Nathan_Jr

Irony thinks she is hiding, but I see her. Here is another good article by Gurwinder. "Ten Reasons Your Beliefs Are Probably Bull$hit" https://gurwinder.substack.com/p/10-reasons-your-beliefs-are-probably

Right. Generally, we understand a redaction as a removal of text, but a redactor is, broadly, an editor, a reviser. I should have been more precise: an interpolator. I don't think these verses sound gnostic, and I'm aware of lots of silly literature that claims to be scripture. None of that answers my question, so I'll rephrase. Was there a theological point the editor was trying to make? What was the reason for the insertion? What was the interpolator trying to suggest or prove to his audience? That this event further showed that Jesus was, indeed, the Christ? Did he think this would make sense to some believers or to Jews? The editor must have thought it made sense to add these lines. I'm not at all saying that it DOES make sense.

If it is a later editorial insertion, what’s the point? What might have motivated the redactor to add these verses? Why? Can anyone steel man the argument from the redactor’s POV?

Did McConaughy work on the Aramaic interlinear published by The Way, Inc.? It seems that he can make for himself an honest and accurate claim of researching the Bible for forty years. Was he banished? Or did he leave on his own accord?

On an iPhone or iPad a single tap on the imbedded image renders a clearly scanned document.

No one is playing chess.* For twenty years Mike has dodged, deflected, distracted, ignored, accused, projected, whined. These are not excellent moves, but they are his, and they are telling. Hey! He is doing his best. * In the original Sanskrit chess is literally sabrina. It's a free radical. The game is not chess. The game is sabrina - sabrina, Sabrina, SABRINA! No one knows what sabrina means, but my hunch is it's a type of ancient cookie or the name of a mermaid. I can't prove any of this. You'll just need to take my word for it. Write it on a 3x5 card, if you must. ABC. Simple. Math.

Which is similar to, but distinctly separate from, the distraction technique seen here…

What an incredibly undignified, scientifically imprecise and mathematically inexact thing to say! An ad homInem intended to distract from the point made.

“God is doing His best..” Wow. Just. Wow. “God is trying, he really is, he is really trying his best, and that’s what he’s doing, his best. But there’s a budget, you see, and double doors and devils! Lots of hindrance for God, but trust he is doing his best!” All of these imaginative, conceptual constructs projected onto and for God!! “I won’t let go…I will hold on tight to this image… I will clutch to this beleeef imagined… I will belleeeve my way into a known concept of God! it’s just got to fit! By Snowball Pete I will MAKE it fit!”

Thanks.

Sure, these verses paint a strange, morbidly comical picture, but I didn’t realize these verses were so uncomfortable and controversial and such an issue. I am not entering a dog in this fight, but I am curious. Mark, what would happen if a proclaimed follower Jesus Christ did NOT do as you say they SHOULD do?

Mmmph

Thank you, WordWolf. Is it an acronym? Is it a gloss in someone's glossolalia? I found a thread where Trimm was promoting his own G'MIR - the apostrophe is his addition. it seems.

I think it was a feature in the Way Rag. Something to do with "research." Maybe. Idk. I didn't write the book.

Mmmph

A GMIR article was mentioned. What is GMIR?

Mmmph

"Give it a rest." Literally, "Give it a sit." The word "rest" should have been written "sit." It's just...so... ....accurate. mmmph

"You got that condescending Way Brain Condemnation working on overtime. Give it a rest." Well, which is it? Does one imitate victor paul wierwille, or not? Does one stand on the shoulders of T7TMOG, or not?

What did he mean by the Word?

Sometime the best way way to work odd verses is to just let them sit there. Like a duck.

Yikes! You are trying to crank logic WAY too early.

That flame of the whirling sword (literal) in Genesis was set to protect the Tree of Life after man was banished. But, I guess one could read into it that it protected the Tree of Life for later, thus protecting man... hey! A glove! That sword might have been more effectually protective of man had it been deployed earlier. It could have cut off Adam and Eve's hands right after they were formed/made/created to prevent them from... well, you know. But I guess that's just another example of God limiting himself.

I’m reading Daniel now, and it’s a lot of fun! That furnace scene always gives me goosebumps It seems to be a patchwork of at least two different authors or interpolators, but that’s just a hunch right now. Different gods, too! There are Yahweh, El Elyon, and others. I’m enjoying the NASB version right now. Just a quick first read before reading again for absorption. I’m surprised victor paul wierwille, charlatan, would want anyone reading this book. Lots in there for our learning that directly contradicts victor’s cookie recipes. His private interpretation of Romans 13 is effectually contradicted. At least two of his walking keys are throughly smashed: tongues are a prerequisite for revelation, and revelation received twice is revelation established.

"If our wants are light and our needs are heavy, we will never get an answer [from God]." -- Orange Book p. 19-21 Victor limited God right there where he wrote it. He meant what he wrote and he wrote what he meant. No logic. No scriptural proof text to back up his fantasy. Just... a cookie and a jar. Hey! I didn't write the book. Mike was taught fantastical theories are legitimate theories. You've got to MAKE it fit, especially when it doesn't. So, if one is unwilling to go beyond what one is taught, then, yeah, after 63 pages it will still be "WAY too early to crank logic."