spectrum49

But his recognition of a form of inerrancy, his change to dispensationalism from Reformed Theology, his putting together of some pretty good things in a very simple form cannot be brushed off as no research at all. There was good work that came out of that very bad group. I still use it today with the caveat; the big caveat!

I agree, Bob. In a "strange way" I am thankful to have been with TWI, for at least that is where I was first introduced to many things about the Bible. Surely I could have found those things elsewhere if I had continued my search for some group, but it was nice to have certain keys and principles in a package.

Although I am disgusted at the plagiarism and poor application (at times) of the very "research principles" they had taught, I (as you) admit there was some good work done - especially during the "early years". For me, that was in the mid 70's.

I do still use much of what I had gleaned from them, but with "caution", also as you had indicated. Certain things just make sense, like the italics in KJV and basic grammar skills like reading for the context instead of isolating things. I could go on and on with more examples of that which was good, but I believe I have made my point.

To say The Way had found nothing "original" or did "no research at all" is (IMHO) being narrow-minded. And I believe they did stumble onto a few things here and there, despite their misuse of proper investigative techniques.

Perhaps this may be explained by quoting something my dad used to say: "Even a blind squirrel will find an acorn every once in a while!"

SPEC

:)

First of all, thank you Bob for inviting me to this new topic (from the “Front page Article”). So far, it promises to be very enlightening and interesting. I am excited to see just where it may lead us. Let us hope the “dissenters” keep their comments down to a “dull roar” as we honestly delve into the varied aspects of this wonderful discussion.

Romans 1:20-22 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-- his eternal power and divine nature-- have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse...

2 Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is inspired by God and useful for refuting error, for guiding people's lives and teaching them to be upright."

First, let me comment on the two verses above. I love the renderings – especially the 2nd one! What version are they from?

Now, about Ro 1:20ff: This does seem to indicate that “truth” may also be gleaned from things in nature (that which was made by God, of which Genesis 1 is a wonderful and vast source of that which was made) as well as scripture. We all are aware that Jesus taught “many things in parables” (and frequently about things found in nature) showing them to be as indicators of these "invisible qualities of God". I believe that the physical and spiritual realms are closely related, working together in harmony - for God designed them both!

It will be interesting to follow the term “scripture” through the texts and actually see if there is a pattern.

I personally think that, in the context of Romans 16:25 and 26, the scriptures referred to are the ones penned after Pentecost 28 CE (Romans 16:25-26 "Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith”).

I also agree, at least partially, in the idea that there was a broader sense of what canon was in Paul (and Jesus’) time. How to deal with this is another matter entirely. So, on the one hand, I am “doing this” (presume(ing) to hand us a cannon to go by”) since we run around in Christian circles, and on the other I love discussions about how do we (and how did they) apply wisdom from other sources that didn’t make the supposed cut.

As an "aside", I want to give you my take on Rom 16:25-27. I have edited it somewhat to show how it flows in a grammatical sense. Note the many parenthetical phrases [in brackets] which render the “heart” of this entire passage to be simply, “Now to him….to God…be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.”

Ro 16:25 Now to him [that is of power to stablish you] [according to my gospel], [and the preaching of Jesus Christ], [according to the revelation of the mystery], [which was kept secret since the world began],

26 [but now is made manifest], [and by the scriptures of the prophets], [according to the commandment of the everlasting God], [made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:]

27 To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen.

This also lines up with that which Paul expounds upon in further detail in Ephesians concerning this “mystery”:

Eph 3:8 Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things…

With the context of the “mystery” in mind, observe a similar wording to that which we saw in Romans. [Again, the parenthetical phrases are in brackets.]

20 Now unto him [that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think], [according to the power that worketh in us],

21 Unto him be glory [in the church] by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.

I agree with you Bob…..the “canon” in Jesus’ and Paul’s time was most likely much broader than that which others had “selected” later on to form what they call the “holy scriptures”.

Cases in point: (and there are many more referenced in the OT.)

2Ch 9:29 Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?

2Ch 12:15 Now the acts of Rehoboam, first and last, are they not written in the book of Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo the seer concerning genealogies? And there were wars between Rehoboam and Jeroboam continually.

Es 10:2 And all the acts of his power and of his might, and the declaration of the greatness of Mordecai, whereunto the king advanced him, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Media and Persia?

Just where are these today? Are there others as well which are not mentioned? Did Jesus and/or Paul have access to them?

And (most importantly), when the time came for “canonization”, why were these left out? After all - they were important enough to have been referenced as additional supporting evidence to things being spoken of in the OT.

So, Paul had at least four sources: Former writings we have as the Bible today, other manuscripts (many of which are now either lost or hidden), and things found in nature. He also had what God was giving to him and his contemporaries, and a brain to relate all these facets together to form what he believed as "the truth".

And isn't it funny that God said people are left "without excuse" for not believing the truth, based simply upon the physical things alone ! (Ro 1:20) And how much greater does that ring true in light of these other sources as well!

SPEC

:)

It seems this topic has returned to one of its major points – which concerns the inerrancy of the scriptures as a premise upon which VPW had built his empire. We all know what can happen when one takes this approach. The intense desire to show it to be true may drive someone to squeeze the scriptures searching for any “palusible confirmation” no matter how remote, or rationalizing (as Waysider had recently pointed out) to make it so even when he himself might have some doubt left. And of course we all know that is not doing an honest investigation.

I personally find nothing so wrong in starting with a premise, or an assumption, which (later on) might be seen as reasonably valid enough to venture a conclusion. (I worded it that way because no matter just how good something looks or how many points and arguments seem to make it true, one cannot still be 100% sure of its validity in the very end.) Nevertheless, some choice has to be made somewhere down the line, and I would select the one which made the most sense to me.

When starting with an idea that something might be true, I find it of the utmost importantance to stay objective and impartial, (just like any good jury) lest I fall into the trap of reading into things, and twisting or bending them in the direction of my idea – especially when they don’t seem to lead there naturally.

Certainly it is true to a point that if one continually searches for something and does not control his emotions and desire, he might just find it everywhere if he is not careful. This may even happen subconsciously, causing errors which lead to false assumptions that will form an ill-founded conclusion.

I personally believe it is available for one to have a strong urge to investigate such a “notion” while still holding his emotions in check while properly weighing all of the evidence so as to either support or to invalidate his original idea. Perhaps this is where VPW erred at times, grasping at straws in support of his claims and stopping far short of a more reasonable investigation before setting the idea in stone, and teaching it as 100% truth.

I noticed this many times in my years with TWI. They would only teach something to a certain point and then have you suppose that was enough to prove it. But if you personally and objectively re-examined the issue in more detail and your own conclusion contradicted theirs, they would shut their ears to your logic and give you their warning to stop and just accept it the way it is, saying, “Who are you to say the MOG is wrong?!”

And didn’t he himself say something to the affect that most people are “held spellbound by the fleeting names of a few great men”? He said in PFAL, “Well – if the great so-and-so said it, it must be true! After all, he’s the greatest theologian in the world!” In my eyes, that’s exactly what he himself expected from the followers of The Way!!

Anyway – back to the issue of “inerrancy”. (And please forgive me if I am running on too much here, for I do have an issue.)

I must admit that I was led to believe "that premise” (to a point) by what was taught, because it seemed so logical in many catagories. However, I never believed 100% of what they showed – far from it! But enough of the scriptures seem to blend together to give me that impression. Oh yes – I am aware of the various other texts, and writings, whether or not they were cannonized as “holy scripture” by men. And yes – I am aware of the different renderings of Greek and Hebrew words by equally reknown scholars. These factors – and many more – would seem to gradually unravel the very idea that (at the least) some of scriptures really may have integrity after all.

I will admit here in this post (and sorry if it offends) that I really do believe there is something remarkable about the Bible in the way it “coheres”. And this was not merely by those who first planted that notion in my head (whom I left years ago) but through my own personal study – a quest if you like – which has taken since 1989 to feret out.

I have not drawn my conclusions based upon a little bit of circumstantial evidence here and there. To the best of my ability I have remained impartial while seeking evidence which seemed to relate with my “premise”. At first it was rather slow going, but after a couple of breakthroughs along the way, stronger and even more convincing points were able to be made. Several years into “the project” a major breakthrough occurred which left me virtually without question that I had somehow stumbled onto something HUGE!

What I then saw was so wonderful and intricate I had to ask myself if man was witty enough to have devised this on his own and write it down in a Bible. And if man was so adept, then why was this not just common knowledge ever since? Why has this been staring Biblical scholars right in the face for thousands of years, yet was not seen?

That breakthrough allowed more pieces of this puzzle to fall into place rapidly and easily with increasing frequency until I realized “enough was enough” and I could no longer deny the idea indeed seemed valid. And that was when I realized (despite all that was seen) I had only really found a drop in the ocean concerning this area.

So I decided to stand upon it and claim it as true – still realizing I could somehow yet be mistaken. But I decided to put my name to it anyway and publish it. No doubt many will believe it right away, others will see it in time, and (of course) there will be the dissenters. I see nothing so wrong in all of that – everyone makes his own choice. They must only be careful to make their own choice rather than to gullibly accept someone else’s as their own.

It is my hope that others with knowledge and skills far beyond mine in the various disciplines of theology, math, science, physics, evolution, etc. will apply those principles to what I have seen and help to discover more “drops” – maybe gallons or perhaps even enough to fill a swimming pool! Sometimes I feel as though I may have opened Pandora’s box ! :o

If you like, look at my findings when they finally make the bookstores. I am still open to suggestion and am still objective, but I warned already that I am fairly well convinced – yet still meek enough to respond to even better logic when it is offered.

Now, in your humble opinions – have I done something so wrong in coming to my “conclusion”? Can I help it if so many pieces seem to fit so perfectly together that I have become convinced God has authored and preserved his writings to at least some state of perfection which still remains intact today, despite man’s treatment of them over the centuries? Is He able to do that?

I didn’t intend to write so much here - but I'm posting it anyways. What the heck!

Love and Hope,

Spectrum49

:)

Thank you very much for the info. By saying it already needed to be uploaded to a website sure helped!

So I started an account with Photobucket, uploaded a pic from my hard drive to it, saved it in a folder, and clicked on it to get its url.

Then I returned to GS and clicked on "insert photo" while editing a post, and pasted the url into where it was asking for the website where the pic was located.

Pretty easy - and it worked! The only thing remaining is I have yet to learn how I might change the size of it in the post. That's no big deal though, I can live with it "full size" as compared to a thumbnail.

Thanks again!

SPEC

:)

PS: NYUK! NYUK! NYUK!

Gee -- Thanks, Waysider!

SPEC

:)

Well said, Roy.

At the AC in 1973, during one of our afternoon twig meetings, I questioned the contradictory nature of this very topic. You know what I was told? "If you would speak in tongues more on a daily basis, stay in fellowship and operate the other two utterance manifestations with greater frequency, God could talk to you and answer that question."

:blink:

I was in the Advanced Class '89 at Emporia KS, and LCM was speaking about these things, along with ABS. He said (in so many words) that if you didn't do them, then "God won't even spit in your direction!"

I think that is just fine because I don't really want God to spit on me anyways. And besides that, I really doubt that he spits on people in the first place!

This was about the time of the "great split" of The Way, and the ensuing "fog years" to come. He said that if we were to "ever leave the fellowship and protection of this household of God", then we would be "greasespots by midnight" !

And guess what? His "prophecy" actually came true, for not too long after I left TWI, I found this WONDERFUL CAFE - I'm now a "Grease Spot" and loving every minute of it!

Now, how's about a nice cup of coffee and a slice of pie?

SPEC

:)

Hi Spec, I enjoyed reading your post. You bring up some good points. I agree with most of what you say namely that Christians are born again with incorruptible seed that will not be stolen away. Certainly there is sin in this world and that affects those who are children of God and that sin will not take away our eternal standing before the Father. I am not coming against the idea of eternal life. What I am bringing into serious question is so-called Great Priniciple and the implications thereof. I personally believe that this teaching of the Great Principle is one of the most damaging doctrines the Way International purported. It relegates God to a principle, and it totally strips intimate relating to the Father. I personally think it makes a rather silly game between God and the believer.

---------------------------------

Thanks for the “vote of confidence” Erkjohn! I did my best to explain what you were looking for, but of course I know I’m not perfect. If only some of what I said made sense to you, then I am happy to have helped – even if (in the “long run”) I may have “erred” somewhat.

Just a note to clarify my post – I never stated that I believe “The Great Principle” is valid. I was merely showing what I knew that TWI had taught about it. In fact, I agree with your idea that it seems to “relegate God to a principle”, and “makes a rather silly game between God and the believer”.

-------------------------------

Another implication of the Great Principle is this separation between the spirit and flesh. I believe this is where you have some, shall we say issues, with what I posted.

Without going into too much detail, I would like to say a dangerous teaching of TWI and other "name it and claim it" ministries is it's concept of sin. Does sin sound a little to "archaic", or "silly"? Then let's use the definition of "sin" which is "missing the mark". I believe a Christian is in serious derision if they believe a just God will not hold them accountable for their actions to their fellow man. There are warnings in the Gospels about abusing children. Jesus said it's better that a millstone be hung around someone's neck and have them thrown into a lake than to bring any harm to the little ones. There are warnings in the Epistles about leaders bringing harm and abusing their flock. There are scriptures all over the Bible about the poor oppressing the weak. I could go on and on but I don't want to derail this thread. Especially since I started it.

----------------------------------

I don’t want to “derail your thread” either, but I have something to say about the concept of "sin". I understand it to be “anything contrary to that which is holy, just and true in God’s eyes” - in short, anything "unrighteous". Now of course, there is not a man alive who does not transgress “God’s perfect truth” in one way or another. We are actually only responsible for what we understand thus far. Let me explain something TWI never really taught well…

I Jn 1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

You have to KNOW you are walking in darkness, which means you are not doing something you understand is right – or doing something you know is wrong, all according to what little you may understand about “the ultimate truth”.

7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

When we walk according to what we know is right, all is “fine” between ourselves and others “in the fold”, so to speak.

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

I mentioned this before – we can never assume we aren’t doing at least something wrong all the time – because of our ignorance of that which is PERFECT. So we acknowledge that and are thankful that “we are cleansed (constantly) by the blood of Jesus Christ”.

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, AND to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

We are only required to confess “our sins” – that is, the ones we KNOW ABOUT. And in that case, we are not only forgiven for those, but (in addition) we are (by mercy) cleansed from all unrighteousness. It is as though we have fulfilled every “jot and tittle” without having performed it all.

I would say that most of our “fellowship” is covered by that aspect alone, so it is a good idea to “tap into it” by taking care of what we do know! Then we are “perfectly clean”. There is more about this, but I will stop here for now.

10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Again, to sum it up, we should never consider that we don’t transgress something or other all of the time which we are not even aware of yet, for we make God a liar who said we do. This keeps the separation between what you are responsible for and what others are responsible for. This way we can share kindness and understanding between ourselves and not judge one another according to what we know.

Basically, grace covers us for what we do know and confess [our sins], and mercy covers all the rest which is “behind the scene” [all unrigheousness - the rest of it all].

I had a major issue with TWI and its leadership at times when somebody did me wrong. They said I was supposed to “forgive him in my heart”, even if he never said he was sorry. That is ridiculous, because he just kept doing it over and over! God does not forgive unless we confess, so why should I when that guy does not say he is sorry? I believe that is “acting in a godly manner”, and is good practice.

I have found that the best way is to let somebody know what is wrong (just like we do here in posts) and try to work it out with him. Most of the time I find that they “just didn’t realize” there was a problem in the first place. And when the misunderstanding is cleared up, things are fine. (We confess to God – and among ourselves - when we understand we have made an error – then there is forgiveness between all parties involved – on earth AND above!)

But what if you KNOW the person is aware of the problem, but will not acknowledge it? How can you just forgive him and “go on as if nothing happened”? In that case, surely I don’t have to hang around the guy any more if I don’t want to. That is one of the major reasons I left TWI – I just got tired of getting “stepped on” by the leadership – and they knew better!

-------------------------------

What's this all going to look like? Darned if I know. I believe that seed is incorruptible, eternal, holy and probably a lot more. But I no longer believe that deeds done with the body are irrelevant in the God's eyes. I'm not talking about hitting your thumb with a hammer and yelling "poopie!" I'm also not saying that anyone is sinless and there isn't Grace. In fact, for a person that wants to discontinue a life of hurting others and themselves, the Kingdome will spend itself unreservedly for them. Again, I don't know all the answers. I just believe God is just, and that God will even the playing field someday. I don't believe we have some free pass given to us by Jesus that allows us to take advantage of our fellow man.

-----------------------------

I agree – we certainly don’t have a “free pass” to take advantage of people!

-----------------------------

Anyway, I hope that's clear.

It was very clear indeed!

SPEC

:)

What strikes me about this is the differentiation between "the spirit (small s)" and the person themselves. Even though TWI was/is not a gnostic religion, this is a type of gnostic belief if I understand things correctly. That is, a person can do whatever they wish with the body and it doesn't matter because the spirit is not affected. I believe this type of thinking opens the door for all types of illicit behavior in "the name of God". I would be interested in hearing others' ideas about this.

Maybe this will assist you Erkjohn…

Certainly you are correct that this type of thinking can lead to rampant misbehavior. But on the reverse side, suppose that the spirit could become tainted by illicit deeds in the flesh. Over time, it could deteriorate into nothing!

Then, what would be so eternal about this gift? What would become of the promise of living forever? What would remain any more as an incentive to act good in order to obtain rewards? These, and many other things would all fall by the wayside – and it would eventually negate all that Christ accomplished for those who would later believe.

The very concept of grace would become a “byword”, and all the good that God intended for His children would be cancelled out ! :(

It almost seems a shame that God had to set things up the way He did in order for His children to enjoy life. But in His eyes it is the best way. Truly the spirit remains intact - perfectly suited for each individual and eternally pure, while the flesh part remains the same as well. This gives people a choice whether to act in either a godly manner or as they always had before.

God knew this potential for evil would still remain, and encourages believers in many places to “renew their minds”, to “avoid evil”, to “do those things which make for peace”, and many others. Whether they will do this or not is up to them – and there are rewards awaiting those who do so.

Understanding this “temptation”, He inspired the following to be written:

Ro 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid…

In other words, “If grace (this allowance to still choose evil) is so wonderful, then why not allow it to become as large as possible by continuing to act in a sinful manner?” And then He gives the answer: “ I forbid it.” Grace was not meant to be abused.

By the way, the Greek word for "abound" is pleonazo, meaning to “superabound” or to become “out of bounds”. Knowing sin would yet continue in the believers’ lives, God desires each individual to keep it “reasonable” – because nobody is going to act perfectly all of the time! He then goes on to explain some logic behind it, with the “bottom line” being to “walk in newness of life”:

…How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

As I mentioned before, doing good to obtain rewards should be incentive enough to continue avoiding this temptation to fall into the trap of eventually doing “all types of illicit behavior”, as you had put it.

The first step is laying the foundation – that is, becoming born again and receiving this “incorruptible” spirit:

1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

I Co 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

After that, a person can do right or wrong by his free will choice and his spirit is still intact, regardless of his actions in the flesh. The following shows what will happen in the future concerning all the “deeds” by those who are born again:

I Co 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;

13 Every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.

14 If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.

Basically, all of the believers’ works will enter some type of “fire”. The illicit behavior will burn, and the good works will survive the fire and be rewarded.

And again, your logic is entirely correct, Erkjohn. It is possible for one to become born again and then do nothing but evil the rest of his natural life! The following shows no rewards for that person at all – yet even in that event, “he himself shall be saved”. He still has his eternal life because the seed of that life cannot become corrupted.

I Co 3:15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

It is God’s wish that people not only become saved, but also to continue living right so they may have rewards in this life, and eternally as well.

It is my guess that these rewards will include positions of honor, special privileges and responsibility in future times to come – things beyond the book of Revelation.

I believe that eventually more will be written, but what little is written about it now is sufficient enough for enjoying life upon this Earth the way it was designed to be.

SPEC

:)

I know how to upload pictures from my computer into a post, but they are formatted as thumnails, which work ok.

But I would like to know how to insert a picture within a post which is sized enough to see it as it is without having to click or open a new window to see it larger.

For example, this is all I can do at the present:

SPEC

:)

The Great Principle appears in the class syllabus of Interpretation of Tongues and Prophesy (1971), which is a forerunner of the Intermediate Class. This was actually part of the original PFAL class and was known informally as "The Thirteenth Session". It is only conjecture on my part that this originated with B.G.Leonard. I base that guess on the fact that we now know VPW based PFAL very closely on Leonard's Gifts of the Spirit class.

Thanks Waysider for the great verbal description of "The Great Principle" chart. However, I DO have a scanner! :) I trust this will help others to visualize it better. ("One picture is worth...")

The following was from the Intermediate Class on The Way of Abundance and Power - Section 6, pg 38. (1996 - LCM):

(For best results, right-click on thumbnail and choose "Open Link in New Window".)

Just below the chart is the following:

"God Who is Spirit teaches His creation in you which is now your spirit. Your spirit teaches your mind. Then it becomes manifested in the spiritual realm as you act or as your speak out."

Of course this was used to "encourage" people to speak in tongues for the first time, and again and again throughout the rest of the PFAL and WAP series for instruction in "operating the other 8 manifestations".

I believe you guys are on the right track about just where this idea may have come from. It makes sense to me that the “triangle” is trinity-based - and VPW (being an expert “borrower of other people’s works”) would definitely have snapped up such a great idea if it helped him to “peddle more classes” !

On a related note, I do remember one of VP’s quotes:

“Reason holds the same relation to the spirit, as the body does to reason.” (And I wonder just where he got this one from!)

This wording seemed to confuse a lot of the students, but it is basically “The Great Principle” again. I put it this way: “The spirit will give direction to the mind just as the mind gives direction to the body.” (This sort of reminds me of one of TWI's commonly used phrases: “body, soul & spirit”, which they have always had reversed. It should be ordered as written in 1Th 5:23 - "spirit and soul and body".)

And on another note, LCM did his best to emulate the MOG by giving “his take” on this as well in the Advanced Class, where he explained the “flip side” of this principle concerning the devil, who “counterfeited” the idea from God. (And now we know where those two MOG got the notion of "plagiarizing" from!)

The following is from the 1998 Advanced Class by LCM:

Trying to be cute, he called it The Great Prince’s Pull. (Personally, I thought that joke was rather lame !) :o

(For best results, right-click on thumbnail and choose "Open Link in New Window".)

According to his chart, the devil's "manifestations" are what are commonly referred to as "the 7 deadly sins". Speaking of those, he did seem to be rather adept at one of them, namely, "sowing discord among the brethren". Can anyone everyone agree with that?

(Did anyone also notice how the dancing woman is dressed? She is the spitting image of "the devil" in TWI's production of Athletes of the Spirit, in which LCM showed off his newly-acquired ballet skills !)

I do hope this post has helped shed more light on a great topic !

SPEC

:)

PS: If anyone can explain to me how to insert larger pictures in these posts instead of thumbnails, please send me a PM. Thanks!

Hey Bob! Nice posts – Quite a vocabulary you have, sir! Excuse me for sounding ignorant, but I had to look up some words you used:

-----------------------------

edumacasion (edumacation) – seems to be slang for education

disingenuous – lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere

remonstrance – the act of saying or pleading in protest, objection, or disapproval

-----------------------------

I once had a professor who said “Please extinguish the illumination at the termination of activity within this domain”. My friend said, “What?!” I told him, “Turn out the lights when you leave the room.” :unsure:

SPEC

:)

...VP made the mistake of not delegating work that he was unqualified for to others and having a little "faith" that they just might "get it" and go beyond. We can never have that attitude. It's not about us. It's about Him.

Do you think he would ever have listened, then, to anyone asking for TWI research to back off from the claim of the inerrancy of scripture as found in the canon of the KJV, which in my view, was his starting point?

I doubt it.

I seem to remember a part in the original PFAL class where he was “remembering” what happened as he was teaching a live class some time before. It was the part that went:

“Verily I say unto you, today shalt thou be with me in paradise - or is it Verily I say unto you today, shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

I recollect him saying to that class that “We might have something here”! Then he went on to say something like, “They all went home - and when they came to class the next day they were all bubbling with excitement, for they too had seen that one little comma had made all the difference”.

First off, I wonder if the incident happened at all. Even if it did, I am sure the students, in an effort to “please the teacher”, all agreed with him. (And from what I have heard, God help them if they dare contradict the “MOG”!)

IMHO, I believe the incident never really happened. But in his mind, the “stooooorrry” was good for his own teaching purposes - and to have us assume he was truly interested in others’ opinions. I personally think he had his mind made up about this point long before the class even began!

I find it hard to believe he was truly meek enough to listen to what others had to say, unless he recognized it as something “valuable enough to plagiarize for himself”.

You are right, Bob – It was not about us, but about HIM.

SPEC

:)

The eyes don't technically SEE anything. Your eyes simply collect the information that your brain, in turn, processes and interprets. This, for example, is how your brain is able to take two slightly different visual images (camera angles) and interpret them into one, singular, three dimensional image. This process involves certain physiological actions that take place at the neurological level. Thus, one can, indeed, "see" things without input from the eyes. This is very different from "imaging" which does not involve this particular type of neurological activity.

I knew that also Waysider! It was easier to just say I "saw something with my eyes". And you are entirely correct.

And to think I supposed all you do is to interject little "quips" here and there to lighten up the posts!

You do have some "grey matter" up there, huh? Or is is really grey? Gee - now I'm confusing myself!

No objections from me, your honor..

Well - I consider you pretty honorable yourself!

SPEC

:)

Very good, Roy! The result would be "nothing", as there is no "substance" to asborb or reflect the light - and, as you pointed out, there is no light either.

I have "seen" colors with my eyes closed; however, that would not really be "seeing" since the eyes are not involved. Instead, I would call it "imagining".

SPEC

:)

Actually the order of living things in Genesis 1 is vegetation and seed bearing plants, then the water and seas with living creatures, then the fowls of the air, then animals on the ground, then man. This order actually lines up with some scientific theories which state that the fish slowly evolved and came out of the seas to become the fowls of the air who slowly evolved to become land animals. And the days listed below gives a chronoligical order to creation...

I like that, Mark! I too had noticed that as I was working Genesis 1. And there's even more to the story which I won't go into at this time.

SPEC

:)

God first

thanks SPEC

lets say I am in the dark room with a cover over my eyes alone with hands covering my eyes and my eyes are close which color do i see

with love and a holy kiss Roy

Tell ya what Roy - I'll give you some information and then perhaps you tell me what color you see in your above situation.

When most people see something which appears blue, they assume that IT IS blue. Curiously though, it is exactly the opposite!

As I understand it, the internal properties of any substance allow it to do two things when it is exposed to light: It can either (1) "absorb" light or (2) "reflect" it back.

In my example, whatever the item is composed of allows it to absorb EVERY COLOR EXCEPT BLUE. Since it cannot absorb blue, it must reflect it back. That is why it appears blue from the observer's perspective, though (in reality) it actually contains every color except blue!

Something white is reflecting back all the colors, while some black has absorbed them all.

So, you tell me - what color do you see in your example of "the dark room"?

SPEC

:)

Course there's a number of things I don't agree with TWI's take on "holy spirit". From trying to equate it to the "new man", which are 2 completely different things. Or equating it to the "seed" of the good news. Or the "inner man". Or many other synonymous things TWI piled into being God's spirit..

Personally, I ultimately equate everything good to LIGHT and everything evil to DARKNESS. I tend to believe everything on the "good side" is related somehow to the term "light" in one way or another, and vise-versa for the "evil side".

So to me (and this is MY THINKING, of course) the terms seed, inner man and new man (being on the "good side") do relate somehow with holy spirit - and with each other as well! Maybe they are "brothers or sisters", "aunts or uncles", "cousins or distant cousins", but somewhere, somehow, "at the end of the day" I am sure they all do equate into LIGHT.

Enjoying "my light show" - or perhaps it is really "His light show"...makes no difference to me. I'll tell ya what: Let me simply rephrase it...

Enjoying "the light show",

SPEC

:)

Some of the accounts in the OT make me laugh.

Probably not meant to be funny. . . . but, it still makes me laugh. . . mine, no yours, no really they are yours. . . fine, we will just kill them and start all over.

I agree Geisha. It wasn't meant to be funny, but it does make me laugh the way you put it all in perspective!

We can understand it was not by Moses' power that this miracle was done. But by having him hold up the staff just before the Red Sea was parted, God was showing Israel He was with Moses and that they should have respect for him - and they did (for a while) until something else came up.

I can undertand Moses' frustration. Israel acted much like "fair-weather friends" - glad when things went good, but seeking alternatives to God when the pressure was on again. And many people are just like that even today. That makes me laugh also.

Anything man does, no matter how elaborate, is "sheer folly" in the eyes of PURE WISDOM: Prov 1:26 [wisdom speaking] I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh; This verse reminds me of something I saw once...

I was walking down the sidewalk and saw a guy walking along. He just couldn't seem to keep his eyes off of a pretty girl across the street. I watched as he was heading right toward a telephone pole. And sure enough - SMACK!

I laughed and laughed at this. Of course (in my heart) I felt sorry this had happened to him, but still couldn't seem to contain myself because what he actually did was just "so stupid".

Similarly, to me it is laughable to watch Israel's "antics" in the OT - to be acting so foolishly after having seen the power of God in action time and time again! So sometimes, all we can do is just laugh.

SPEC

:)

Excuse me year 2027.

I read your post. I can't see how is possibly relates to the topic. And you said nothing about it at all. I'm LOST!

Can you elaborate on it somewhat and show me how this fits into our discussion?

SPEC

Group hug :knuddel: :knuddel:

Good call Oak! I agree wholeheartedly ... after all, who is perfect among us?

Oak,

Sorry about the snarky "unbeliever" comments...

Geeze, if it wasn't for snarky comments, I'd have nothing to say at all...

I have been known to do snarky at times. . . . . . . . and you [sPECTRUM] are exc-uuuuuused. :)

hey ! that's where i come in !!!!!

(She was referencing that Jesus had said he came to call "sinners" - how humbling!)

It's a great thread and so are you people :)

Yes, folks! There ARE a lot of great people here, despite the fact that we cannot help being "snarks" at times. At least we are having fun!

A lot of what is going on during this thread is sort of a "side-bar" to the real work being done here concerning the "topic" - and most recently by Penworks and roberterasmus. I am learning a lot about "true research" from this - and having a little fun too!

SPEC

:)

foundational class - look at me I can babble like an idiot

intermediate class - I can make stuff up on the fly

advanced class - I can rearrange my thoughts and hear the invisible one

Way D/WOW - I can interrupt a stranger's dinner to tell them they are crazy and need to obey, feel the power? The spirits are angry.

Great list! How about:

Christian Family & Sex: Hey Baby, I'm spiritual enough, let's do it in all these positions!

Biblical Principals of a Believer's Family: It's time for me to make the whole family follow orders barked from HQ or else.

Rise and Expansion: Forget about Expansion, I am going to rise up and annoy the .... out of everyone.

Dealing with the Adversary: Look at me, I can beat that der adversary! (Only don't look at my life, ain't nothing happening)

Pretty funny stuff, you two! Been there - done that.

I especially enjoyed the one about LCM promising to "rise up and annoy the .... out of everyone". Chased away quite a few, huh? Oh well - any way to have people leave TWI is justified in my sight! With our hindsight, isn't it ironic that he really may have (in reality) done a "good thing" by sending them away? Sort of reminds me of:

Job 5:13 He taketh the wise in their own craftiness: and the counsel of the froward is carried headlong...

...15 But he saveth the poor from the sword, from their mouth... [YEAH, BUDDY!]

Now, on a more serious note...for TrustAndObey:

About the "IN or UPON stuff": Personally, I never read in the NT that “the spirit departed” from anyone as it did Saul, for instance. And I do believe we cannot “lose our spirit” in the Grace Administration. But that is merely "my take" - no big deal.

Nevertheless, if we are to concern ourselves with the spirit’s OPERATION, I believe we do agree they are “one and the same” throughout the entire Bible.

And we don’t energize it – God does. Oh yes, we might “believe” for that, but there are constraints involved which relate to God’s justness. If we are out in “left field”, we are not in the “best position” to be receiving revelation & power in operation in the first place. And the same is true in OT times. Whether the spirit is truly “permanent” or not does not matter so much after all. Not much really happens in life without some level of obedience anyway. (And, even during "dire situations" I believe God's mercy is still big enough to allow it in order to protect "life & limb", so to speak.)

I really hate to nit pick – so no big deal about “in or upon”. It’s like you said, its “mostly academic anyway”.

Now back to more "fun & games"...I do promise to enjoy the "Light Show" as you had requested, but perhaps not the one you were referring to - it's really all about light in "one way or another", huh? :B)

So you see, my dear, this way EVERYONE can enjoy the "light show" - well, not everyone - but that's another topic...

SPEC

:)

It's all good bro' - and Spectrum too...

Sometimes it's easy to forget that there are non-Christians in this "Christian Nation"...I don't offend easily, but I like to remind folks that there's "unbelievers" in the room!

Thanks Oak! I feel much better now!

SPEC

:)

The way I see it....if one TRULY believed that. . . ."OOPS" and a big laugh would hardly seem an appropriate response from someone commanded to love their neighbor as themselves.

Gee, Geisha, I certainly meant no harm. I am sorry if I ruffled your feathers a bit. I really didn't mean to. I meant it as humorous - and most here know me well enough to have seen I wasn't being completely serious.

Certainly it is God who will decide (NOT ME!) who deserves the "second death" he mentions. He alone will decide who makes it to the "bema", and the resurrections of the "just" and "unjust". He alone will not only weigh (on His balances) the actions of everyone who ever lived, but also their heart and intent as well.

It is written, "Charity thinketh no evil." Personally, I believe EVERYONE will be subject to this one - including myself!

So please lighten up - I judged nobody in particular - but you indeed "singled me out" as having made a grave error. To be perfectly honest however, I do admit that the "big laugh" may have been inappropriate.

So, in answer to that: In the words of Steve Martin, "Well...exc-uuuuuuuse ME!"

SPEC

:)

I think we are all in for a rude "awakening" in some way or another.

Not to worry folks! -- The way I see it...

EVERYBODY GETS TO GO TO HEAVEN !

Now, ain't that just wonderful ?

SPEC

:)

PS: OOPS! I forgot to mention just one little thing...

...Not everybody gets to stay !

This whole idea that the spirit given today is any different than that which is spoken of and given in the Old Testament makes no sense, especially when so many NT scriptures, even those in the epistles that link the two together...

I never said there is much difference between the old and new testaments concerning the "holy spirit" and its operations. They truly are "linked", as you put it. In fact, the only difference I can see is the fact that today we have it IN US as a part of our "spiritual nature", while in the OT it came upon them as needed and left after it's "work was done".

And it's not that I totally agree with TWI's teachings concerning the operation of the gift of holy spirit. I read the Bible for myself and think independently. If my conclusions are wrong, I will bear that burden myself, alone.

However, I admit that we indeed differ somewhat in the fact that I consider the Bible as the most prominent source of spiritual truth (although I do see other proof elsewhere), while you seem to give the Bible and other readings "equal merit". I don't see that as a big problem...

...This idea that God's spirit is the greatest thing He has given us, his kids, with all these gizmos and gadgets, well.. All I have to say is, enjoy the light show! Because for me, the greatest thing God has given us is His Son. And I wouldn't say either Christ or God's spirit are toys that you control and play with according to your will.

Now this is something we can readily agree upon, for I believe that the "greatest" part of our gift of holy spirit" is the fact that we have "Christ in us, the hope of glory." God himself even calls this is the "riches of the glory of this mystery".

And you did acknowledge that more concerning all this is in the TOPIC on 1Co 12. I believe I have posted enough in there to show I do not believe these manifestations are "toys that you control and play with according to your will", as you put it.

SPEC

:)

PS: I will try and forget your personal comment to me about "enjoying the light show" - just to be kind. I am really trying to be your friend - REALLY!