stressing in John 8 not Mary, but a heavenly origin. He was trying to get the Pharasees (sp?) to get it that he was the messiah, he was sent by God, and God was his father. If they couldn’t get that, they would die in their sins. They never did get it. They were stuck on earthly origin and earthly parents. We be of Abraham’s seed. Who the heck are you? Well, that’s how I understood it. I am not the best writer in the whole world. Larry, I hope that made some sense. Edited for something I meant to say just the opposite....

Man, dooj. That sounds just exactly like those letters! I remember a time we were about to start a class. A WC went nuts because there was a smudge on the window. He started yelling, "that can keep the students from receiving the Word!!!!" Okay..........

Anger Management 201 (Learning is an Exciting Adventure) 1. Name your spirits and find them in people and most objects. 2. Refer to those who won’t take the class as “empties floating by.” (Be sure to tell them that). 3. Use Greek words constantly and look down on those who don’t. 4. For those who question your authority, just say, “I wish you could see it in the original.” Then laugh smugly about your secret knowledge. 5. Claim to receive revelation all the time, make stuff up, and say it’s from God (give me your money). 6. Get a green bumper sticker that says, “God likes me best.” 7. Remember you’re not in a cult, it’s everyone else. 8. Require everyone around you to work hard for you and pay you for the privilege. 9. Wear skinny ties and find a large forehead of your very own. 10. Tell everyone you’ve got the way, the truth, and a light (carry a map, books written by others, and a book of matches). 11. Give extreme attention to the minute and ignore major things (aka straining at gnats). 12. Tell everyone you have 2000 yr. old knowledge no one else wants. Congratulations, you now get another piece of paper and a different name tag (this will impress others). You can now employ advanced witnessing techniques. Borrow T-bone’s Halloween decorations and sing “Let it Snow, Let it Snow, Let it Snow” at the Mall. Confront everyone with your words. Pretend YOU’RE the one that’s normal.

P.S. Act 10:36The word which [God] sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:) NIV: You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, telling the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all. To be honest with you, I never once considered Romans 10:9 in light of this, until this morning. It isn’t enough to believe God raised him from the dead. It is acknowledging and believing God made him Lord over all. Nifty. Doesn't that make more sense and isn't it more meaningful than "confess the Lord Jesus?" Especially if you consider it in light of the verses in John. In the same manner they would die in their sins if they didn't believe who Jesus was, we make that confession in light of who he is. Not someone with a title, but his position and authority. Nifty, nifty.

Now that's funny, Shifra!

Just teasing, dooj. Next time I'll use the smiley deal... I really did get letters like that though.

Larry, I think Mark mentioned it. I don’t remember for sure. I haven’t studied them, so I can’t answer your questions. I was just thinking of looking at some of the ones that are hotly debated, divinity/not divinity with no theology in mind, but just look at them. I have never done this. I just took twi’s word for it. I’m not really interested in taking anyone’s word for it. Just take up the trail and see where it goes. All along this thread has been re-examining Jesus, so might as well continue. (I would also like to look at first and last Adam and the I AM phrase). I suppose my real question is do I really know who he was/is? I know what twi said. Since we already know some things weren't quite right, there may be more. I have been doing a systematic review of what Jesus said about himself preparation of this. Jhn 8:23And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. Jhn 8:24I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am [he], ye shall die in your sins. Jhn 8:25Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even [the same] that I said unto you from the beginning. Jhn 8:26I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him. Jhn 8:27They understood not that he spake to them of the Father. Jesus began by saying he was the light of the world. An argument ensued, but the point was in order for them to not die in their sins, they had to believe he was the Messiah and not of this world but of the Father. Compare to: Rom 10:9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. NIV gives: That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. “Lord” is kurios. According to Thayer’s, “to Jesus as the Messiah, since by his death he acquired a special ownership in mankind, and after his resurrection was exalted to a partnership in the divine administration.” I checked other translations that also give “Jesus is Lord.” I think there is a major difference between confess “Lord Jesus” in the sense of title, compared to the sense of ownership of “Jesus is Lord”.