Larry N Moore

Perhaps when you have more time you'll tell DrWW (and the rest of us following this thread) how you would know it. And while you're doing that you might also address what 2 Peter says in verses 15 and 16 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. It seems to me that Peter had the opinion that Paul's writings (Epistles) were given to him by God. Should we just conclude he was hoodwinked by Paul and therefore toss out what he wrote as well?

You're forgetting one thing -- the context of this verse is in relationship to the "body of Christ." In that "body" gender is not an issue.

Shifra, I understand what you're saying but, aren't you using Paul's words to convince yourself (and maybe others) that Paul was anything but holy?

Ecclesiastes 3:1 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: 2 A time to be born, and a time to die . . . Only some form of intervention -- whether it be via man or God -- can change the course of time's natural influence on God's creation. Job 7:1 Is there not an appointed time to man upon earth?

Happy Birthday Out There. Oops! Sorry, I discovered there's already a thread congratulating you on your BD.

Another spot, I anticipated that being one of the verses that would be cited in rebuttal to the point I made. I'm always grateful, whenever someone points to references in the Bible to enrich my understanding and/or cause me to re-think a doctrinal pov I hold which may not be accurate. Reading through the remainder of the chapter I find this also said: "That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." and think (in reading through the whole context) that it appears that sin is no longer a factor for us concerning death. We've already passed "GO" and collected our $200. So for us, imo at least, we aren't even on the "payroll" of sin and therefore can't earn death.

I'm always hesitant to comment on matters that concern tragedy but, having seen your link and read up to the point of where HCW actually speaks of what happened I feel compelled to say I see no justification for blaming the LEAD program or TWI for the accident. The driver of the car was just being plain stupid and I don't think anyone -- including God -- can be blamed for stupidity. I was involved in two auto accidents in my entire life. The first one was when I was in Ohio's in-state outreach program called WOO. My partner and I was returning from the home of someone interested in learning more about God. We were excited because it went very well. It was night-time and raining. Neither of us were familiar with the roads. And my partner was driving faster than the speed limit. We came up to a sharp curve in the road and he failed to negotiate it, flipping the car over three times before it came to rest back on its tires. He was knocked unconscious. Maybe I was also but only briefly. I noticed the passenger window was broke but I didn't think anything of it until a few minutes later. I dragged my partner out of the car and then saw what was the only house in the area -- we were in a rural or country area and proceeded to it. I knocked on the door and it was then that I realized why the window was broken. My arm went broke it. I left a trail of blood dripping on the door. The second accident happened when I was in FLO. Only a few months later. I volunteered (probably was asked) to go with a member of the Way Corp to Int. HQ to pick up some straw. Our route took us down one of those roads that had a deep ditch on one side (and the road was narrow). I thought he was driving too close to the edge and should move over -- for a moment I thought God was telling me to tell him so but, then I thought that couldn't be right because this man was Corp and surely he would be listening to God. So I kept my mouth shut. And just a few minutes later we went off the road into the ditch. Now, my point is -- In neither case was anyone else to blame but the drivers of the vehicles. Both were careless. To blame anyone else (or a program) for what happened to me -- well -- I think is slightly dishonest. But that's just my opinion. I mean no offense to those who have (and continue to) mourned the loss of someone they loved.

I see no reason why you should apologize for what you believe. I don't recall ever reading the Bible stating this. We (those who have been saved) likewise have eternal life and yet our bodies will eventually die. Other than in Genesis the tree of life is mentioned three times in Revelation -- 2:7 "To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God." 22:2 "In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations." 22:14 "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life" There may be others but, I can't remember them if there are. Verse 2 of 22 especially attracts my attention because it specifically gives some details of the benefit of eating from that tree -- that being -- "for the healing of the nations." Now, there may be other meanings of this phrase -- other than physical healing -- but I'm pretty certain this is the same tree that God told Adam he may freely eat from. While in Revelation it speaks of it's benefit to "nations" (plural) I don't see how Adam would not have received the same benefit. And if so that brings up a question in my mind of: Why would Adam need healing? The tree wasn't planted just for the benefit of a future generation. Furthermore, as I understand it, God designed the body to heal itself. Adam had the same type of body we do and from what I know it's perfectly natural for the body to die daily unless some sort of intervention takes place -- like medicine. I think that's what the tree of life represents -- intervention in the natural course of things. Additionally you have the verses in Genesis 3:22 and 24 "And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever . . . and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life." Seems to me that it was the "tree of life" that made it possible for man to live (physically) forever. That's why God had to a guard around the tree -- to prevent that. Well, I understand this but, it does present a problem if you consider a new-born child dying. What sins did a new-born child commit that caused death?

Thanks a bunch Abi, for finding the info I requested. I'll definitely take the time to look through it. I'll be interested in reading what you think. At your leisure, my dear. I agree. Sometimes, I've thought -- if I had met some of the atheists I've spent time discussing religion with online prior to becoming a Christian I might not have become one.

You mean to tell me that it was God "ordained"? ;)

Reincarnation is an interesting subject in itself. Haven't heard of anyone claiming to have been Adam in a previous life though.

Uncanny (that they both share the same name), isn't it?

Thanks. If it becomes too burdensome for you I'll understand if you put it off. Obviously the death that God was speaking of could not have been physical -- for two reasons. First, I believe physical death was a possibility for Adam and Eve even without "eating" from the "tree of knowledge" because there was also a tree called "the tree of life". Plus another passage in the OT speaks about man's days being numbered -- can't remember the exact wording or the passage. Secondly, the Bible emphatically states that "for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." They didn't physically die that day so either God lied to them or He was speaking of death in a non-physical manner. The soul and the spirit is the only thing left to consider if God didn't lie. So true, although I take exception to the thing about death being temporary. I don't know that to be true. I can believe it but without evidence to the contrary how can I know it?

Bramble, the answer to that question requires one to believe that God is able to communicate (via revelation) with man. If He can then it's possible for a man like Paul to know Jesus even though he hadn't spent time with him day after day as did the Apostles. Another possibility -- and this is something someone else alluded to -- is the passage where Paul didn't do anything for a few years after his conversion. It could be that during that time he was listening to someone who actually spent time with Jesus getting to know him better.

Can you cite (for my consideration) your source for this doctrine? I would be interested in reading how your teachers come up with it. In the case of Adam and Eve it resulted in death. If someone were to tell you if you did such and such that you would die you naturally can choose to do what they warned you against, but is your death a good thing? I imagine to those who love you it wouldn't be.

Abigail, there is also a passage in Genesis where God tells Adam and Eve what was right and what was wrong. Genesis 2:16 - 17 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. God told Adam and Eve that it was ok (right) to eat of every "tree of the garden" but not ok (wrong) to eat of the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil." They chose to do what was wrong (according to God) being convinced by the serpent that it was the right thing to do because in doing so they too would be just like God -- deciding what was right and what was wrong. Like I said -- self-determination.

Sunesis, that's essentially what I was saying (in a previous post). If I were to rename the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" I would call it -- "the tree of self-determination." When we take it upon ourselves to decide what is good and what is evil we elevate ourselves to the position of being just like God -- god-like.

lindyhopper, I remember the book makes some interesting points (to consider) but, it's difficult to buy into his arguments when he obviously can't see the flaws in his own premises. But, I'm sure you'll not be wasting your time reading it.

:) He started it! How could I possibly resist?

It's about damn time!

I see you didn't wait very long. :) My dear sir+, you are mistaken. I did sample your muffins. Are you suggesting I'm lying? ;) You do a lot of wondering, don't you? :unsure: What could possibly be wrong between the bestest of buddies? :) Pick a few. I'm flexible. I did. You must have missed it. Take a deep breath and let it out slowly. You'll feel better. Trust me on this one. ;)

Well, I guess that is as good an answer to my question as I can expect -- the answer being -- No.

*SIGH* You just don't know what you're doing or get it, do you cman? If you look back at one of my posts to Abigail I made the statement (in gist): "Now, I wonder how far down this path we'll go before someone will get it back on track." Instead of taking the hint, I was immediately attacked AGAIN. Sheesh, sweet Louise!

Ok Abigail. I'll consider what you said and keep in mind how you feel. LOL. Where do they come up with these funny sayings?

Are you writing a book? :)