anotherDan

I liked it too... will be sending it to folks. Thank you!

Good whole-grained bread, or oat bran, lightly toasted mayo (Hellman's, lots) avacado alfalfa sprouts (must contact the mayo!} bacon tomato s & p (salt must contact the avacado!) A man in view of absolute goodness in a sandwich, adores, with total humility

I saw that, Dot. An old man in such a condition might be expected to make a slip like that.... "having been in a coma, and not expected to survive the weekend...." though obviously the rest of the post was lucid. Like I said, he got me, and I can take it all in fun, but like ex70 said, it is a pretty sick joke.

I too think that Pilate was responding to Jesus' statements just previous to his question, though I would not call it "knee jerk." My sense is that Pilate was a thinking man, and this question may have been spoken sarcastically. It's a powerful exchange of words. That three-word question is included in the record, I think, for us to ask the same question.

Thanks for the heads up, Dot. It was "surreal" enough to give me pause, and it was well done enough to cause me to consider my own problems in perspective. No doubt as I prayed, there were in fact old men dying in hospital beds and nursing homes. My prayers were for them as well. Satori, you got me. Thanks for the perspective, though!

Mako and thresher sharks are said to be the best eating, but stores are known to substitute (as people were saying about shark/skate being passed off as scallops). I've done a fair amount of shark fishing (watch out Eyes! I'll bet the whole theme of this thread gives you pause! :B) ) and there are indeed some that are very bad for eating... the only one I can say from personal experience is blue shark. Looks good, tastes bad. Good shark is a lot like swordfish in texture and flavor. I second the motion on mahi mahi. This is a food fish with scales, it grows fast and (at this time) is only caught wild. It's abundant and therefore inexpensive. I had it last night here at home. We get it frozen at Trader Joe's and it is outstanding broiled or on the grill. About $6 for two nice pieces.... perfect for Liz and me -- outstanding eating qualities. mahi mahi is also called dolphinfish and dorado: here's a mako being brought aboard Mike Homewood's boat, offshore of the Chesapeake Bay

Your post, sir, is surreal... you're not kidding, right? Because I will be in prayer for you as soon as I'm done with this post. BTW, I would vote for the doctor to be a little more brain dead than you. I'll be looking for you tomorrow, sir. Dan

oh never mind

waysider... ain't God great?

Doug, Welcome to GS. Glad you're here! Now, we will disavow you of your illusion! Just kidding. :D Are you freshly "out" or what? TBone, good post. Dr.W's rise to notariety coincided with the popularity of books like Think and Grow Rich, The Magic of Believing, How to Win Friends and Influence People, etc. Even the title "PFAL" keys off of this "success literature". No burdened-down Christians will do! He was a product of his times, as are we all. I like the 7 Habits of Highly Successful People much better. edited to say, Dooj! I loved your post!

You're doing good, Dot. Ask the man in the sandals.

Not at all, Oldies. I'm not at all trying to get you to talk with Jesus, either. Like I said, I respect your position. But, and I'm speaking strictly for myself, I do feel that I personally diminished the role of Jesus in my life to the point that he was NOT Lord. You seem to manage a very high level of respect and honor for Jesus Christ, in good Way Ministry fashion. It makes sense to you. Whether that regard for Jesus rises to the level of Lordship is entirely between you and the Lord. May I make a confession? I call him Lord; I believe he's Lord, but I don't have the confidence that my confession and belief IN FACT "rises to the level of Lordship." I will have to find out. If you think that's not a comfortable place to be, you'd be right. I'd much rather just blithely go on my way thinking I was "righteous" via the theological construct that Dr. W presented. There are other ways of looking at that, not that I want to argue them. If he is Lord, my faith is to be in him, and that's where I am, or am trying to be. My faith in Christ is that he did indeed die for my sins, he did indeed rise from the dead, he was indeed made by God to be "both Lord and Christ (anointed, like a king). But I take it upon myself to reckon with the warning that there are those who call him Lord that are going to be disappointed in their expectation.

You CAN do something about it, if you have the patience and time to rise above the pettiness. Show us "how it's done." But some people are very very hurt, and that's not surprising. A little forbearance and understanding and empathy can help, there too. There is a "decaffinated" forum for those who find some of the other threads too "agressive." I've never peeked in there. I like to deal with substantive issues, though I sometimes get my own feelings hurt. Not really an answer for you. I guess I'd agree that it can be nasty, and when it does, it "sucks." I guess each of us will stick around until we move on! BTW, your avatar has sometimes got me confusing you with Socks. What would you think about finding another one? The fighting image doesn't do much for the subject of this thread, come to think of it! edit: it looks like you're throwing punches, but maybe it's just "yippee! I'm out of the Way!" Not sure. Anyway, from another newbie, welcome!

Dot, your story and your quest touch me deeply. As rascal recently wrote on another thread, these things take time. I have had many of the same questions you're asking. Locally, a lot of the believers have been involved in exactly that type of "inner healing," and though I don't understand a lot of things, I just thought I'd pass on that a number of friends I know have simply asked him. It's the next layer of the onion, so to speak. The answers I have heard have been surprising, but I don't offer them here. You need to hear directly from the Lord. There's no other way. I do hope that you successfully beat any idea that you may share any of the blame (i.e. because you didn't leave when you were warned), and I pray that you find your answer from God as to "where He was" during the crime. May I encourage you to keep doing what you're doing? Some may see it as blasphemy of sorts to "challenge" God as Job did and as the Psalmist did. I can see that POV, but I can also see that when we get honest enough about how we really feel, the Lord may step in with exactly what we need. There are a number of incidents in my personal life that seems as if I was left unprotected. There is a lot of unfairness in the world... everyone knows that... the victims of 911 and Columbine and countless others. I do believe the Bible has answers to your questions, but they don't come with a systematic theology, they come when the spirit guides us into all truth. This is Jesus, the risen Lord. Was it "him" that you saw? Or did you put him there? I think it was "him," but I cannot say for sure. My encouragment would be to ask him.

Dove, thanks for that (read that letter, if you can, Oldies!) The ruling principle, as I see it, as you and Oldies have posted, is monotheism, something that I too appreciate. It's a good discussion. Bliss, thanks for your comments, too. They warmed my soul. Johniam, what Doojable wrote was what I was thinking.... I probably wouldn't say it just like that, but if you had left off that last line, I think your argument could have been more graciously received! But don't let me confuse you with the truth! :P edit: Oldies, we're posting at the same time. Do you see in those verses where Jesus says, "I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you."? Do you see where he told them that he would love them and make himself known to them? Has he done that for you?

maybe a new clue is in order? ;)

White Dove, one of my favorites along that line was when Jesus said, "in that day, ye shall ask me nothing, for the Father himself loveth you..." I used that as proof the we shouldn't pray to Jesus. Honestly, I pray to God, "through" Jesus Christ, but I do sometimes talk things over with the Lord. Unbelievers make fun of prayer altogether, but some of them admit the possible benefits. Those who don't pray to Jesus may do so based upon their belief of what the Word says, and I certainly don't find fault with that, if they're convinced that prayer should only be made to the Father. I respect Oldies' position on this matter. When I was in residence, this topic came up in conversation, and someone showed me a letter written by Dr. Wierwille in response to someone who had written him about the subject. I did read the actual letter, but I cannot remember if the person who showed it to me was the one he had written, or if it was a copy of the letter. Anyway, Dr.W replied that he didn't see anything wrong with talking to the Lord. I can't produce the letter, but that's how I remember it. Of course, Dr. Wierwille's recommendation or view won't impress many people here! But I thought I'd mention that for you and Oldies. Sunesis, I too appreciate your heart and love for the Lord Jesus, as others have expressed. Obviously, we have a lot in common. I wish we could discuss some of these things without getting freaked out if someone doesn't agree with ourselves. One person takes a shot at another, or just resists what another affirms, and it's taken personally, and then the insults fly back and forth. Before you know it, people who are both seeking to do the will of God are at each other's throats. Of course, this is an oft-discussed issue here at GS, where there is such a diversity of opinion. Oldies' tagline by O'Rielly is right on. (Not that I'm a fan of Bill, mind you! Even a broken clock is right twice a day.) I admire those who have the maturity and wisdom not to engage in that stuff. Oldies just doesn't see it. Yes, he's stubborn IMO, but he sees himself as faithful. He's not unreasonable, though sometimes I think he fails to listen to reason. He often makes a lot of sense to me; sometimes not. GSC is not going to come into harmony and be a "replacement" fellowship for the failed Way International, and I say Thank God for that. I have church for worship and teaching and preaching and fellowship, and I thank God for that! Some, I fear, have only GS as a place of fellowship. This is a place where (among other things) people who were hard-azz doctrine heads are still hashing out what they believe, and sparring with others over their differences. (And that's not the stated purpose of the site... it's just allowed, and with good reason, I think.) This can be done with a healthy mutual respect.... heck, even if others are not respectful to us, we can choose to not respond in kind... Don't render evil for evil, turn the other cheek, yadayada. Paul and Jesus are on MY side! :P I believe God raised Christ from the dead and made him both Lord and Christ. Again, to me the issue is one of Lordship. Someone may have a theological problem with Jesus being able to hear our prayers. I cannot help them, because theology has limits. But it does seem to me that our great high priest is living, he is the head of the church, and if we are not "holding the head," we're missing something.

Oldies, Tbone has done some groundbreaking for me. Those were good verses he quoted, and worth reviewing, IMO. The issue here lies with the concept of Jesus being Lord. "Why do you call me 'lord, lord,' and not do the things that I say?" There are those who call him "lord" as you know, that he will then say to, "depart from me, you that work inequity; I never knew you." Jesus said that the obedient were those to whom he would reveal the Father, and himself, and they would make their abode with these. That's the personal walk. If Jesus is Lord, we ought to be doing the things he said. We do ourselves a lot of harm hanging on to the dispensationalism paradigm. We exclude the teachings of Jesus in favor of Paul. We separate ourselves from his teachings, declaring that they are "not addressed" to us. This is another very catchy theory that the good Doctor set forth as a mathematically accurate right-dividing of the Word. Strange, don't you think, that the Gospels were written after the Pauline corpus. These are those which preserve his teachings. Paul, however, was the groundbreaker, and his inspired writings are essential to the whole picture. But Jesus' teachings are hard to obey. It is a narrow path that leads to life, and few there be that find it. Yes, it's "whosoever," the invitation is open to all, but to take up one's cross and follow Jesus is ridiculed by the sons-of-God-with-all-power gallery. I wouldn't want to go to church with YOU! Fellowship with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ is not optional. Except you abide in him, you wither away. Without him, you can do nothing. Lordship is a very "personal walk with Jesus thingy." That's a very short version of the explaination you're asking for. Would you like to know more?

Shifra, you're right about that! note to self: look up that exchange between Luther and More.

guessalot, you are gifted. I'm not done with your last major post... I have to go to work again (darn!). As cman says, rereading is useful. Looking forward to it. Thanks for sharing.

Good point, Shif... IMO, there are not only nine. Martin Luther vs. VPW? I think they both had liberating effects in their ministries, Luther's, of course, being vastly more far-reaching. But Luther's effect was also tremendously confining. DrW's doubly so. They both saw themselves as reformers, and history will have its way with them both. I'm surprised you don't like Paul, but like Luther!!!

Aha. Thanks, Dot Dooj, I don't see how we disagree. From my POV, the things you said are how I feel, too edit: Why didn't you pick on WordWolf?

Hi Bliss. I don't mind. But maybe the historical Jesus did die and was raised from the dead, and made heir of all the universe in a way that is not apparent to everyone. I consider that as a possibility. If that is the case, my question would be, does he mind? The blood of Christ may not have been a common thing, but something that was in fact sacred. It may have actually purchased our pardon.

Last night I read parts of Language in Action by S.I. Hiakawa, and On Language by William Safire. Neither really helped me very much! I am of the opinion that language, though fluid, has as its aim communication (duh?) and therefore strive to write and speak simply. The writers to whom I gravitate are those who connect with me. They "speak my language." Poetry often uses language with abandon, and yet it speaks more loudly (good poetry, that is)... the poet takes on the daunting task of trying to say "what words can't express." Shakespeare was great. I haven't had the leisure to read him seriously in all my 54 years. Maybe someday. Paul makes a point of speaking (in the church) words that are "easy to be understood." He is contrasting that with a manifestation of the spirit he calls "speaking in tongues." In the church, he would rather speak five words with "his understanding" than 10000 words "in a tongue." Words spoken with the understanding include prophecy and preaching. But he spoke in tongues more than they all. This does appear to me to be his meaning when he says "I will sing with the spirit" and "I will pray in the spirit." (Remember the N.T. Wright quote.) The Pentecost event seems to be the antithesis of the confusing of the languages at Babylon. The score is not five to nothing. I think it may be 2 to 3. Tongues being "proof" of "the new birth" seems to lose that ball game. (This comment is only for PFAL grads.) Shifra's example of phony tongues and "interpretation" was prevalent in the Way. Or is it genuine tongues and phony interpretation only? The interpretations were trite because they were defined narrowly by Dr. W according to how he saw it in the Word. I don't fault him for trying to keep it within the bounds of what the Scriptures say, I'm quite in agreement with that practice. But I certainly agree that the practice of tongues w/ int was anemic (OK, I need a spell checker! and is it phoney or phony?) and without inspiration. Can't be what Paul was talking about. The Corinthian church was prideful of the fact that they were "manifesting" the spirit in various ways. Paul's point in chapter 12 is that God was their unity. Who causes you to differ from another? And what do you have that you have not received (from God)? And if you've received it (from God), why would you boast as if you hadn't received it (as a gift, from God, but rather because of some personal superiority or achievement)? This is Paul's reasoning elsewhere. The Corinthians thought some gifts were better than others, and the display of those gifts made them better than others who had other gifts. Paul confronts this with the body analogy. All are needed. God has tempered the body together, and even the humble "parts" are necessary, and have honor. God put the members of the body as it has pleased him. He put the eyes on the front of our faces, and he put tongues and "word of wisdom" in the spiritual body as He saw fit. It is clear from the rhetorical questions at the end of chapter 12 that Dr. Wierwille's assertion that the spirit divides to every man "severally, as he (the man) wills" is incorrect. This flies in the face of Paul's line of reasoning. My personal quest is to come into conformity with God's purposes for His children. Conformity might not be the best word, since it's "the world" that conforms us, but God via the spirit transforms us. It's liberating rather than confining. edit: the poem I quoted in the last post was by Dietrich Bonhoeffer