Nathan_Jr

I think her challenges to those traditional assumptions have merit. I don’t disagree with her. Jesus being white is laughable. I am presently convinced by the textual and manuscript evidence against those anti-women verses being authentically Pauline. Paul was a radical. Later scribes couldn’t handle it, so they added verses, even forged whole epistles, to MAKE Paul fit like a glove on their misogynistic hands.

Interesting bit about Cato. It seems the later scribe who added verses 34 and 35 was familiar with his popular injunction.

Doug Wilson’s movement is light in the loafers compared to its Islamic equivalent, Jihadism. But with big enough believing, one day it could be as “spiritually mature” as the Taliban, who has made it illegal for girls and women to talk in public. Voting rights? An issue for mere babes in tha werd.

And if it’s NOT possible, just apply that foundational hermeneutic: if it doesn’t fit, you got to MAKE it fit. Make the numbers whatever they need to be. What a tremendous truth!

They did open this year's festival to the general public. How many of the 3000 were locals, I wonder.

For those interested and concerned, here's a commentary on the Christian Nationalist and self-described "paleo-Confederate," Douglas Wilson. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/14/opinion/douglas-wilson-evangelical-hegseth.html?unlocked_article_code=1.eU8.IF2t.ygovpbbB8QNL&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare Warning: may trigger projectile vomit.

Would TWI or victor support the mandatory display of the Ten Commandments in classrooms - a hallmark of contemporary Christian Nationalism? I suspect they wouldn't, since that's a Jew thing and that Jew law doesn't apply to Christians. Any thoughts on this?

Christian Nationalism, Jihadism Tomato, Tomahto *projectile vomits*

Exactly why I added the air quotes.

I noticed on the cover "Prevailing Word Edition."

It might be this one. https://www.theway.org/sunday-teaching-services/ Here's an unattributed testimony from a very cheerful giver of just how... tremendous the experience is - so much smiling: "It is truly an unparalleled experience being in the audience, smiling and feeling as if everyone on the stage can see you and they are all smiling back at you. The music, the interaction between stage and audience, the Word being shared from fully dedicated hearts of committed believers, God receiving the glory in everything—there is no price tag big enough to cover it."

“Leadership”

For whom was this ring conceived? To whom should it be given? I am truly baffled. Is it a generational thing? I'm gen x and just don't get it. A childhood friend is an illegitimate grandson of Carlos Marcello. His "uncles" were inexplicable multimillionaires. They wore coverall jumpsuits daily and drove Oldsmobiles and Buicks. I think they wore rings like this.

You dropped these " ". I gotcha, STL. "research" There. I fixed it.

If you suffer from CRS like I do, and can’t quite remember whom to worship, the bookstore has got you covered with wallet size reminders. https://store.theway.org/store/dr-victor-paul-wierwille-wallet-photo/

It synthesizes itself. What a tremendous manufacturing truth!

Nope. LCM is the pariah. He is the sin-burdened goat banished to death by starvation in the desert. All is better now. Promise. Come on home! But if you're Christmas shopping early, they've got this stocking stuffer for sale: https://store.theway.org/store/rings-mens-ruby/

If you go, take this map https://www.reddit.com/r/theway/s/bY4Mifgkkl

If SIT is THE most important action for a believer, according to victor, why does Paul only yell about it in 1 Cor. 12-14? If it is so important, so perfect, shouldn't he at least mention it in the salutations of his other letters? "I write to you in Christ in all supplication while perfectly praying in tongues..." Or even in the closings? "Peace be with you, and don't forget to speak in tongues ceaselessly..." I don't think Paul thought that highly of SIT. It was an embarrassing issue for him, along with the infighting and litigation amongst the Corinthians. I suspect Paul was aware of the prevalence of SIT among the mystery cults in the ANE. Some of his converts were coming from these cults over to his form of Judaism. He was cool with it, even propping them up (perfect prayer, etc.) and sympathizing (me too, more than you) before knocking them down (sounding like a drunk gong). Remember, Paul himself said he would be whoever he needed to be to persuade a potential convert. It's the same with the Corinthians. "See? I would that you all speak in tongues. I speak in tongues, too, just like you, except more." Intelligibility and love were paramount in Paul's message to the Corinthians, but he had to acknowledge this SIT fetish and set some ground rules. He was on a mission and would be damned if some babbling Greeks were going to embarrass and derail him. That's my reading. I could be wrong.

Paul had παιδεία (paideia). He had training in logic, rhetoric, philosophy, theology. He learned HOW (aytch-oh-double-you) to develop and construct persuasive arguments. The perfect prayer and all the rest of it are concessions ahead of his argument. Classic steel-manning. He was skilled at this. Sometimes, when reading Paul, I can hear him yelling at these people. And I can hear a sarcastic, hyperbolic condescension - a rhetorical device to persuade. "I thank God that I speak glossais more than all of you...[but that's neither here nor there because it's better to speak five understandable words the ten thousand logous en glosse!]" Clarity, comprehension, understanding, these were the most important things for Paul, not glossolalia. Vitctor got it wrong. Again. Hadn't he already spent time in Corinth teaching and preaching? This issue never came up? "Oh, I forgot to tell you, keep the babbling to a minimum, because people on the street will hear your incomprehensible lo shontas, and it's not a good look."

No. Go ahead, George.

Sorry. Forgot about this. A mind is a terrible thing to lose. Louisiana Hayride, Municipal Auditorium, Shreveport, Louisiana

To your point, Acts 2 seems to be xenolalia or xenoglossia.

I am reminded of Aunt Jackie, Mom's sister. She had a business called... The Business. Nope. That's right. Just, The Business. Or sometimes, Tha Business. She found a way to insert the phrase "The Business" into EVERY conversation, regardless of relevance. She'd just MAKE it relevant. The vagueness was deliberate and calculated. Anyone: "Oh, your business, Jackie? What is that? What kind of business?" Jackie: "Are you really interested to know? Do you have six hours after dinner for me and your uncle to tell you all about it?" Anyone: "No." Jackie: "How 'bout all day Sunday?" Similarly, Anyone: "Can you recommend a 'good' translation, John?" JS: "Why, yes. Yes, I can..." (The business? Amway. The translation? REV)

Defining the Covenants or judging the Covenants? I think we established morality (value judgement) can be based on scripture, but it is still subjective morality. And that’s just fine! I don’t see subjective=worst, objective=best. It may be helpful to understand the terms as descriptive.