I'm posting this to do two things. One is to help the "mike's drivel" thread fade into the depths of the charts, and the other is to refresh one particular topic that came up within this "Ubiquitous.." thread thread.
Also, there are many posts within this thread that I've not yet responded to, and I want to get to them soon.
The one particular topic I want to refresh is the one concerning our relationship with Jesus Christ.
This is a very important topic, and I want to see it discussed more. We have a wonderful brother in Christ, and many more blessings to enjoy with him as he appears.
I'm going to agree with Zix on this one. The question of whether VPW laced his teaching with a "ubiquitously hidden" thesis may not be doctrinal, but the presentation and discussion of his doctrine on our relationship with Christ is, by definition, a doctrinal discussion.
I'm interested in more than the doctrinal angle, though. What I have is information that contradicts the "grad urban legend? that we were not taught anything substantial regarding our relationship with Christ Jesus. I can show that we were taught this, although we were often distracted from it. It?s a big part of what happened to us while in TWI, and it reflects on the existing condition within that organization now, as well as our own present spiritual condition. It?s in the record. AND it fits in with this ?Ubiquitous...? thread?s parameters also.
I just thought of something quick to post. Earlier in this thread Mandii brought up the relationship wityh Jesus Christ issue, and I made a short list of some things we do in normal relationships to get to know someone or to enjoy knowing we already know.
That list could be longer. I have a few more items to add, and I was wondering if anyone has some additions.
Mike said: The one particular topic I want to refresh is the one concerning our relationship with Jesus Christ.
This is a very important topic, and I want to see it discussed more. We have a wonderful brother in Christ, and many more blessings to enjoy with him as he appears.
That is the point, Mike.
What about the blessings here and now with an active, involved High Priest? What part does he take in our lives, NOW?
That was the point or points always missing from TWI. It was he did THAT and he will do THIS when he returns...but nothing in the middle.
Do you believe VP taught we can pray to Christ? Do you believe VP taught that Christ had an active hand in the pouring of the Holy Spirit, do you believe that VP taught that Christ IS active in guiding, leading, comforting, His body, His church here on earth?
If not, then there is NO relationship that VP taught that we can have with Christ in the here and now.
The post Pentecost relationship God designed for us is NOT a flesh relationship but a spiritual one.
Who said that the pre pentecostal relationship was a flesh relationship? Where does anyone get the right to say that?
Jesus Christ's fleshy presence on earth does NOT make it a flesh relationship or just a thing of the flesh. That is ludicrous as Jesus Christ worked so many miracles and wonders and went beyond what our normal flesh can do in fasting for 4o days. He took the devil..not a devil spirit on..face to face. He raised the dead. He healed the sick/crippled. He gave out power to his apostles. He was working a spiritual work.
(just like we would like to believe we do, but if the Lord can be condensced to being just fleshy, how much more us?)
You use the scripture that we are not to know Christ after the flesh..or that we don't know him to come up with this theory and YET again, you by pass and conveniently ignore the fact that the Gospels were written well beyond and after Pentecost
SO
if God didn't want a mental picture of Christ in his fleshly form...and didn't want people to be able to relate to Christ in human form..guess what...
THE GOSPELS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN!!
Jesus Christ just did not come into human form just to die but to paint a picture of the One who can't be seen...so His people could relate and understand the Holy One through the life of Jesus Christ..this is NOT to be dismissed..
And the gospels repaint that picture for everyone who did NOT have the privilege to walk the earth with Jesus at that time each and every time some one reads the gospel OR hears the gospels.
But I see here a familiar TWI theme of dissing the gospels, putting them as second rate and not revelant to the believer thereby again, cutting access to Jesus, (and to understand God better because who else would Jesus be declaring?) because they may form a mental picture of Jesus???
You may think you are glorifying God by doing so, but I assure you, you are doing the opposite. This is such a grave error that TWI made and has made over and over and over again every time it gets repeated; repeated with different words and different reasonings, but STILL it is removing Christ the Lord from the individual believer.
Mike you said:
Knowing someone after the flesh is the normal way of knowing: looking at, talking to, and listening to, and doing things together. We don?t know how these things adapt in a spiritual understanding yet. We know how a lot of denominations have evolved an emotional tradition that involves talking to, joyous exaltations, painful emulation (I did this as a RC), and even into extreme situations like visions and stigmata. Some of these things may be psychologically and emotionally pleasant, but they?ve not gotten anyone to ?all nine all the time.?
I resent you lumping talking to Christ in the same context as being hysterical and receiving stigmatas. For those who don't know..some type of stigmata is like having your hands bleed where supposedly the nails of Christ is thought to have been by some.
To lump that in with stigmata, which happens on such a small percent is a great scare tactic to make people FEAR speaking to Jesus or praising Him. Again a TWI tactic of fear.....talk to Jesus and you too can end up possessed.
It is wrong to approach Christ this way to make people fearful or even mock those who do pray/talk to Christ cause, doncha know, it's just a matter of time before those religious suckers get possessed.....please...
Mike, you said:There?s more in Corinthians. Here are the next verses:
II Cor. 5: 17-20
Therefore if any man be in Christ,
he is a new creature:
old things are passed away;
behold, all things are become new.
And all things are of God,
who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ,
and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
To wit, that God was in Christ,
reconciling the world unto himself,
not imputing their trespasses unto them;
and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
Now then we are ambassadors for Christ,
as though God did beseech you by us:
we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
The relationship we have with Jesus is one of taking his place. We get to know him by BECOMING him, in a sense, by allowing the new man inside to grow and counting the old man dead. We get the same job of representing God to the world, and reconciling them back to God. We get the same power Jesus got, the same relationship with the Father, and are joint heirs with him. We get to know him the way an actor gets to know the character they play. The actor becomes the role they portray, but only for the duration of the play. We get to do it for keeps. Once we get that down, God will give us our next instructions.
First, let me assure you, if you played me in a play, no matter how pretty or exact the dark auburn wig you would have to wear was, you would not know ME or have a relationship with ME and Praise the Lord, it would not make you me.....I may think you can identify with me, or my feelings or my perspective and that ONLY at best but that would in no way shape or form qualify you to call yourself my friend or to say you had a real relationship with me, cause you wouldn't be having either, friendship or relationship. You would only have knowledge of me.and that is about it.
Second, TWI's translation of that verse is to imply that Paul is saying that we are all ambassordors. But that is just TWI slant.
Some people believe, that Paul, in his ministry as an apostle, and since face to face with the believers, he is asking them to reconcile (be changed) and get it together. That this was part of Paul's ministry of an apostle and IS not handed out to every tom dick and harry when born again. (Why in TWI did we think we were equal to the Apostles? Heck, we thought we were equal to the Lord Jesus Christ...) So they see Paul saying..since we (the apostles) have received this ...we (speaking for the leaders of the church --and it wouldn't be the first time Paul brought words to the gentile believers from the leaders of the church)are asking you to get your selves together
Now if you remember, the ministry of reconcilation, according to TWI was something we were given at the time of our new births. So if this is true, and if this verse is saying what TWI or VP said it meant, why is Paul telling people who are already reconciled and have that sonship right to be reconciled??
Read it carefully...he is not saying to go out and reconcile those who aren't reconiled. He IS telling people to get it together.
But here is one of the major bumps, errors of PFAL and VP and that is in the haughty assumption that we take the place of the absent Christ, using this verse to say we are all ambassadors with a special ministry or right to do so. We don't need the Lord because we fill His shoes in the here and now.
We do not replace Christ. Christ does not need replacing. And in representing someone does not MEAN one replaces him.
I represent my work. I represent my family. Ambassadors represent their countries and their leaders but in no way do they take the place of the one they represent. Therefore, they best be conducting themselves quite well because there will be much to answer for to the one they represent.
Even if one wants to stay with the TWI definition of this section of scripture, it is STILL a far leap of logic...an awfully long stretch to take ambassador to mean fully taking someone's place and taking on all the glory and responsibilty of the one they replaced...two different words with two differents meanings and they are not interchangeable....replace represent
But in TWI, we had all these people thinking that to be Christ like was to be just like him in everything to the point of replacing him. Hogwash and that is how TWI got so polluted, through the corrupt teachings that had people idolazing the 'leadership' whose Christ in them was bigger...therefore better..all works of the flesh that glorified man and not the Lord Jesus Christ or God and we all see what that turned into.
TWI did not teach a real relationship with Christ.
Any relationship with Christ WOULD have to be spiritual since he is not on this earth in bodily form anymore..but that does NOT mean He has to be replaced because, spiritually, He is there for His people, leading and guiding them. TWI and VP, through it doctrine and practices had us replace Christ. And consequently, VP became our High Priest...and the fact of the passing of the patriarch and shoving the mantle were all old testament ceremonies and phrases (but which practices opened people up to taking whatever the MOG said and doing what the MOG wanted done, because TWI had so exalted men to that position) that have/had no significance within the body of Christ because we have a High Priest who doesn't change, hasn't been replaced..is not a silent partner and is forevermore.
Sorry, I don't want you or the lady over there, I want Christ. And these days, I certainly avoid those who actually think that they 'replace' Christ here on earth.
Now, don't point out the Pope to me or good lady whoseefazit who has stigmata..we are talking about TWI and what they did to sever our relationship, a real, working relationship with Christ,that should have been borne out of love..not hidden from in fear of getting possessed or in haughtiness to think we are Little Christs...
[This message was edited by Mandii on April 09, 2003 at 15:22.]
[This message was edited by Mandii on April 09, 2003 at 15:30.]
[This message was edited by Mandii on April 09, 2003 at 15:32.]
that was a beautiful post .. amazing , thank you .
remember that saying "as He is!" at my first rock everyone was saying that every time I would ask "How are you today ?"
Let me the first to say many were NOT "as he is ". That is from a teaching in the blue book and I had not read it when I went to my first rock of ages... I asked who is about a thousand times haha
Jesus Christ NEVER USED A COMPUTER , for example haha ..
He died at a very young age, He never had children... etc.
Just how are we replacing the Saviour of mankind here exactly in twi???
I know of Zero christians dying for me well ok if someone has then did they do it without sinning EVER???????
Jesus Christ is so much more than a butch of mini me 's walking around pretending to do good for God.
If I ever do any good I feel I owe Jesus Christ it for what He did for me by obeying God almighty without failure..I pray He always always gets the glory for it .
people sin, Jesus Christ allows them the forgivness for it from God Almighty ..by never ever sinning..
Can any christian do that???
People do not heal one another , God heals people , Jesus Christ never even claimed He did any miricles He said His father did them because He (Jesus Christ) always obeyed His(Gods) will.
I think VP presented his view of what he thought our relationship should be with Christ.
I maintained that VP did not teach a living, dynamic relationship with Christ. On the other thread, Mike answered, if I understood him correctly, that VP did present/teach such and then Mike went into how we have a relationship with Christ by taking His place to the world and that is how we get to know him, by representing Him to others.
I responded that I did not believe that to be an example of a real relationship with Christ and why I thought that.
So yes, to what you thought you have been reading.
WOW! I'm just touching bases at home for a few minutes and wont be home again until late tonight. I thought I had the monpoly on long posts... ?
This subject was a VERY hot one in the late 80's and early 90's, but my impression has been that it's faded a bit, compared to other TWI issues, these recent years.
So, it looks like it still is a hot issue. I'm glad. This'll give us something better to discuss than drivel issues. If we were to take a poll then I know how I'd vote, as to who we should really give some deep discussion time to: me or Jesus Christ?
Well that was clever , by all means , lets discuss Jesus Christ foremost,,, but that may mean you have to doge the real live questions presented to you by me about what you mean by your statement of replacing Jesus Christ now...
In your more important and profound discussion focused on Jesus Christ lets start with topic #1
How do you think God views your notion that today your equal to The KING He ORDAINED to RULE OVER US?
America has a democratic view , God decided aa monarchy will be in the kingdom... hmmm Kingdom sounds not so much plural Mike .
how about it?? going with your suggestion here.
hurt me by ignoring you know ...what with your heart to serve Im sure you will reply.
Yikes! Hold on to your hat! I just got back and saw your post first.
Are you referring to a post of yours earlier in this thread?
There are a big bunch of un-responded to posts there that I am aware of, and that?s the reason I came back to this thread. I was hauled off to court by LarryP2 on his ?Drivel? thread. If you are referring to a post of yours here on this thread that it looked like I ignored, please be assured I didn't ignore it. I suggest you take this up with Larry. You and he could make for a very entertaining food fight. Maybe even lead to a TV pilot opportunity.
But seriously, when you wrote: ?Well that was clever , by all means , lets discuss Jesus Christ foremost,,, but that may mean you have to doge the real live questions presented to you by me about what you mean by your statement of replacing Jesus Christ now...?
I don?t know which real live questions you mean. Can you give me a thread, page, and time-date stamp, or re-paste it? If not I may eventually get to it, if it?s on this thread. I plan to be here a while. This ?Ubiquitous Teaching? is a very large matter. Maybe I should just try to hang out here and not post on other threads for a while.
I can try and wing it a little here and say that from II Corinthians 5:20, the phrase ?in Christ?s stead? means roughly ?taking the place of the not personally present Christ,? and that a few phrases before that the phrase ?ambassadors for Christ? has roughly the same implication.
Here?s what I did NOT mean: that there?s anything wrong with Jesus Christ, and that we needed to have him replaced, or that he?s rejected, or anything like that.
Let me know more, and I can answer more, now that I?ve been cleared of Ban Level Drivel and can come back here. Hey! I didn?t get any yellow ribbons? Seeing the events in Iraq today, I guess my freedom?s newsworthiness is eclipsed.
**********
Mj, you also wrote: ?How do you think God views your notion that today your equal to The KING He ORDAINED to RULE OVER US??
I?m not sure I understand what you mean here. God made us joint heirs, and Jesus said we should be able to do all he did. Is that a problem? Is that what you mean?
*****
You then wrote: ?America has a democratic view , God decided aa monarchy will be in the kingdom... hmmm Kingdom sounds not so much plural Mike .?
Now here I have NO idea what you?re getting at. I can?t even guess a response, so please state it again, in another way, or with more details, and I?ll try it again.
*****
You then wrote: ?how about it?? going with your suggestion here.
hurt me by ignoring you know ...what with your heart to serve Im sure you will reply. thanks?
Here I understand the grammar and such, but I don?t undertstand the heart. I can?t tell if you?re mad at me here, or kidding, or being gentle, or rough??? I?m sorry, but it?s too jumbled, and sometimes when things like that come my way I fip back and forth between thinking the worst and thinking the best. Please just let me know how you feel and that would make it a lot easier. If you?re just jabbing at me, please save it. I never intended to do that to you. You approached me for help one day a long time about and I did my best to help. I am again. Please be patient with this posting process. I have a lot of them to deal with. You can ALWAYS e-mail me, and even phone, with any REALLY burning issue, so please don?t think I?m purposely dodging you. Besides, I only dodge certain ISSUES, not people. Oky Doky? I?ll be as nice as I can with you.
Finally I'm getting to your first recent post here. As far as "What part does he take in our lives, NOW?" I partially addressed this earlier with a mention of the repeated teaching series of "Christ Formed In You" and soon I'll get into those details, but there's more. All these things will take time to sequentially lay out, but I'm into it, and just need time.
Some other things I already posted from the Zacheus "Climbing High..." chapter in Vol. V also address this subject. Dr urged us there to search for Jesus, to seek to SEE him. Dr wasn't suggesting we get real still in a dark room and look for visions to appear. He was talking about seeking him out in God's Word, because he IS the Word made flesh. That's the most logical first place to look for him to a graduate of PFAL.
This may seem a bit abstract, and it is, because it's headed out of the flesh realm. If we see Jesus in the Bible, that's one level, a 5-senses level of sight, because the Bible is in the 5-senses realm. Then, after that, if we continue in this pursuit and see him in the Word of God, we?ve graduated to a spiritual sight of him. This fits in to the category of a spiritual relationship with him.
I know you have more questions in a later post on these two, but one subject at a time. I?ll get there.
You then wrote: ?That was the point or points always missing from TWI. It was he did THAT and he will do THIS when he returns...but nothing in the middle.?
Here?s where I need to separate out the two concepts again, of the twi verbal tradition (TVT) on one end of the spectrum, and the written PFAL record on the other end. I think when you say ?missing from TWI? it?s accurate when aimed at the TVT. This APPROXIMATELY includes twig teachings and coffee discussions and ministering, plus branch teachings, and phone conversations, and letters, and teachings by reverends, on tape and even in the Way Magazine. SO this ?verbal? tradition, in my definition, really is and the non-PFAL written materials.
I agree that the TVT had some problems regarding the activity of Jesus Christ and they got worse as time went by. By meltdown time it was rampant. I do remember a Way Magazine article (not by Dr) that had the title ?What Is Jesus Christ Doing Up There?? It was a small article, and it went into his intercession activity.
I?ve found many interesting things in the record on knowing Christ that we missed. Here?s just one from the Blue Book. See how many ?between? type activities are mentioned in just this one passage. Then, things mentioned here may have additional details in related passages, thus enriching it further to the mastering student.
(There are some variations in this passage's text in earlier printings.)
**********************************
?The Bible Tells Me So? p.109
Wouldn?t you say that God certainly has engraved us upon the palms of His hands? He forgives and forgets our shortcomings while He remembers and cares for us constantly.
God gives us in Revelation a comparable truth.
Revelation 3:20:
Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup [eat] with him, and he with me.
Have you ever thought on the beauty of those words? In the Orient the host does not eat with his guest unless he is a most intimate friend. In this passage of Scripture Jesus is saying, ?I am your most intimate friend.? Jesus enters into our hearts upon our invitation. He never forces Himself on us. He is not just entering in, but He is supping with us. Jesus said, ?I want to be very intimate with my people; I will sup with them; I will eat with them if they will but ask Me.?
Hebrews 13:5 says ?...I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.? Also Matthew 28:20 says, ?...lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.?
The Lord is with us always. That is why He said as recorded in Matthew 11:28, ?Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.? It is God?s continuous remembrance whereby He can say to us, ?I have graven you upon the palms of my hands even though your walls, your palms, are continually before me.?
Christ died for all and thus He could say, ?Whosoever will may come.? Once Christ has offered the invitation, it is a matter of our accepting it. If you want to come to Christ you may. Man need not die in his sin because Christ died for sin and carried our sicknesses and our pains. We need not carry them. God has willingly and gladly engraved our names upon the palms of His hands.
There is no question about the call of Jesus Christ to man being clear. The only question is whether man is going to respond to that call.
**********************************
How odd, how this passage I?ve selected ends with ?no question? and ?clear? on a subject that we have questioned and are not clear on. There is a reason for this. It?s connected with the reason I often point out the differences between the record and the TVT.
When it comes to the TVT we can?t say these Blue Book pages were in the ?no question? and ?clear? category, because as the TVT grew the memory of the contents of the books faded, assuming they were read and absorbed. Not all details were absorbed.
The introduction to the Part IV in the Blue Book, in which this passage sits, mentions what these written materials were given to us for. On page 103 we see: ?...on the subjects in this Part IV, the clarity of God?s Word has been muddied by passage of time, translations and interpretations. So now we must again study the Word of God and look for clarity on subjects which have been relatively unstudied or on subjects which have been grossly misunderstood and thus inaccurately taught.?
Here, the 5-senses context is how things got ?questioned and unclear? in churchianity prior to God?s 1942 intervention. But, look how it also applies us! It BETTER applies to us, in fact. The reason the TVT got out of hand is because of the ?relatively unstudied? and ?inaccurately taught.? Now that we?re looking at the books, it can move towards the category of without question and clear.
You then wrote: ?Do you believe VP taught we can pray to Christ? Do you believe VP taught that Christ had an active hand in the pouring of the Holy Spirit, do you believe that VP taught that Christ IS active in guiding, leading, comforting, His body, His church here on earth??
There was one "pray to Jesus" reference in the above passage. Did you catch it?
My notes are misplaced on this, but I have found a few songs we would sing TO Jesus in the songbooks. As far as teaching on praying to Jesus in Dr?s writings, it?s about as prevalent there as it is in the New Testament. Just to be safe, I?d often say things like ?Thanks!? or ?HOW did you do it?? but I?d run out after a while.
The Bible does have a few people talking to Jesus post Pentecost, but it seems like those things happened when people were contacted.
I figured that if SIT was perfect it wouldn?t leave him out in any way.
This is no where near the sum total of what I have to post on this, but I do have one more item for this one response. It?s at the end of the Introduction to ?Jesus Christ Is Not God.? I mentioned about a hundred posts ago that often Dr put crucial things in out of the way places, like introductions, and we now have two examples of that here.
Dr often and urge book mastery to close the gap between the TVT and the written materials, but as the years went by, us OLGs felt more and more spiritual, and less and less need to obey his advice. Unfortunately, as we were getting bigger and bigger ego heads, our original exposure to the PFAL writings was leaking out. The need to refresh our memory, and get the exact wording in our heads, grew simultaneously with our ?perception? that we had no such need.
Here?s what Dr wrote there:
**********************************
JCNG p.8-9
Before closing, let me bare my soul. To say that Jesus Christ is not God does not in my mind degrade the importance and significance of Jesus Christ in any way. It simply elevates God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, to His unique, exalted and unparalleled position. He alone is God.
I do believe the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is the Son of man because he had a human for a mother; and he is the Son of God because of his created conception by God. So on the basis of the parentage of God alone, besides his choosing to live a perfect life, Jesus Christ is by no means a run-of-the-mill, unmarked human being. Thus, to say that I do not elevate and respect the position of the Lord Jesus Christ simply because I do not believe the evidence designates Jesus Christ as God is to speak the judgment of a fool, for to the very depth of my being I love him with all my heart, soul, mind and strength.
It is he who sought me out from darkness.
It is he who gave me access to God; even now he is my mediator.
It is he who saved me when I was dead in trespasses and sin.
It is he who gave me the new birth of God?s eternal.
It is he who filled me to capacity by God?s presence in Christ in all the fullness of God?s gift of holy spirit.
It is he who was made unto me my wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption.
It is he who called me and set me in the heavenlies.
It is he who gave me his joy, peace and love.
It is he who appointed me as a spokesman of God?s accurate Word; may I be found faithful in that calling.
It is he who is all in all to me that I might give my all for him.
It is he who is God?s only begotten Son.
May I as a son of God live always to glorify the God whom men can only know from God?s written Word, the Bible, and from the declared Word, God?s Son, Jesus Christ.
In spite of all my human frailties and shortcomings, I endeavor to love him with all my being. I love him and the one and only God who sent him. May His mercy and grace continue to be yours as well as mine, and may God be magnified by our testimony of Him who gave His Son that we might have life and have it more abundantly? yes, that life which is eternal and therefore more than abundant.
**********************************
Did you see the answer to your "active hand in the pouring of the Holy Spirit" question above?
This is a start to bringing out our spiritual relationship with Jesus Christ. It?s late now, and I?m tired. Tomorrow?s another day.
.
.
.
[This message was edited by Mike on April 10, 2003 at 12:22.]
I?m back. In your next post you began with: ?SO.....if God didn't want a mental picture of Christ in his fleshly form...and didn't want people to be able to relate to Christ in human form..guess what...?
This statement, and all the previous ones are right on the money. However, not all of what I under stand on this has yet been posted (correcting that here some), plus not all posted has yet been fully understood. This is new stuff, in the sense that most of this ?ubiquitous? subject slipped past us, and thus the word ?hidden? in the title. Let?s see how much we can clear up right now.
In the Advanced Class we were taught the ?16 Keys To Walking in the Spirit? and key #4 is ?Study the Word much. What you can know by the five senses God expects you to know.?
We start out in the 5-senses natural factual realm with no spirit, and even when we get holy spirit, that doesn?t affect the mind, so we?re pretty stuck in the 5-senses realm. This is how the apostles and disciples got to know Jesus. Their 5-senses relationship with him was richer than rich, yet it was still only 5-senses. Once in a while they?d get a spiritual flash, but it wasn?t everyday, and it wasn?t when the pressure was on. When things were rosy, their 5-senses relationship with him must have been quite superb. It appears like they have a tremendous advantage being that close to the master.
However, we have a kind of advantage over them that makes up for it. We have the written Word on which to base our relationship with Jesus Christ. For years after Pentecost they only had memories.
For both groups, however, the 5-senses relationship is not all that God has made available. Starting at Pentecost, a spiritual relationship became available for those who desire. This is better than the 5-senses relationship, otherwise God would have had him stay here visible.
We must start in the 5-senses, but when it ends or ceases, then the only way is up. The Advanced Class key #4 teaches us that we should not only HAVE a 5-senses relationship with Christ, but that we should DEVELOP it, by study of the Word. Jesus was the Word made flesh, so studying the written Word, like the gospels, is part of the feeding-growth process.
Without the PFAL writings, I see that a spiritual relationship with him is nearly impossible. In the OT there were odd fellows who came along now and then who were somehow suited to receive spirit upon them. These people had the genetics, the upbringing, and the free will decisions to propel them into service as prophets. They were coincidentally tough enough in the right places and knowledgeable in the right places and willing to serve in the right places that qualified them to get the supernatural boost of spirit upon for God. They were rare.
Likewise, it?s rare that someone can develop this spiritual relationship with Christ, without many factors lining up just right. The Bible remnants are just not good enough to serve us well here. They help in other areas, but here they are not up to the standards of perfection (Rafael, please take note) that God knows are necessary for it to work.
Since these writings are from God for the specific purpose of teaching us His Word (and WHO is His Word? Jesus Christ) like it (he, Jesus) has not been known since the first century, then the principle kicks in: ?With the coming of the greater, the lesser is terminated.?
Now this isn?t law, it?s what?s available. God made something greater available, because the 5?senses relationship breaks down. Look how the apostles? relationship with him broke down when the heat was on after Jesus was being tortured. Look how OUR relationships broke down in the ministry meltdowns.
Now, God isn?t nasty about this and say to us ?Get in line!? He just makes it available and then waits for us to grow up to be ready. When my daddy gave me that crude electronics lesson by rolling a marble down a vacuum cleaner hose, it was the only relationship I could have with electronics until I grew a little more. That crud relationship was like a 5-senses one. Years later I learned the next level of accuracy in electronics, and I was able to do more and understand more. Same with the spiritual relationship with Christ.
Right now a spiritual relationship with Christ looks too abstract and unfulfilling emotionally. That?s a 5-senses impression, and is incorrect. As we grow in our understanding of this Natural/Factual versus Spiritually/True and the realms involved, then Dr?s promise of clarity on the bottom of page 24 in the Blue Book will come to pass.
God is our Daddy, and He is not impatient with us. He knows that we MUST start out in the 5-senses, and that only with great drive and learning can we arrive at the greater. He is there to help. He wants us to seek Jesus.
*********
The gospels were written for the generations after the apostles and for areas not local to Palestine and people who never saw Jesus physically. They were written last or after the epistles. They were written so that people could start out in the 5-senses and get to know the personality of Christ from a distance. Then, the epistles make more sense. The gospels are like a giant contextual frame for the epistles, and are very useful. They start us out, and then the epistles show us the newer relationship, where there?s no distance, he?s IN us, and we then become him. That?s the spiritual relationship in a nutshell.
The 4 gospels are very important. They serve a purpose.
************
Then Mandii, in your megapost you wrote: ?But I see here a familiar TWI theme of dissing the gospels, putting them as second rate and not revelant to the believer thereby again, cutting access to Jesus, (and to understand God better because who else would Jesus be declaring?) because they may form a mental picture of Jesus????
Let?s slightly change your sentence by substituting ?TVT? for TWI because TWO things went on in TWI: the corrupt verbal tradition and the writings by revelation. Then I can agree with it. I saw a lot of Corps bravado used here. In asserting themselves as more contrary than the other guy against ?Jesus is God? notions, some Corps jerks would put down relationships with Jesus Christ as trinitarian or dangerous. This accelerated as time went by. Reading the gospels was only for sissies, by this misguided leadership.
******************
You then wrote: ?I resent you lumping talking to Christ in the same context as being hysterical and receiving stigmatas.?
Please be assured that my lumping men together was in grammar only. I DID mention that stigmata was more extreme. They are VERY different in some aspects, yet different in other crucial aspects. I could lump God and the devil together in saying that they both are spiritual, but i still remember they are vastly different.
I see those things as tied together in that they are a 5-senses thing. Even stigmata may be a natural process related to grieving. In the garden, Jesus had something going on with his sweat that was not normal. Many Catholics are taught the empathy pain approach to relationships with Jesus. Maybe it?s not so extreme to sweat like blood from the hands. I don?t know. I Do KNOW that my including them in the same category is not to put down anyone who employs those 5-senses techniques for ?knowing? Jesus. If that?s all someone has to go on, I can?t see God blaming them and shunning them in any way. I can see Him yearning (John 4:23) and seeking ways to tell all that there?s more available.
I have used several of these methods in the past, not including stigmata, and I would never try to make someone feel bad about doing the best they can. I would simply look t see if they desire more. If I didn?t have this attitude, then your eloquent exposure of such hard heartedness would apply to me as well as those jerky Corps people who got overly enthusiastic in shutting down the 5-senses approach. If they had had the spiritual relationship cooking in their lives then they?d have been patient and gentle about it like God.
I have talked top Jesus lots and never got possessed. If I limited my relationship to him there, however, then I?d have less ability to wage war on the adversary, and if I went into the wrong battle with this spiritual immatuurity, THEN I might have a lot more trouble dealing with ds possession, ds oppression, and indirect satanic influences.
**********
Moving right along, you then wrote: ?First, let me assure you, if you played me in a play, no matter how pretty or exact the dark auburn wig you would have to wear was, you would not know ME or have a relationship with ME and Praise the Lord, it would not make you me.....I may think you can identify with me, or my feelings or my perspective and that ONLY at best but that would in no way shape or form qualify you to call yourself my friend or to say you had a real relationship with me, cause you wouldn't be having either, friendship or relationship. You would only have knowledge of me.and that is about it.?
Yes. This is the case for normal acting. However, if I have a spiritual hotline with YOUR Daddy, and your Daddy is MY Daddy too, then suitable equipped with a God-breathed text that details the essence of your personality, THEN it may be different. THEN I will not only get to know you BETTER than if I always only saw you at some distance however short, but I could do all the things you could do, in a limited sense. IF there was a job to be done that you usually performed, I could then step in and do it as well, since I mastered the Mandii Manuscript. As I?m doing your job, I get to know you even more, relating to how you see the job.
***********
Regarding alternate interpretations of II Cor.5 I might caution that we should really first master what we were taught IN THE BOOKS, and then we can better examine alternates. I am believing the PFAL books. Someday we can closely examine what they say about these matters.
You wrote on this subject: ?So if this is true, and if this verse is saying what TWI or VP said it meant, why is Paul telling people who are already reconciled and have that sonship right to be reconciled???
I see two things there. The first is that before Paul and Timothy and others came to Corinth, the were not born again. Rhetorically, Paul can sum up their history in verse 20, like a review of what happened and was happening. He and Timothy and others were reconciling them ?back to God? because they had become separated in Adam?s sin.
Another way to look at verse 20 is that even though many Corinthians had received holy sppirit, they were carnal in their minds, and separated from Godly thoughts and renewed mind and fellowship with the Father. When I get out of the fullness of fellowship with my Father that is available, I seek to be reconnected, reconciled in my mind. It looks like this is what you expounded upon, and quite well, I might add.
This is an example how one usage may have more than one meaning. God?s Word is rich. In the back of RHST we can see some verses where the useage of pneuma hagion may be multiple. These two meanings are in two realms. One is spiritual reconciliation; one is 5-senses. BOTH are part of God?s plan, but the 5-senses one got taken over by the adversary. He is now defeated.
Dr mentions double meanings in Vol. IV ?God?s Magnified Word? on page 14, and we?ve discussed it a bit here at GS.
**************
You then wrote: ?We don't need the Lord because we fill His shoes in the here and now.?
You then correctly identified this as part of the TVT error. When I saw this error being pulled out of some Corps butt I would resolve to read the gospels all the more to see what size those shoes were. And which way he walked in them. And with what kind of spring in his step. All these are necessary in our starting out with a 5-senses relationship with Christ. We NEED accurate information to relate to in order to have a relationship. We NEED oru lord and master. His 5-senses example is crucial. It?s not the endpoint in what?s available, it?s the beginning.
It?s always been my understanding, and I?ll always mean it here, that the phrase ?replacing Christ? means that he is MORE present. It doesn?t mean squeezing him out, just that he?s more visible to those who can?t see him otherwise. To someone who hasn?t yet believed, and hence can?t see him, I can show them Jesus Christ because in the SENSES REALM, he is not available, but I AM. That blind person can see me, and I can show them Christ, see them born again, and THEN the situation changes. Now THAT person has Christ in them too, and we are both members of the Body of Christ. We can both represent the 5-senses ?absent? Christ, but we?ve now beyond that stage. He?s our head, spiritually, and we function together. Of course TVE missed this altogether. It?s in the books, though.
Mandii, as we all go through our memories of the crap, the more we separate the TVT from the written materials, all these things will get much clearer. I think you?ve described the TVT errors in this matter accurately throughout your post. There was a lot of crap, but thank God we can see the pure good now. The reason we all had in the back of our heads that it was worth staying in spite of all the crap was GOD. We stayed because we could sense that mixed in with the crap was something good. Our awareness of this became dimmer as we drifted from the exact wording in the books. Eventually we all reached our breaking points and bailed. By coming back to the books we can reacquaint ourselves with that still small voice in the books that we originally heard telling us this was THE Way.
quote:Likewise, it?s rare that someone can develop this spiritual relationship with Christ, without many factors lining up just right. The Bible remnants are just not good enough to serve us well here. They help in other areas, but here they are not up to the standards of perfection (Rafael, please take note) that God knows are necessary for it to work.
Actually, the person who imposed that standard on the Bible is VPW, not me. One preoposition out of place, and it CRUMBLES. That's what VPW said about the Bible. I'm only guilty of applying that same standard to VPW's written works.
I think the remainder of your thesis is hogwash. Impossible or rare to have a true understanding and relationship with Christ without the PFAL writings? Hogwash. Believe it if you want, and I wish you well, but that thesis is nonsense.
You wrote, and very succinctly : ?I see two things being discussed here, simultaneously. First, whether Wierwille presented a coherent doctrine concerning our fellowship with Jesus Christ. Second, whether his presentation/doctrine was correct.?
I am assuming the latter, and attempting to prove the former. These two things do get confused, and I?m glad for the help in pointing this out.
I am less into proving the later (correctness), because I believe if we properly work with the former (presentation) then we will see the reality of the correctness. God?s Word speaks for itself better than I could ever speak for it. I assume the correctness up front and wide out in the open. Proving that we did have something better, and still do have something better, than the twi verbal tradition TVT is the major thrust of all my posts.
[This message was edited by Mike on April 10, 2003 at 15:09.]
you got your "former" and "latter" mixed up, which, come to think of it, doesn't surprise me at all.
EDITED:
(for those reading: I'm not crazy here. Mike actually did get "former" and "latter" mixed up in the preceding post. He fixed it after I pointed it out).
Mike, you assume Wierwille was correct in what he taught, and you're setting out to prove to us that he taught a coherent doctrine on our relationship with Christ.
That's where you and I are different (again). I assume Wierwille taught something, then set out to establish whether that which he taught was correct. To each his own.
[This message was edited by Rafael 1969 on April 10, 2003 at 15:47.]
As to the standard that Dr gave us for the perfection of God's Word, I think it?s the case that as we master that topic, in all its locations, then you may have to modify the standard of perfection you think Dr gave us. I think you have some error in your understanding of Dr?s teaching on this standard.
There are still some more subtleties in what constitutes an error to get on the table. Here?s one: would you count ink splotches or grain in the paper that look like punctuation? I guess that you wouldn?t, because you do come off as reasonable in your approach to these matters. This is not a subtle question, but here is one: where do you draw the line on printers errors, typesetting, proofreading, and even the editorial processes between Dr and all his editorial staff?
Here is one anecdote I?ve always carried with me, but hasn?t reached post until now. I once heard Dr at a staff meeting commenting on errors that crept into the materials and the effort to catch them all before publication. He said (paraphrasing): ???If the Way International waited for things to be 100% perfect before publication we?d never print a single book.?""
The important thing here is the revelation from God, and us finally getting a spiritual understanding of it. What Dr was saying is that physical perfection of the 5-senses product is desirable, but not achievable. The Psalm talks about ?words of earth? then later becoming perfect in what they convey: God?s pure Word where every word is pure. How do you get a word to go from earthy and imperfect to pure? God!
The important thing, the goal, is the spiritual understanding of the revelation, and the physical medium is wonderful, and as perfect AS IT NEEDS TO BE in order for us to get that spiritual understanding as we master it.
Yes, in SOME areas, one word out of place and the whole thing falls to pieces, but not all topics and words are so pivotal as pros in John 1:1. I?ve seen other places where Dr says that there are alternate renderings worth considering, and the exact rendering less crucial for the ultimate goal.
If your present understanding of Dr?s position on the perfection of the words is correct, then Dr would have to conclude that these other places have one and only one word in the perfect rendering.
I think you?re taking Dr too literally on this, and not seeing the overall truths he teaches here. It?s like the ants on the trees analogy presented by What The Hay on 4-7-03 in Drivel Court.
Language itself is not as exact as this supposed standard of Dr?s, and perfection in 5-senses understanding what is written may, even after study, elude us due to our language being slightly different from Dr?s. An idiosyncratic passage of his may look like a mistake in my language, and I may NEVER get the 5-senses understanding of this. However, if I apply all the principles I was taught, eventually I?ll have enough of a correlation on the ?mistaken? topic to see correctly in my language what Dr was writing there in his. OR, it may be that I NEVER get a perfect 5-senses understanding of that one passage, but since I did all my homework in other areas (key #4 again, of the 16) God can tell me this in my newly forming spiritual understanding of the revelation, which is the ultimate goal.
[This message was edited by Mike on April 10, 2003 at 15:19.]
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
82
119
656
81
Popular Days
Jun 15
86
Jul 3
73
Jul 12
50
Mar 31
49
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 82 posts
mj412 119 posts
Mike 656 posts
Steve Lortz 81 posts
Popular Days
Jun 15 2003
86 posts
Jul 3 2003
73 posts
Jul 12 2003
50 posts
Mar 31 2003
49 posts
Popular Posts
Yanagisawa
Did you say "get the ball rolling" or get the kaballa rolling...for it sounds like that's your current freak - some sort of hidden, mystical kaballa-esque gnostic esotericism. I'm fascinated with you
Mike
Howdy Folks,
I'm posting this to do two things. One is to help the "mike's drivel" thread fade into the depths of the charts, and the other is to refresh one particular topic that came up within this "Ubiquitous.." thread thread.
Also, there are many posts within this thread that I've not yet responded to, and I want to get to them soon.
The one particular topic I want to refresh is the one concerning our relationship with Jesus Christ.
This is a very important topic, and I want to see it discussed more. We have a wonderful brother in Christ, and many more blessings to enjoy with him as he appears.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zixar
Mike: That's what the Doctrinal section is there for.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I'm going to agree with Zix on this one. The question of whether VPW laced his teaching with a "ubiquitously hidden" thesis may not be doctrinal, but the presentation and discussion of his doctrine on our relationship with Christ is, by definition, a doctrinal discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Zixar,
I'm interested in more than the doctrinal angle, though. What I have is information that contradicts the "grad urban legend? that we were not taught anything substantial regarding our relationship with Christ Jesus. I can show that we were taught this, although we were often distracted from it. It?s a big part of what happened to us while in TWI, and it reflects on the existing condition within that organization now, as well as our own present spiritual condition. It?s in the record. AND it fits in with this ?Ubiquitous...? thread?s parameters also.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
mull mull mull...
all right. none of my bidness. I'll shaddap. Carry on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
You might not like this, but I have to go to work now. I'll be back.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
I just thought of something quick to post. Earlier in this thread Mandii brought up the relationship wityh Jesus Christ issue, and I made a short list of some things we do in normal relationships to get to know someone or to enjoy knowing we already know.
That list could be longer. I have a few more items to add, and I was wondering if anyone has some additions.
How to KNOW Jesus is so crucial.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mandii
Mike said: The one particular topic I want to refresh is the one concerning our relationship with Jesus Christ.
This is a very important topic, and I want to see it discussed more. We have a wonderful brother in Christ, and many more blessings to enjoy with him as he appears.
That is the point, Mike.
What about the blessings here and now with an active, involved High Priest? What part does he take in our lives, NOW?
That was the point or points always missing from TWI. It was he did THAT and he will do THIS when he returns...but nothing in the middle.
Do you believe VP taught we can pray to Christ? Do you believe VP taught that Christ had an active hand in the pouring of the Holy Spirit, do you believe that VP taught that Christ IS active in guiding, leading, comforting, His body, His church here on earth?
If not, then there is NO relationship that VP taught that we can have with Christ in the here and now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mandii
Mike, you said...
The post Pentecost relationship God designed for us is NOT a flesh relationship but a spiritual one.
Who said that the pre pentecostal relationship was a flesh relationship? Where does anyone get the right to say that?
Jesus Christ's fleshy presence on earth does NOT make it a flesh relationship or just a thing of the flesh. That is ludicrous as Jesus Christ worked so many miracles and wonders and went beyond what our normal flesh can do in fasting for 4o days. He took the devil..not a devil spirit on..face to face. He raised the dead. He healed the sick/crippled. He gave out power to his apostles. He was working a spiritual work.
(just like we would like to believe we do, but if the Lord can be condensced to being just fleshy, how much more us?)
You use the scripture that we are not to know Christ after the flesh..or that we don't know him to come up with this theory and YET again, you by pass and conveniently ignore the fact that the Gospels were written well beyond and after Pentecost
SO
if God didn't want a mental picture of Christ in his fleshly form...and didn't want people to be able to relate to Christ in human form..guess what...
THE GOSPELS WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN!!
Jesus Christ just did not come into human form just to die but to paint a picture of the One who can't be seen...so His people could relate and understand the Holy One through the life of Jesus Christ..this is NOT to be dismissed..
And the gospels repaint that picture for everyone who did NOT have the privilege to walk the earth with Jesus at that time each and every time some one reads the gospel OR hears the gospels.
But I see here a familiar TWI theme of dissing the gospels, putting them as second rate and not revelant to the believer thereby again, cutting access to Jesus, (and to understand God better because who else would Jesus be declaring?) because they may form a mental picture of Jesus???
You may think you are glorifying God by doing so, but I assure you, you are doing the opposite. This is such a grave error that TWI made and has made over and over and over again every time it gets repeated; repeated with different words and different reasonings, but STILL it is removing Christ the Lord from the individual believer.
Mike you said:
Knowing someone after the flesh is the normal way of knowing: looking at, talking to, and listening to, and doing things together. We don?t know how these things adapt in a spiritual understanding yet. We know how a lot of denominations have evolved an emotional tradition that involves talking to, joyous exaltations, painful emulation (I did this as a RC), and even into extreme situations like visions and stigmata. Some of these things may be psychologically and emotionally pleasant, but they?ve not gotten anyone to ?all nine all the time.?
I resent you lumping talking to Christ in the same context as being hysterical and receiving stigmatas. For those who don't know..some type of stigmata is like having your hands bleed where supposedly the nails of Christ is thought to have been by some.
To lump that in with stigmata, which happens on such a small percent is a great scare tactic to make people FEAR speaking to Jesus or praising Him. Again a TWI tactic of fear.....talk to Jesus and you too can end up possessed.
It is wrong to approach Christ this way to make people fearful or even mock those who do pray/talk to Christ cause, doncha know, it's just a matter of time before those religious suckers get possessed.....please...
Mike, you said:There?s more in Corinthians. Here are the next verses:
II Cor. 5: 17-20
Therefore if any man be in Christ,
he is a new creature:
old things are passed away;
behold, all things are become new.
And all things are of God,
who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ,
and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
To wit, that God was in Christ,
reconciling the world unto himself,
not imputing their trespasses unto them;
and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
Now then we are ambassadors for Christ,
as though God did beseech you by us:
we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
The relationship we have with Jesus is one of taking his place. We get to know him by BECOMING him, in a sense, by allowing the new man inside to grow and counting the old man dead. We get the same job of representing God to the world, and reconciling them back to God. We get the same power Jesus got, the same relationship with the Father, and are joint heirs with him. We get to know him the way an actor gets to know the character they play. The actor becomes the role they portray, but only for the duration of the play. We get to do it for keeps. Once we get that down, God will give us our next instructions.
First, let me assure you, if you played me in a play, no matter how pretty or exact the dark auburn wig you would have to wear was, you would not know ME or have a relationship with ME and Praise the Lord, it would not make you me.....I may think you can identify with me, or my feelings or my perspective and that ONLY at best but that would in no way shape or form qualify you to call yourself my friend or to say you had a real relationship with me, cause you wouldn't be having either, friendship or relationship. You would only have knowledge of me.and that is about it.
Second, TWI's translation of that verse is to imply that Paul is saying that we are all ambassordors. But that is just TWI slant.
Some people believe, that Paul, in his ministry as an apostle, and since face to face with the believers, he is asking them to reconcile (be changed) and get it together. That this was part of Paul's ministry of an apostle and IS not handed out to every tom dick and harry when born again. (Why in TWI did we think we were equal to the Apostles? Heck, we thought we were equal to the Lord Jesus Christ...) So they see Paul saying..since we (the apostles) have received this ...we (speaking for the leaders of the church --and it wouldn't be the first time Paul brought words to the gentile believers from the leaders of the church)are asking you to get your selves together
Now if you remember, the ministry of reconcilation, according to TWI was something we were given at the time of our new births. So if this is true, and if this verse is saying what TWI or VP said it meant, why is Paul telling people who are already reconciled and have that sonship right to be reconciled??
Read it carefully...he is not saying to go out and reconcile those who aren't reconiled. He IS telling people to get it together.
But here is one of the major bumps, errors of PFAL and VP and that is in the haughty assumption that we take the place of the absent Christ, using this verse to say we are all ambassadors with a special ministry or right to do so. We don't need the Lord because we fill His shoes in the here and now.
We do not replace Christ. Christ does not need replacing. And in representing someone does not MEAN one replaces him.
I represent my work. I represent my family. Ambassadors represent their countries and their leaders but in no way do they take the place of the one they represent. Therefore, they best be conducting themselves quite well because there will be much to answer for to the one they represent.
Even if one wants to stay with the TWI definition of this section of scripture, it is STILL a far leap of logic...an awfully long stretch to take ambassador to mean fully taking someone's place and taking on all the glory and responsibilty of the one they replaced...two different words with two differents meanings and they are not interchangeable....replace represent
But in TWI, we had all these people thinking that to be Christ like was to be just like him in everything to the point of replacing him. Hogwash and that is how TWI got so polluted, through the corrupt teachings that had people idolazing the 'leadership' whose Christ in them was bigger...therefore better..all works of the flesh that glorified man and not the Lord Jesus Christ or God and we all see what that turned into.
TWI did not teach a real relationship with Christ.
Any relationship with Christ WOULD have to be spiritual since he is not on this earth in bodily form anymore..but that does NOT mean He has to be replaced because, spiritually, He is there for His people, leading and guiding them. TWI and VP, through it doctrine and practices had us replace Christ. And consequently, VP became our High Priest...and the fact of the passing of the patriarch and shoving the mantle were all old testament ceremonies and phrases (but which practices opened people up to taking whatever the MOG said and doing what the MOG wanted done, because TWI had so exalted men to that position) that have/had no significance within the body of Christ because we have a High Priest who doesn't change, hasn't been replaced..is not a silent partner and is forevermore.
Sorry, I don't want you or the lady over there, I want Christ. And these days, I certainly avoid those who actually think that they 'replace' Christ here on earth.
Now, don't point out the Pope to me or good lady whoseefazit who has stigmata..we are talking about TWI and what they did to sever our relationship, a real, working relationship with Christ,that should have been borne out of love..not hidden from in fear of getting possessed or in haughtiness to think we are Little Christs...
[This message was edited by Mandii on April 09, 2003 at 15:22.]
[This message was edited by Mandii on April 09, 2003 at 15:30.]
[This message was edited by Mandii on April 09, 2003 at 15:32.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Honest observation, no criticism intended or implied:
I see two things being discussed here, simultaneously.
First, whether Wierwille presented a coherent doctrine concerning our fellowship with Jesus Christ.
Second, whether his presentation/doctrine was correct.
Am I reading this thread correctly?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
mandi
that was a beautiful post .. amazing , thank you .
remember that saying "as He is!" at my first rock everyone was saying that every time I would ask "How are you today ?"
Let me the first to say many were NOT "as he is ". That is from a teaching in the blue book and I had not read it when I went to my first rock of ages... I asked who is about a thousand times haha
Jesus Christ NEVER USED A COMPUTER , for example haha ..
He died at a very young age, He never had children... etc.
Just how are we replacing the Saviour of mankind here exactly in twi???
I know of Zero christians dying for me well ok if someone has then did they do it without sinning EVER???????
Jesus Christ is so much more than a butch of mini me 's walking around pretending to do good for God.
If I ever do any good I feel I owe Jesus Christ it for what He did for me by obeying God almighty without failure..I pray He always always gets the glory for it .
people sin, Jesus Christ allows them the forgivness for it from God Almighty ..by never ever sinning..
Can any christian do that???
People do not heal one another , God heals people , Jesus Christ never even claimed He did any miricles He said His father did them because He (Jesus Christ) always obeyed His(Gods) will.
no other person will be my Lord ever..
Mandi I am so thankful for what you wrote..
beautiful..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mandii
*scratches head and looks confused*
I will try to answer, Rafael, as best as I can.
I think VP presented his view of what he thought our relationship should be with Christ.
I maintained that VP did not teach a living, dynamic relationship with Christ. On the other thread, Mike answered, if I understood him correctly, that VP did present/teach such and then Mike went into how we have a relationship with Christ by taking His place to the world and that is how we get to know him, by representing Him to others.
I responded that I did not believe that to be an example of a real relationship with Christ and why I thought that.
So yes, to what you thought you have been reading.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mandii
*smiles* Thank you, mj, I am glad that you were able to see my heart and that it touched yours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Mandii,
WOW! I'm just touching bases at home for a few minutes and wont be home again until late tonight. I thought I had the monpoly on long posts... ?
This subject was a VERY hot one in the late 80's and early 90's, but my impression has been that it's faded a bit, compared to other TWI issues, these recent years.
So, it looks like it still is a hot issue. I'm glad. This'll give us something better to discuss than drivel issues. If we were to take a poll then I know how I'd vote, as to who we should really give some deep discussion time to: me or Jesus Christ?
See you all later.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
Mike
Well that was clever , by all means , lets discuss Jesus Christ foremost,,, but that may mean you have to doge the real live questions presented to you by me about what you mean by your statement of replacing Jesus Christ now...
In your more important and profound discussion focused on Jesus Christ lets start with topic #1
How do you think God views your notion that today your equal to The KING He ORDAINED to RULE OVER US?
America has a democratic view , God decided aa monarchy will be in the kingdom... hmmm Kingdom sounds not so much plural Mike .
how about it?? going with your suggestion here.
hurt me by ignoring you know ...what with your heart to serve Im sure you will reply.
thanks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Dear mj412,
Yikes! Hold on to your hat! I just got back and saw your post first.
Are you referring to a post of yours earlier in this thread?
There are a big bunch of un-responded to posts there that I am aware of, and that?s the reason I came back to this thread. I was hauled off to court by LarryP2 on his ?Drivel? thread. If you are referring to a post of yours here on this thread that it looked like I ignored, please be assured I didn't ignore it. I suggest you take this up with Larry. You and he could make for a very entertaining food fight. Maybe even lead to a TV pilot opportunity.
But seriously, when you wrote: ?Well that was clever , by all means , lets discuss Jesus Christ foremost,,, but that may mean you have to doge the real live questions presented to you by me about what you mean by your statement of replacing Jesus Christ now...?
I don?t know which real live questions you mean. Can you give me a thread, page, and time-date stamp, or re-paste it? If not I may eventually get to it, if it?s on this thread. I plan to be here a while. This ?Ubiquitous Teaching? is a very large matter. Maybe I should just try to hang out here and not post on other threads for a while.
I can try and wing it a little here and say that from II Corinthians 5:20, the phrase ?in Christ?s stead? means roughly ?taking the place of the not personally present Christ,? and that a few phrases before that the phrase ?ambassadors for Christ? has roughly the same implication.
Here?s what I did NOT mean: that there?s anything wrong with Jesus Christ, and that we needed to have him replaced, or that he?s rejected, or anything like that.
Let me know more, and I can answer more, now that I?ve been cleared of Ban Level Drivel and can come back here. Hey! I didn?t get any yellow ribbons? Seeing the events in Iraq today, I guess my freedom?s newsworthiness is eclipsed.
**********
Mj, you also wrote: ?How do you think God views your notion that today your equal to The KING He ORDAINED to RULE OVER US??
I?m not sure I understand what you mean here. God made us joint heirs, and Jesus said we should be able to do all he did. Is that a problem? Is that what you mean?
*****
You then wrote: ?America has a democratic view , God decided aa monarchy will be in the kingdom... hmmm Kingdom sounds not so much plural Mike .?
Now here I have NO idea what you?re getting at. I can?t even guess a response, so please state it again, in another way, or with more details, and I?ll try it again.
*****
You then wrote: ?how about it?? going with your suggestion here.
hurt me by ignoring you know ...what with your heart to serve Im sure you will reply. thanks?
Here I understand the grammar and such, but I don?t undertstand the heart. I can?t tell if you?re mad at me here, or kidding, or being gentle, or rough??? I?m sorry, but it?s too jumbled, and sometimes when things like that come my way I fip back and forth between thinking the worst and thinking the best. Please just let me know how you feel and that would make it a lot easier. If you?re just jabbing at me, please save it. I never intended to do that to you. You approached me for help one day a long time about and I did my best to help. I am again. Please be patient with this posting process. I have a lot of them to deal with. You can ALWAYS e-mail me, and even phone, with any REALLY burning issue, so please don?t think I?m purposely dodging you. Besides, I only dodge certain ISSUES, not people. Oky Doky? I?ll be as nice as I can with you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
So many posts to do, but Sienfeld is on in a few minutes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Hi Mandii,
Finally I'm getting to your first recent post here. As far as "What part does he take in our lives, NOW?" I partially addressed this earlier with a mention of the repeated teaching series of "Christ Formed In You" and soon I'll get into those details, but there's more. All these things will take time to sequentially lay out, but I'm into it, and just need time.
Some other things I already posted from the Zacheus "Climbing High..." chapter in Vol. V also address this subject. Dr urged us there to search for Jesus, to seek to SEE him. Dr wasn't suggesting we get real still in a dark room and look for visions to appear. He was talking about seeking him out in God's Word, because he IS the Word made flesh. That's the most logical first place to look for him to a graduate of PFAL.
This may seem a bit abstract, and it is, because it's headed out of the flesh realm. If we see Jesus in the Bible, that's one level, a 5-senses level of sight, because the Bible is in the 5-senses realm. Then, after that, if we continue in this pursuit and see him in the Word of God, we?ve graduated to a spiritual sight of him. This fits in to the category of a spiritual relationship with him.
I know you have more questions in a later post on these two, but one subject at a time. I?ll get there.
You then wrote: ?That was the point or points always missing from TWI. It was he did THAT and he will do THIS when he returns...but nothing in the middle.?
Here?s where I need to separate out the two concepts again, of the twi verbal tradition (TVT) on one end of the spectrum, and the written PFAL record on the other end. I think when you say ?missing from TWI? it?s accurate when aimed at the TVT. This APPROXIMATELY includes twig teachings and coffee discussions and ministering, plus branch teachings, and phone conversations, and letters, and teachings by reverends, on tape and even in the Way Magazine. SO this ?verbal? tradition, in my definition, really is and the non-PFAL written materials.
I agree that the TVT had some problems regarding the activity of Jesus Christ and they got worse as time went by. By meltdown time it was rampant. I do remember a Way Magazine article (not by Dr) that had the title ?What Is Jesus Christ Doing Up There?? It was a small article, and it went into his intercession activity.
I?ve found many interesting things in the record on knowing Christ that we missed. Here?s just one from the Blue Book. See how many ?between? type activities are mentioned in just this one passage. Then, things mentioned here may have additional details in related passages, thus enriching it further to the mastering student.
(There are some variations in this passage's text in earlier printings.)
**********************************
?The Bible Tells Me So? p.109
Wouldn?t you say that God certainly has engraved us upon the palms of His hands? He forgives and forgets our shortcomings while He remembers and cares for us constantly.
God gives us in Revelation a comparable truth.
Revelation 3:20:
Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup [eat] with him, and he with me.
Have you ever thought on the beauty of those words? In the Orient the host does not eat with his guest unless he is a most intimate friend. In this passage of Scripture Jesus is saying, ?I am your most intimate friend.? Jesus enters into our hearts upon our invitation. He never forces Himself on us. He is not just entering in, but He is supping with us. Jesus said, ?I want to be very intimate with my people; I will sup with them; I will eat with them if they will but ask Me.?
Hebrews 13:5 says ?...I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.? Also Matthew 28:20 says, ?...lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.?
The Lord is with us always. That is why He said as recorded in Matthew 11:28, ?Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.? It is God?s continuous remembrance whereby He can say to us, ?I have graven you upon the palms of my hands even though your walls, your palms, are continually before me.?
Christ died for all and thus He could say, ?Whosoever will may come.? Once Christ has offered the invitation, it is a matter of our accepting it. If you want to come to Christ you may. Man need not die in his sin because Christ died for sin and carried our sicknesses and our pains. We need not carry them. God has willingly and gladly engraved our names upon the palms of His hands.
There is no question about the call of Jesus Christ to man being clear. The only question is whether man is going to respond to that call.
**********************************
How odd, how this passage I?ve selected ends with ?no question? and ?clear? on a subject that we have questioned and are not clear on. There is a reason for this. It?s connected with the reason I often point out the differences between the record and the TVT.
When it comes to the TVT we can?t say these Blue Book pages were in the ?no question? and ?clear? category, because as the TVT grew the memory of the contents of the books faded, assuming they were read and absorbed. Not all details were absorbed.
The introduction to the Part IV in the Blue Book, in which this passage sits, mentions what these written materials were given to us for. On page 103 we see: ?...on the subjects in this Part IV, the clarity of God?s Word has been muddied by passage of time, translations and interpretations. So now we must again study the Word of God and look for clarity on subjects which have been relatively unstudied or on subjects which have been grossly misunderstood and thus inaccurately taught.?
Here, the 5-senses context is how things got ?questioned and unclear? in churchianity prior to God?s 1942 intervention. But, look how it also applies us! It BETTER applies to us, in fact. The reason the TVT got out of hand is because of the ?relatively unstudied? and ?inaccurately taught.? Now that we?re looking at the books, it can move towards the category of without question and clear.
You then wrote: ?Do you believe VP taught we can pray to Christ? Do you believe VP taught that Christ had an active hand in the pouring of the Holy Spirit, do you believe that VP taught that Christ IS active in guiding, leading, comforting, His body, His church here on earth??
There was one "pray to Jesus" reference in the above passage. Did you catch it?
My notes are misplaced on this, but I have found a few songs we would sing TO Jesus in the songbooks. As far as teaching on praying to Jesus in Dr?s writings, it?s about as prevalent there as it is in the New Testament. Just to be safe, I?d often say things like ?Thanks!? or ?HOW did you do it?? but I?d run out after a while.
The Bible does have a few people talking to Jesus post Pentecost, but it seems like those things happened when people were contacted.
I figured that if SIT was perfect it wouldn?t leave him out in any way.
This is no where near the sum total of what I have to post on this, but I do have one more item for this one response. It?s at the end of the Introduction to ?Jesus Christ Is Not God.? I mentioned about a hundred posts ago that often Dr put crucial things in out of the way places, like introductions, and we now have two examples of that here.
Dr often and urge book mastery to close the gap between the TVT and the written materials, but as the years went by, us OLGs felt more and more spiritual, and less and less need to obey his advice. Unfortunately, as we were getting bigger and bigger ego heads, our original exposure to the PFAL writings was leaking out. The need to refresh our memory, and get the exact wording in our heads, grew simultaneously with our ?perception? that we had no such need.
Here?s what Dr wrote there:
**********************************
JCNG p.8-9
Before closing, let me bare my soul. To say that Jesus Christ is not God does not in my mind degrade the importance and significance of Jesus Christ in any way. It simply elevates God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, to His unique, exalted and unparalleled position. He alone is God.
I do believe the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is the Son of man because he had a human for a mother; and he is the Son of God because of his created conception by God. So on the basis of the parentage of God alone, besides his choosing to live a perfect life, Jesus Christ is by no means a run-of-the-mill, unmarked human being. Thus, to say that I do not elevate and respect the position of the Lord Jesus Christ simply because I do not believe the evidence designates Jesus Christ as God is to speak the judgment of a fool, for to the very depth of my being I love him with all my heart, soul, mind and strength.
It is he who sought me out from darkness.
It is he who gave me access to God; even now he is my mediator.
It is he who saved me when I was dead in trespasses and sin.
It is he who gave me the new birth of God?s eternal.
It is he who filled me to capacity by God?s presence in Christ in all the fullness of God?s gift of holy spirit.
It is he who was made unto me my wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption.
It is he who called me and set me in the heavenlies.
It is he who gave me his joy, peace and love.
It is he who appointed me as a spokesman of God?s accurate Word; may I be found faithful in that calling.
It is he who is all in all to me that I might give my all for him.
It is he who is God?s only begotten Son.
May I as a son of God live always to glorify the God whom men can only know from God?s written Word, the Bible, and from the declared Word, God?s Son, Jesus Christ.
In spite of all my human frailties and shortcomings, I endeavor to love him with all my being. I love him and the one and only God who sent him. May His mercy and grace continue to be yours as well as mine, and may God be magnified by our testimony of Him who gave His Son that we might have life and have it more abundantly? yes, that life which is eternal and therefore more than abundant.
**********************************
Did you see the answer to your "active hand in the pouring of the Holy Spirit" question above?
This is a start to bringing out our spiritual relationship with Jesus Christ. It?s late now, and I?m tired. Tomorrow?s another day.
.
.
.
[This message was edited by Mike on April 10, 2003 at 12:22.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Hi Mandii,
I?m back. In your next post you began with: ?SO.....if God didn't want a mental picture of Christ in his fleshly form...and didn't want people to be able to relate to Christ in human form..guess what...?
This statement, and all the previous ones are right on the money. However, not all of what I under stand on this has yet been posted (correcting that here some), plus not all posted has yet been fully understood. This is new stuff, in the sense that most of this ?ubiquitous? subject slipped past us, and thus the word ?hidden? in the title. Let?s see how much we can clear up right now.
In the Advanced Class we were taught the ?16 Keys To Walking in the Spirit? and key #4 is ?Study the Word much. What you can know by the five senses God expects you to know.?
We start out in the 5-senses natural factual realm with no spirit, and even when we get holy spirit, that doesn?t affect the mind, so we?re pretty stuck in the 5-senses realm. This is how the apostles and disciples got to know Jesus. Their 5-senses relationship with him was richer than rich, yet it was still only 5-senses. Once in a while they?d get a spiritual flash, but it wasn?t everyday, and it wasn?t when the pressure was on. When things were rosy, their 5-senses relationship with him must have been quite superb. It appears like they have a tremendous advantage being that close to the master.
However, we have a kind of advantage over them that makes up for it. We have the written Word on which to base our relationship with Jesus Christ. For years after Pentecost they only had memories.
For both groups, however, the 5-senses relationship is not all that God has made available. Starting at Pentecost, a spiritual relationship became available for those who desire. This is better than the 5-senses relationship, otherwise God would have had him stay here visible.
We must start in the 5-senses, but when it ends or ceases, then the only way is up. The Advanced Class key #4 teaches us that we should not only HAVE a 5-senses relationship with Christ, but that we should DEVELOP it, by study of the Word. Jesus was the Word made flesh, so studying the written Word, like the gospels, is part of the feeding-growth process.
Without the PFAL writings, I see that a spiritual relationship with him is nearly impossible. In the OT there were odd fellows who came along now and then who were somehow suited to receive spirit upon them. These people had the genetics, the upbringing, and the free will decisions to propel them into service as prophets. They were coincidentally tough enough in the right places and knowledgeable in the right places and willing to serve in the right places that qualified them to get the supernatural boost of spirit upon for God. They were rare.
Likewise, it?s rare that someone can develop this spiritual relationship with Christ, without many factors lining up just right. The Bible remnants are just not good enough to serve us well here. They help in other areas, but here they are not up to the standards of perfection (Rafael, please take note) that God knows are necessary for it to work.
Since these writings are from God for the specific purpose of teaching us His Word (and WHO is His Word? Jesus Christ) like it (he, Jesus) has not been known since the first century, then the principle kicks in: ?With the coming of the greater, the lesser is terminated.?
Now this isn?t law, it?s what?s available. God made something greater available, because the 5?senses relationship breaks down. Look how the apostles? relationship with him broke down when the heat was on after Jesus was being tortured. Look how OUR relationships broke down in the ministry meltdowns.
Now, God isn?t nasty about this and say to us ?Get in line!? He just makes it available and then waits for us to grow up to be ready. When my daddy gave me that crude electronics lesson by rolling a marble down a vacuum cleaner hose, it was the only relationship I could have with electronics until I grew a little more. That crud relationship was like a 5-senses one. Years later I learned the next level of accuracy in electronics, and I was able to do more and understand more. Same with the spiritual relationship with Christ.
Right now a spiritual relationship with Christ looks too abstract and unfulfilling emotionally. That?s a 5-senses impression, and is incorrect. As we grow in our understanding of this Natural/Factual versus Spiritually/True and the realms involved, then Dr?s promise of clarity on the bottom of page 24 in the Blue Book will come to pass.
God is our Daddy, and He is not impatient with us. He knows that we MUST start out in the 5-senses, and that only with great drive and learning can we arrive at the greater. He is there to help. He wants us to seek Jesus.
*********
The gospels were written for the generations after the apostles and for areas not local to Palestine and people who never saw Jesus physically. They were written last or after the epistles. They were written so that people could start out in the 5-senses and get to know the personality of Christ from a distance. Then, the epistles make more sense. The gospels are like a giant contextual frame for the epistles, and are very useful. They start us out, and then the epistles show us the newer relationship, where there?s no distance, he?s IN us, and we then become him. That?s the spiritual relationship in a nutshell.
The 4 gospels are very important. They serve a purpose.
************
Then Mandii, in your megapost you wrote: ?But I see here a familiar TWI theme of dissing the gospels, putting them as second rate and not revelant to the believer thereby again, cutting access to Jesus, (and to understand God better because who else would Jesus be declaring?) because they may form a mental picture of Jesus????
Let?s slightly change your sentence by substituting ?TVT? for TWI because TWO things went on in TWI: the corrupt verbal tradition and the writings by revelation. Then I can agree with it. I saw a lot of Corps bravado used here. In asserting themselves as more contrary than the other guy against ?Jesus is God? notions, some Corps jerks would put down relationships with Jesus Christ as trinitarian or dangerous. This accelerated as time went by. Reading the gospels was only for sissies, by this misguided leadership.
******************
You then wrote: ?I resent you lumping talking to Christ in the same context as being hysterical and receiving stigmatas.?
Please be assured that my lumping men together was in grammar only. I DID mention that stigmata was more extreme. They are VERY different in some aspects, yet different in other crucial aspects. I could lump God and the devil together in saying that they both are spiritual, but i still remember they are vastly different.
I see those things as tied together in that they are a 5-senses thing. Even stigmata may be a natural process related to grieving. In the garden, Jesus had something going on with his sweat that was not normal. Many Catholics are taught the empathy pain approach to relationships with Jesus. Maybe it?s not so extreme to sweat like blood from the hands. I don?t know. I Do KNOW that my including them in the same category is not to put down anyone who employs those 5-senses techniques for ?knowing? Jesus. If that?s all someone has to go on, I can?t see God blaming them and shunning them in any way. I can see Him yearning (John 4:23) and seeking ways to tell all that there?s more available.
I have used several of these methods in the past, not including stigmata, and I would never try to make someone feel bad about doing the best they can. I would simply look t see if they desire more. If I didn?t have this attitude, then your eloquent exposure of such hard heartedness would apply to me as well as those jerky Corps people who got overly enthusiastic in shutting down the 5-senses approach. If they had had the spiritual relationship cooking in their lives then they?d have been patient and gentle about it like God.
I have talked top Jesus lots and never got possessed. If I limited my relationship to him there, however, then I?d have less ability to wage war on the adversary, and if I went into the wrong battle with this spiritual immatuurity, THEN I might have a lot more trouble dealing with ds possession, ds oppression, and indirect satanic influences.
**********
Moving right along, you then wrote: ?First, let me assure you, if you played me in a play, no matter how pretty or exact the dark auburn wig you would have to wear was, you would not know ME or have a relationship with ME and Praise the Lord, it would not make you me.....I may think you can identify with me, or my feelings or my perspective and that ONLY at best but that would in no way shape or form qualify you to call yourself my friend or to say you had a real relationship with me, cause you wouldn't be having either, friendship or relationship. You would only have knowledge of me.and that is about it.?
Yes. This is the case for normal acting. However, if I have a spiritual hotline with YOUR Daddy, and your Daddy is MY Daddy too, then suitable equipped with a God-breathed text that details the essence of your personality, THEN it may be different. THEN I will not only get to know you BETTER than if I always only saw you at some distance however short, but I could do all the things you could do, in a limited sense. IF there was a job to be done that you usually performed, I could then step in and do it as well, since I mastered the Mandii Manuscript. As I?m doing your job, I get to know you even more, relating to how you see the job.
***********
Regarding alternate interpretations of II Cor.5 I might caution that we should really first master what we were taught IN THE BOOKS, and then we can better examine alternates. I am believing the PFAL books. Someday we can closely examine what they say about these matters.
You wrote on this subject: ?So if this is true, and if this verse is saying what TWI or VP said it meant, why is Paul telling people who are already reconciled and have that sonship right to be reconciled???
I see two things there. The first is that before Paul and Timothy and others came to Corinth, the were not born again. Rhetorically, Paul can sum up their history in verse 20, like a review of what happened and was happening. He and Timothy and others were reconciling them ?back to God? because they had become separated in Adam?s sin.
Another way to look at verse 20 is that even though many Corinthians had received holy sppirit, they were carnal in their minds, and separated from Godly thoughts and renewed mind and fellowship with the Father. When I get out of the fullness of fellowship with my Father that is available, I seek to be reconnected, reconciled in my mind. It looks like this is what you expounded upon, and quite well, I might add.
This is an example how one usage may have more than one meaning. God?s Word is rich. In the back of RHST we can see some verses where the useage of pneuma hagion may be multiple. These two meanings are in two realms. One is spiritual reconciliation; one is 5-senses. BOTH are part of God?s plan, but the 5-senses one got taken over by the adversary. He is now defeated.
Dr mentions double meanings in Vol. IV ?God?s Magnified Word? on page 14, and we?ve discussed it a bit here at GS.
**************
You then wrote: ?We don't need the Lord because we fill His shoes in the here and now.?
You then correctly identified this as part of the TVT error. When I saw this error being pulled out of some Corps butt I would resolve to read the gospels all the more to see what size those shoes were. And which way he walked in them. And with what kind of spring in his step. All these are necessary in our starting out with a 5-senses relationship with Christ. We NEED accurate information to relate to in order to have a relationship. We NEED oru lord and master. His 5-senses example is crucial. It?s not the endpoint in what?s available, it?s the beginning.
It?s always been my understanding, and I?ll always mean it here, that the phrase ?replacing Christ? means that he is MORE present. It doesn?t mean squeezing him out, just that he?s more visible to those who can?t see him otherwise. To someone who hasn?t yet believed, and hence can?t see him, I can show them Jesus Christ because in the SENSES REALM, he is not available, but I AM. That blind person can see me, and I can show them Christ, see them born again, and THEN the situation changes. Now THAT person has Christ in them too, and we are both members of the Body of Christ. We can both represent the 5-senses ?absent? Christ, but we?ve now beyond that stage. He?s our head, spiritually, and we function together. Of course TVE missed this altogether. It?s in the books, though.
Mandii, as we all go through our memories of the crap, the more we separate the TVT from the written materials, all these things will get much clearer. I think you?ve described the TVT errors in this matter accurately throughout your post. There was a lot of crap, but thank God we can see the pure good now. The reason we all had in the back of our heads that it was worth staying in spite of all the crap was GOD. We stayed because we could sense that mixed in with the crap was something good. Our awareness of this became dimmer as we drifted from the exact wording in the books. Eventually we all reached our breaking points and bailed. By coming back to the books we can reacquaint ourselves with that still small voice in the books that we originally heard telling us this was THE Way.
.
.
.
.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Actually, the person who imposed that standard on the Bible is VPW, not me. One preoposition out of place, and it CRUMBLES. That's what VPW said about the Bible. I'm only guilty of applying that same standard to VPW's written works.
I think the remainder of your thesis is hogwash. Impossible or rare to have a true understanding and relationship with Christ without the PFAL writings? Hogwash. Believe it if you want, and I wish you well, but that thesis is nonsense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Rafael,
You wrote, and very succinctly : ?I see two things being discussed here, simultaneously. First, whether Wierwille presented a coherent doctrine concerning our fellowship with Jesus Christ. Second, whether his presentation/doctrine was correct.?
I am assuming the latter, and attempting to prove the former. These two things do get confused, and I?m glad for the help in pointing this out.
I am less into proving the later (correctness), because I believe if we properly work with the former (presentation) then we will see the reality of the correctness. God?s Word speaks for itself better than I could ever speak for it. I assume the correctness up front and wide out in the open. Proving that we did have something better, and still do have something better, than the twi verbal tradition TVT is the major thrust of all my posts.
[This message was edited by Mike on April 10, 2003 at 15:09.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
you got your "former" and "latter" mixed up, which, come to think of it, doesn't surprise me at all.
EDITED:
(for those reading: I'm not crazy here. Mike actually did get "former" and "latter" mixed up in the preceding post. He fixed it after I pointed it out).
Mike, you assume Wierwille was correct in what he taught, and you're setting out to prove to us that he taught a coherent doctrine on our relationship with Christ.
That's where you and I are different (again). I assume Wierwille taught something, then set out to establish whether that which he taught was correct. To each his own.
[This message was edited by Rafael 1969 on April 10, 2003 at 15:47.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Rafael,
As to the standard that Dr gave us for the perfection of God's Word, I think it?s the case that as we master that topic, in all its locations, then you may have to modify the standard of perfection you think Dr gave us. I think you have some error in your understanding of Dr?s teaching on this standard.
There are still some more subtleties in what constitutes an error to get on the table. Here?s one: would you count ink splotches or grain in the paper that look like punctuation? I guess that you wouldn?t, because you do come off as reasonable in your approach to these matters. This is not a subtle question, but here is one: where do you draw the line on printers errors, typesetting, proofreading, and even the editorial processes between Dr and all his editorial staff?
Here is one anecdote I?ve always carried with me, but hasn?t reached post until now. I once heard Dr at a staff meeting commenting on errors that crept into the materials and the effort to catch them all before publication. He said (paraphrasing): ???If the Way International waited for things to be 100% perfect before publication we?d never print a single book.?""
The important thing here is the revelation from God, and us finally getting a spiritual understanding of it. What Dr was saying is that physical perfection of the 5-senses product is desirable, but not achievable. The Psalm talks about ?words of earth? then later becoming perfect in what they convey: God?s pure Word where every word is pure. How do you get a word to go from earthy and imperfect to pure? God!
The important thing, the goal, is the spiritual understanding of the revelation, and the physical medium is wonderful, and as perfect AS IT NEEDS TO BE in order for us to get that spiritual understanding as we master it.
Yes, in SOME areas, one word out of place and the whole thing falls to pieces, but not all topics and words are so pivotal as pros in John 1:1. I?ve seen other places where Dr says that there are alternate renderings worth considering, and the exact rendering less crucial for the ultimate goal.
If your present understanding of Dr?s position on the perfection of the words is correct, then Dr would have to conclude that these other places have one and only one word in the perfect rendering.
I think you?re taking Dr too literally on this, and not seeing the overall truths he teaches here. It?s like the ants on the trees analogy presented by What The Hay on 4-7-03 in Drivel Court.
Language itself is not as exact as this supposed standard of Dr?s, and perfection in 5-senses understanding what is written may, even after study, elude us due to our language being slightly different from Dr?s. An idiosyncratic passage of his may look like a mistake in my language, and I may NEVER get the 5-senses understanding of this. However, if I apply all the principles I was taught, eventually I?ll have enough of a correlation on the ?mistaken? topic to see correctly in my language what Dr was writing there in his. OR, it may be that I NEVER get a perfect 5-senses understanding of that one passage, but since I did all my homework in other areas (key #4 again, of the 16) God can tell me this in my newly forming spiritual understanding of the revelation, which is the ultimate goal.
[This message was edited by Mike on April 10, 2003 at 15:19.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Rafael,
Thanks for the typo alert. I edited it. Looks like that post wasn't so God-breathed in it's first edition. But the revelation was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.