Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

spectrum49

Members
  • Content Count

    290
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by spectrum49

  1. As I had indicated: "Perhaps this [what you quoted of me] is a slight deviation from the topic, but for what it's worth, here goes:" Certainly we differ on this. Because it's tangential to the Topic (Act 2:1-4) it should be discussed elsewhere, on its own. But thanks for "your take" on it.
  2. That sounds entirely feasible to me! Surely, God (via foreknowledge) could have planned an earthquake he knew was coming to coincide with the monumental event at Pentecost.
  3. I remember once at a Rock of Ages (I forget the year) when VP was under the big-top, teaching quite a bit more in-depth concerning Biblical administrations than what was in PFAL. (things like: "not reading the past into the future" or "the present into the past" or "one part of the future into another part of the future", etc) Having loved grammar all my life, I was already aware of some of these things from studying comprehension skills. Nevertheless, I was very impressed with some things I hadn't come across. But here's the interesting part: Many times, he was pausing quite a few seconds between remarks. Ordinarily, I would suppose a teacher would be doing that either for inflection or merely to collect his thoughts. But often, I noticed him glancing upward before continuing. (And I'm sure many of you here at GS already know the rest!) He was intentionally giving the impression that God was revealing stuff directly to him by revelation --- fresh off the press, as it were. Along with many, I was in awe of his spiritual prowess! However, some years later I finally bought a copy of Bullinger's How to Enjoy the Bible. Lo and behold! --- In Part I, III, iv, 1-6 (covering pages 105ff) I saw that entire ROA teaching (supposedly from God to VP to us) plainly laid out in print --- right before my very eyes! (What I thought then really isn't worth mentioning, so I'll just stop here.)
  4. Glad to help! As I had indicated earlier: Although this is "somewhat more remote" in context with the actual record of Pentecost (Act 2:1-4, etc) it does indeed relate. (In fact, the entire Word from Gen to Rev is basically telling only one story --- of which we perceive baptism to be a rather important aspect.)
  5. Genesis 1: God's Table of Contents to the Bible (And it's available for download here at GS, if you like.)
  6. Unfortunately, my plight wasn't as easy to become rid of. I kept giving them the benefit, of the benefit, of the benefit, of the benefit of the doubt, that they just didn't see the "wonderful new light" I had found yet --- the book I wrote about Gen 1. At one time, I was actually commanded in the name of Jesus Christ to literally burn all of my 7 years of private research on the subject --- which of course, I very sadly obeyed. (Boo-hoo!) But (with God's help) I was somehow able to put it all back together! That was in '95. And I kept hoping that the next Limb Coordinator might see the logical way I presented the material...and the next...and the next (many times waiting 3-5 years for a "different opinion" upon the arrival of the new clergy). Long story short: I finally left in utter frustration after another 14 years or so, in 2009. (And I published my book shortly thereafter.)
  7. Perhaps this is "old news" to you, but because I hadn't frequented GS in some time --- I had missed this topic from 2014. If it's not too late, I'll chime in: I remember "the split" which (to my knowledge) truly began sprouting up shortly after VP had died. By the latter 80's to early 90's (which LCM had termed the fog years) this rift in the ministry finally became quite evident to most everyone. Yet, (despite the variances here and there, which were contentions about one subject or the other...like adultery, etc) all in all, the different camps (offshoots) were still so similar (because of the 90% or so they yet had in common) that some distinction had to be made in order to recognize just which one still taught the absolute truth! Therefore, those of us who remained after "the deluge" were (affectionately) given the (high and lofty) title: "the faithful remnant". That sure made us proud not to have left along with those nasty rags --- which had once been part of a most beautiful robe...or something to that effect! Speaking of terminology though, I've something I consider quite unique to share which might interest you: Early on (in May '75) I was proud of The Way naming itself as such --- because they actually called it The Way Biblical Research and Teaching Ministry. Being rather analytically minded, one day I saw Jn 14:6 in a light I hadn't noticed before: Jn 14:6 "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life..." And I thought to myself: "So, Jesus Christ is: (1) the way, (= The Way) (2) the truth, (= Biblical Research, which discovers the truth) (3) and the life..." (= and Teaching these things promotes the life within the Ministry) Now, I wasn't exactly sure if TWI actually saw it this way, but that didn't seem to matter to me: Because (after all) I considered they were just being honest as to who they are and what they were doing. And I simply marveled: "WOW!!! This really is the one and only true ministry of Jesus Christ, because (even by it's sheer name) it's just so plain to see! It's truly 'the way, the truth, and the life ministry' --- exactly like Jesus said!" Boy, was I hooked --- like a catfish on a lure! Later on though, (still being analytical) I noticed a rather subtle change to this perfection in what the ministry called itself. For by then (in order to make the proper distinction I mentioned above, once there were many similar ministries around) they had added something to the original; for it was now called: The Way Biblical Research Teaching and Fellowship Ministry. Spiritually, this didn't sit very well with me --- because it seemed akin to adding to the Word, which is wrong --- just like what Eve had done in Eden! (And Jesus Christ certainly didn't say: "I am the way the truth, the life and the fellowship...") So why the addition? Simply, it was just another convention they used --- in order to isolate and control people! Because now: It no longer mattered so much what was actually taught, because all of the various offshoots had their different flavors of truth, so to speak. What was so important though is what LCM sternly warned and threatened people with: "Just who do you stand with?" So, who you fellowshiped with made all the difference. And LCM's laws just "got tougher and tougher", until I had finally had my fill. If only I had been a bit keener in my spiritual perception (based upon the unwarranted addition to the ministry's name) I might have saved myself from a few more years of grief and frustration! And the moral? Hindsight is 20-20!
  8. Perhaps this is a slight deviation from the topic, but for what it's worth, here goes: One thing which was presented quite accurately (in that other ministry, yet copied from elsewhere!) concerns the terms kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God. (For brevity's sake, I'll not belabor myself to show the subtleties of the distinction between them here.) Basically: (1) The kingdom of God is overall, covering everything concerning God's own kingdom --- which (of course) includes the spiritual realm. (2) However, the kingdom of heaven is rather limited to an earthly kingdom. You may recall how John the Baptist frequently remarked: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand". (Later on, just after Jesus had heard John was in prison...to be beheaded...he began using that phrase himself --- taking over where John had left off, as it were.) Anyway: Even though the (earthly) kingdom of heaven "was at hand", that doesn't necessarily mean it was a valid statement --- as of yet! (After all, to properly have a kingdom upon earth requires the physical presence of a king; and technically, Jesus wasn't yet a king; those of Israel merely assumed so at the time.) [Now: There's a rather mysterious reason why God allowed Israel to (falsely) proclaim Jesus as King of the Jews, even though it wasn't yet an actual reality. But I won't go into that aspect here and now. Let it suffice that (later on) Jesus will rule as a king upon earth.] [And that's where The Way had another thing correct: But as usual, the info was obtained (actually, plagiarized) from another source, long before PFAL.] And this concerns how the kingdom of heaven was discontinued after Jesus departed --- and is still being held in abeyance until his return (in Revelation) when he receives his official title as King of Kings, after which he'll rule his kingdom upon earth (the finally realized kingdom of heaven...duh!) for 1,000 years (aka: the millennium). Meanwhile, he's a resident of God's Kingdom. And it appears that he's the only one so far...who was once human. (The angels have resided there from antiquity.) Although being subjects of the realm isn't yet a virtual reality for us, we're informed in a figure that (spiritually speaking, mind you!) it's a present reality for us --- even as "we're already seated in the heavenlies", per Ephesians. And the reason this is so is because (as I said earlier) the Kingdom of God includes the spiritual realm, to which we have been initiated (baptized into) --- per our obedience to Ro 10:9, which pertains to the new birth (lit: born from above; ie: having received spiritual life). Nevertheless, what we have presently (though quite vast in itself!) is a merely a portion (earnest; or token, per Eph 1:14) of what we shall have in full, even as Jesus Christ has presently. So yes...technically Jesus is the only actual subject of The Kingdom of God, because (per Mk 16:19) he ascended to God's throne. But sometime later on, we'll join him there, where God rules as THE KING.
  9. You're quite welcome, chock! (By the way, the spiritual meaning behind numbers appearing in Scripture is quite fascinating to me, personally!) Here's a link to something "fairly straightforward and rather simple" concerning the number 12 in Scripture: http://www.biblestudy.org/bibleref/meaning-of-numbers-in-bible/12.html ENJOY! (But use caution: If you delve too far into numerology, it becomes increasingly VAST!) On a related note: In case you're unaware of this, here's a tangent which might make you wonder --- in sheer awe! Gematria is the technique of using the numeric values of Hebrew and Greek letters to find a hidden or symbolic meaning to the corresponding word. (Each letter in those languages has a number associated with it; and it's possible to gain insight via this convention.) For example, the combined value of the numbers associated with the words man and woman (when added together) are equivalent to the value of the word child. In other words: man + woman = child! (Well...so much for that! --- Enjoy "12")
  10. Yes...Jn 3:8 does seem a bit like a "more remote connection" to all of this. Perhaps (at some later time) we might explore that intriguing avenue. Yet (as I believe the 3 of us...Tax, chock and yours truly...are all aware) the entirety of Scripture is basically one great overall connected context! Nevertheless, (because you're somewhat curious) Rob J Hyndman seemed to sum it up pretty well at the following link: http://bibleq.net/answer/2891/ (And not to worry --- it's very short!)
  11. To quote Jim Carrey: "Well, alrighty then!" How about a little more detail, perhaps to make it a bit more intriguing? So, let's go back a tad: As we see in the latter part of Acts 1, there was a problem: Because Judas was dead, there were only 11 apostles. And (for some spiritual reason [?] or other) it appears there actually needed to be twelve present to receive the holy spirit. It seems to me that the great event which was to happen on Pentecost was slightly delayed because of this glitch. And therefore, something needed to be done --- to put things back into proper order. (Notice they even considered their intended action as the fulfilling of a prophecy from Psalms! -- See Act 1:20) NOW LOOK --- The "ands" we saw in Acts 2 were actually preceded by a few more of them: Act 1:23-26 "And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said: 'Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen, that he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.' And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." At this point, it might be said: "Okay, Houston: the problem has been fixed! We have twelve again, so let's resume the countdown." Now, the very next verse: Acts 2:1 "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place...." Is that more inspiring to you --- or are you still in scribe city? The crescendo...yes! --- and especially the culminating point which we see in the latter part of verse 47: "...And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." Now, isn't this our main objective --- to build God's family? (yet not only in numbers, but quality as well!)
  12. This might be a bit off-topic, but (to me) it still relates because it's along the lines of changing wording to suit one's own perspective. It has to do with The Way's "literal translations, according to usage". This classic example of mine (which I hope you'll enjoy, along with me) is as follows: “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, [to determine] whether those things were so.” (Act 17:11 - KJV) The word whether is very interesting here. When this verse is worked honestly, it really means: “by searching the scriptures daily, they could determine for themselves whether or not what they had been taught made sense to them (that is: whether those things were so). For all they knew, there was potential for it not to line up with the scriptures they had at hand. And they could comprehend this merely by comparing it on their own, so they could plainly see for themselves if what they had heard was really the truth. Now—this is what God calls being noble. [And this is very simple to see: The word whether is the Greek word “ei”. Of the 292 times it occurs in the NT, it’s translated “if” 242 times. So—we can read this verse “and searched the scriptures daily, [to determine] IF those things were so.”.] But TWI had a different slant on this verse! They teach it just as though the Greek word “ei” should be translated “that” instead of “if”. In other words: “You work exactly what we showed you, until you can see for yourself that those things are so." Let’s show that another way --- by using the scripture verse again: [What TWI says is in red font --- and replaces what’s been crossed out.] "These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word the teachings of The Way with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures only within those teachings (also including what was taught about them elsewhere, by looking up all the verses used --- via The Way International Publications Scripture Index...and reading all of those articles as well) daily, whether those things were so. proving to themselves that what was already taught to them was the absolute truth of the Word of God --- because they had made it their own! Now—that’s not what I consider being noble --- it’s what I call being puppets on a string!
  13. My my --- aren't WE agreeable today! (Bless ya...)
  14. I totally agree this is a summary statement, generally commenting upon how the believers conducted themselves --- and is not portraying the things mentioned in any progressive order.
  15. Prior to your above post, I had also said the following: So (of course) you're correct! The passage you quoted indeed took place over quite some time. Yet, it still follows (per the figure, many ands) that each item in the list is of great importance, for they lay the pattern for how the believers conducted themselves. For brevity's sake, I did leave out something of relative importance from my earlier remarks, which you might consider: Mat 3:11 "I [John] indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me [JC] is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost [holy spirit], and with fire: There seems something interesting here when we think of the cloven tongues like as of fire. Your thoughts? And there's also something else I find intriguing, which (to my knowledge) The Way never spoke of. Notice it says: "he [Jesus!] shall baptize you..." That makes me wonder a bit! --- Again, your thoughts?
  16. I too, wholeheartedly agree that this topic should end HERE AND NOW. Mike seems to be having a field day while we continue answering the fool according to his folly --- which many of us realize isn't the wisest thing to do --- but we do it anyway, don't we? I'm done playing the fool for Mike's sake! Let us then forsake this 21-page Topic and answer Mike from the Doctrinal Section instead. This is my last post concerning Mike in Plagiarism on the road to success.
  17. Taxidev: I guess the point I was trying to make is more like this: At the very moment God breathed unto Adam, he began living his natural life. And In acts, the very moment the rushing mighty wind thing happened is precisely when the 12 apostles' spiritual life began. And immediately after they had received this new life, they began putting it to use --- by speaking in tongues. As far as the polysyndeton (many ands) goes, that figure of speech doesn't always entail a rapid succession of things happening, but is always a semantic convention alluding to the importance (and stress) we should place upon each individual item contained therein. And as far as Pentecost is concerned, I believe the wind, the cloven tongues, their becoming born again and speaking in tongues all happened within a very short space of time. (In fact, I'm also of the opinion that the vision of the cloven tongues as of fire was not only God's way of letting them know they had already received the spirit, but was also as a sign that they would perceive what to do --- and use those tongues by speaking out.) Now my friend, please understand one thing about me as we get to know each other. Certainly I put my best foot forward (so to speak) when I proclaim things. In doing so, I'm giving it the best chance to be accepted by those who read my work. After all, I do need to sound as convincing as possible, don't I? However, that does not mean those things are settled in stone for me. Simply come up with something which sounds even more logical to me, and I have no problem adapting that in its place. Peace, bro...
  18. Taxidev: It's merely another classic example in a long line of VP's semantic prestidigitation (slight of hand). But in this case --- it's more like slight of mouth! We might do well to remember that the same thing happened when God "breathed into man the breath of life". So, you're basically correct in declaring the essence here is to breathe upon. Interestingly: In one case, we're speaking of the very beginning of natural life; and in the other, the very beginning of spiritual life! SO: Is it any wonder why "Jesus breathed on [upon] them" --- as a prophecy for a future event? (I absolutely love parallels in Scripture like this!) And if that's not enough, consider this: VP taught this verse just as though each of these things (in Acts: 2-4) happened in succession, one after the other (ie: this, then this, and then this) --- when in fact this entire event happened in an instant! Act 2:1-4 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. Notice the words and, (not then) which connect this entire section together, forming the whole of these scriptures into a single event!
  19. Okay, Mike: I concede your point. And why can I do that? Because God told me to by revelation: But not direct revelation, mind you --- but from the revelation already written down for us to simply read. And just in case you're wondering what that is --- it's "agree with your adversary while you're in the way with him". And now that's out of the way (pun intended!) let's see what we've agreed upon together: By revelation from God, Victor took many a man's wife for his own and fornicated with many women who weren't yet married. (And even as Hillary Clinton condoned Bill's adultery, Dorothea appeared to do the same because...at least to my knowledge...she sure never spoke up against it --- did she?) By Revelation from God, Victor stole many a man's intellectual property by coping (often verbatim!) from their work, giving them no credit. That sure puts a damper on what I read in the Bible: "the workman is worthy of his reward". So, I guess Stiles and Bullinger, et al, weren't worthy of any credit for their own work, huh? (excepting from Victor's viewpoint, that is!) (Besides: Why work for something when you can just as well steal it and pass it off as your own work --- and get all the credit you crave from the ignorant and gullible!) By revelation from God, Victor deceived many people by attempting to hide his sins, even as Adam covered himself with a fig leaf. He failed to credit the authors he stole from, passing it all off as his own. (And he got lots of credit --- from many of his ignorant and gullible followers.) [Hmmm: Maybe that's my answer to his wife's position in all of this! Perhaps he told Dorothea to wear that fig leaf as well (conspiring with him to conceal his sin: by keeping the "sex-capades" a secret. And why? Probably for the overall good of his ministry...lest a scandal (and very likely, legal actions) would destroy his Way Thing!] (And btw: Such things didn't do LCM any good either, did they?) SO: He committed adultery and fornication, stole others' work and intentionally deceived people. And that's just the tip of the sinful iceberg! Hmmm --- Ya know what? That sounds more like what the Devil would do, rather than a so-called, self-proclaimed man of God. And again (simply declared, concerning the 10 commandments) here's the 9th: "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." (Ex 20:16) Bearing false witness describes how he pawned many of his writings off as his own work. AND #10: "Thou shalt not covet...any thing that is thy neighbour's." (Ex 20:17). Covet (simply defined) means to desire what belongs to another. And it's blatantly obvious that VP indeed coveted other people's manuscripts, to say the very least! (What about all those women!) Okay Mike: I admit now that I was just being sarcastic about conceding your point. In no wise do I agree with you that (in any way, shape or form) God Almighty sanctioned Victor to act just like the devil --- and get away with it! And one day, he (and all others who rationalize the condoning of these sins of his) shall answer to God for himself. And when that happens, any rebuttals (like you post here at GS) will be futile before the righteous judge!
  20. That reminds me of something humorous: I was a good little wafer, because I had no friends outside of the household. Upon leaving, it became quite clear to my wife & I that we had no friends at all!
  21. I agree with you, Taxidev. Sarcasm seems a much better fit here than "actually stealing". (Thanks!) Paul had quite a sense of humor, didn't he? Nevertheless, even sarcasm is something which (to me) still belongs on the dark side of the light, as I have shown. (And thanks for considering that point as "excellent"!) But to keep things just a bit simpler, I offer this: Not that it matters much to you, Mike: I remember in PFAL (and so do you!) when VP was sharing about law and grace. After explaining how we're no longer under the law, he remarked: "Now, does this mean that we don't have to obey the ten commandments? And he went on to boldly say: "Certainly not!" Of course, that would also include the 8th commandment, wouldn't it? (Thou shalt not steal!) Concerning plagiarism, that seems pretty damned clear to me. I rest my case!
  22. Yes. I'm aware of those 2 items, which have already been discussed in some detail here at GS. I care not to comment on them, for this appears to me to be like a magician's trick called misdirection. Although my gut feeling is that the following seems futile, I'll try a little more patience with you --- for the time being: Although this is really for Mike, you (So_crates) just might like this. Maybe let me know what ya think? MIKE: This is rather deep (and also might just be a bit controversial); but I perceive you like to think deeply, so here goes: Via a thorough study, I've found what one might call a dark side to the light. It delves into the realm where things usually frowned upon (or forbidden) in the Scriptures are indeed acceptable in God's eyes. A classic case is that of acceptable lying --- from Joshua 2: You might remember God working in Rahab's heart to lie to King Jericho's men, who were looking for the two spies Joshua had sent out. She told them they had already left, when the truth was that she had hidden them on the roof of her inn. Normally, lying is wrong. But in that case, it was okay with God because the safety of God's people was more important; for if they had gotten caught, they may have been murdered. Other base things such as this are available within this dark realm of the light, as I call it. Paul admitted "robbing other churches" (2Co 11:8) and was even "crafty" at times, "catching people by guile" (2Co 12:16). And even God himself used deception against the enemy: We know from 1Co 2:7-8 that God allowed the Devil to kill Jesus (when in actuality, Jesus willingly gave up his life) supposing that would help him to avoid the fate (the prophesy in Gen 3:15) which foretold that "the seed of the woman would bruise [crush] his head". There are many more examples of acceptable wrong behavior in the Word. But this liberty is NOT TO BE MISUSED. And it only comes by way of revelation from beyond the written Word --- and not from man's own scheming! And these things (outside of the norm) seem to happen most often during perilous (or austere) times, and frequently involve the safety and protection of God's people. These exceptions to the normal rules are certainly not a license to do whatever one likes for his own reasons. Just never! I've also observed that conventions such as these (which deviate from the written revelation) are used to trick and deceive the enemy; and I haven't see even one example where things of this nature were utilized among the household of God! Within the family, we're honest; we speak the truth; we're not deceitful; and we don't trick people or lay traps for them, etc. And this is what was wrong with VP's supposed revelation (to deceive his followers into believing God had sanctioned his behavior, which certainly includes plagiarism!): He crossed the line --- when he did this to the household of God!
  23. Eccl 8:11-12 "Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. Though a sinner do evil an hundred times, and his days be prolonged, yet surely I know that it shall be well with them that fear God, which fear before him." You see Mike, this is exactly why VP continued the way he did --- because he was getting away with it! Also according to this verse, the more one persists in the error the easier it becomes to practice it. And we also see here that to respect God is how "it shall be well for us". Have you forgotten what Jesus said to the Pharisees in Matt 22:21? "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's." As well as obeying God, we're expected to obey "the law of the land". And (even as Waysider just indicated) plagiarism is against the law --- not only in America, but in most other countries as well. Jesus seemed to understand this. Do you, Mike?
×
×
  • Create New...