So, George, are you arguing that Dr and Keostler were so wrong about this that God DID use the UN to set up a country in the 1940's for His people?
Are you saying that identifying modern Israel as fundamentally different from Biblical Israel was a lie?
Well, I've got serious reservations about some "god" doing anything, Mike, sorry. Maybe it was Superman, or Hercules?
But if you buy the notion that there IS an Almighty God that once had a pact with the Israelites, why couldn't the U.N. have been used as a tool to reestablish that nation? Is there some sort of Biblical prohibition against the U.N.?
And as for your second question, if there's substantial genetic evidence that a large proportion of modern Israelies (and there DOES seem to be such evidence) are descended from the ancient inhabitants of that land, what IS the difference between the "Israel" of old and that of today? I mean, other than theological tenets of you and them?
You wrote: “But if you buy the notion that there IS an Almighty God that once had a pact with the Israelites, why couldn't the U.N. have been used as a tool to reestablish that nation? Is there some sort of Biblical prohibition against the U.N.?”
I mentioned it earlier. A country that fundamentally rejects God’s Messiah rejects God.
***
You wrote: “...what IS the difference between the "Israel" of old and that of today? I mean, other than theological tenets of you and them?”
Why the qualifier “other than theological tenets of you and them” ? That IS the fundamental difference.
In the OT, when Israel would reject God, then He would reject them. When they believed, God would accept them. When NON-Israel humans would believe He would accept them. This is Biblically addressed in the figure of Abraham’s two offspring, one of believing God and one of believing the flesh.
I mentioned it earlier. A country that fundamentally rejects God’s Messiah rejects God.
And you have this on good authority I take it?
Why the qualifier “other than theological tenets of you and them” ? That IS the fundamental difference.
So, you don't care for modern Israel because you don't agree with their superstitions?
In the OT, when Israel would reject God, then He would reject them. When they believed, God would accept them. When NON-Israel humans would believe He would accept them. This is Biblically addressed in the figure of Abraham’s two offspring, one of believing God and one of believing the flesh.
Well, I see and hear a lot of Israelies expressing their devotion to God. So why do you think God is rejecting them?
The bottom line is that we did not ever have a problem with our Jewish friends AND we did bring a lot of them to twig. There was no following VPW into anti-Semitism because there was no leading into anti-Semitism. It's all being manufactured now in threads like this.
***
George,
In response to your last question, have you never heard of outward expressions POSSIBLY being phony in any way? God looks on the heart.
***
Exy,
I think you get creeped out too easily.
If you could deal with such a simple non-threatening idea of a "grad" better,
then you could move on to dealing with lots of other things that bother you.
We are graduates of PFAL. That is our fundamental commonality.
If you were not a grad I could see it a little,
and I can see it a little (how you feel) when it comes to how we treat non-grads,
but even there I think you need to relax.
Elitism in itself is creepy,
but when an elite crew actually get a very difficult job done,
No Mike...as spirit filled Christians we are to become elite servants....not as "grads"...You're mistaking the message for the reality behind the message...and in this case, the message was severely flawed.
Being an elite servant, in my supplied context, means getting a real big job done for God. It is love. Someone's got to be the best at agape, why not us?
Groucho,
Lots of people claim to be Christians.
Some have something to serve.
Grads have the most. That's not something to bust buttons over. In fact, busting buttons is NOT doing th serving. Busting open the books is where the best service can come from.
In response to your last question, have you never heard of outward expressions POSSIBLY being phony in any way? God looks on the heart.
***
Funny, Mike. Are you then God? Because based on what you have posted, one could easily infer you KNOW that the Jews have rejected God and the implication is that any expression of devotion to God by a Jew is simply phony.
Hmmmm
Elitism in itself is self worship.
Being an elite servant, in my supplied context, means getting a real big job done for God. It is love. Someone's got to be the best at agape, why not us?
Groucho,
Lots of people claim to be Christians.
Some have something to serve.
Grads have the most. That's not something to bust buttons over. In fact, busting buttons is NOT doing th serving. Busting open the books is where the best service can come from.
Let's be the best at serving.
So long for now, folks.
It's been fun.
OMG if that isn't the most arrogant bunch of hogwash I have read in such a very very long time. Funny, because Christian doctrine as I understand it, would lead one to believe Jesus was the best at agape, yet he never even took PFAL.
Reading through this topic, I would like to add an observation and a few feelings of my own as this reaches home. Everyone talks about docvic being proud of his German heritage. As my background is also German, I wonder if there is a distict possibility, because of that, that he could not face up to the reality of his country doing something so horrible? I know, from discussions in our own house, that my relatives had an extremely hard time handling the truth of the Holocaust. When the first reports started tricking out of Germany in '41 & '42, no one would believe it. They felt no civilized country could be so guilty. What they did not realize was the fact that old Uncle Joe Stalin was doing the same, if not worse, for years prior to the start of WW II. Look at the purges of the Russian Officer Corps during the 30's. That left the army so decimated that they Russians were totally unprepared when Hitler turned on them. Growing up, I talked to my great-grandfather & grandfather about things and they were so ashamed of what happened that they would not admit for many years that they actually were German. It was a major case of self-denial. I grew up around veterans of Patton's 3rd Army who could never get rid of the nightmares of what they saw when they entered some of the camps in Germany.
In regards to present day Israel, read your history. When the Arab Revolt occured during WW I, the Middle EasT WAS SUPPOSED to be turned over to the Arabs. Instead the British & French divided it among themselves for the oil. As part of the Balfour Declaration, drawn up by Churchill & others, Palistine was designated as a new homeland for the Jews. Instead, that was carved up also, and part became present day Jordan. I xcould go on about the UN but that ios a totally different topic which I could fill a book about.
I don’t mean to bury your thoughtful post with my long one, but I had spent the last half hour composing the following response to Abigail.
Responding to your post, though, I think Dr was human and sinful, just like us all. Sure it must have been very unpleasant for him, as well as all Germans living through those times.
I talked a lot with Jimmy Doop a few years ago, and during the 90’s. He said that Dr had said that Hitler hat some very right ideas early on, but that he later went insane. From Jimmy’s mouth I heard that Dr knew and believed and admitted that Hitler was insane, but still possessing some impressive skills. Kinda reminds me of Craig.
It’s no small fact that Hitler was very successful in pulling Germany up from and out of a huge financial and psychological depression. He was loved like Ronald Regan who did a similar thing (not as intense, though) in pulling us up from a much milder financial and psychological depression. Remember 17% inflation under Carter, and the Vietnam malaise? I think Germany’s inflation rate was in the thousands, or at least far above 100%, and they were heavily oppressed by the Treaty of Versailles ending WWI.
I don’t think Dr had any problem with the sad affairs of WWII Germany by the time he taught us the class. Dr did admit having psychological problems with blacks, because his brother was killed by one, but he also reported that he eventually overcame this, as HCW has verified here. My co-worker on staff went to high school with Dr. She told me of some of his early problems and how he overcame them.
*******
Hi Abigail,
Long time no talk. It's good to see you.
No, I'm not God, AND I am (believe it or not) not in the least bit looking down on anyone. I picked up what I posted there from Romans and a few other sources, including first hand experience.
I know firsthand how phony I can be and have been. I know firsthand how phony religious people can sometimes be, but have a good outward show. Didn’t you see any of that in TWI? Of course you did. It’s the norm for humans.
I am convinced that ALL human beings (not just Jews, to your "Hmmm" comment) of body and soul are incapable of pleasing God and are in fact, enemies with God, the True God. Much is needed to overcome this, but chanting prayers out loud is useless.
Humans show off their religiosity for each other all the time and it means nothing to God. He said this in the OT many times... in vain do they worship me, He says. Jesus said it too.
Sorry, I'm just the messenger of a sad reality, that humans are mere animals that THINK they are spiritual and that they know God when the opposite is the case, they (as children of Adam) are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the devil.
It takes much to overcome this, like lots of desire on the human’s part and lots of power on God’s part and few even try beyond what they think they must do. God is their fire-escape from hell at best, and it’s definitely not a love (agape) thing.
***
As for my arrogance, that’s only true if what I serve is not the truth of God’s Word like it has not been known since the first century. It’s PFAL is false, then I must plead guilty to arrogance, but at least I’d be arrogant with a willingness to serve what I THINK is the truth. I could be worse, like arrogant WITHOUT a willingness to serve.
But if PFAL is from God, THEN I’m not arrogant, just accurate, and willing to serve the accuracy of God’s wonderful matchless Word.
Babe Ruth said (and many agree) that if a man says he can jump over a barn, and he can actually do it, THEN it’s not bragging. I like that usage of the word “brag.” I think it works for arrogance too. I think you too, if you look at what you do well for others, would feel the same basic thing I just expressed.
Have you ever looked at the 4 Gospels with the same anti-arrogance stance as you just looked at my post? What do you think of Jesus saying that he was the ONLY way to God? What do you think of Jesus’ claim that anyone who tries to enter heaven bypassing him were like thieves and would fail, that he was the bread of life, the resurrection, etc., etc. He was NOT arrogant because he was accurate and he had a willingness to serve with his God-granted superiority.
I happen to be a little taller than many other people. That’s accurate, not arrogant, if I use my tallness to serve others, reaching things on high shelves for them. If I expect others to worship me for each inch I have over them, then I have a problem.
The same thing hold for brains, beauty, and bucks. Having a lot of either can make someone arrogant with no willingness to serve others with their God-granted gifts, OR they can thank God for their bounty and serve others with it.
***
How do you know Jesus didn’t take PFAL? I’ve heard that one before, but usually it’s Paul that people point out could not have taken PFAL.
Paul went on his time travel trip to the future to see why he was busting his arss so bad. God showed and taught him by revelation (It was not physics type relativistic time travel.) God showed him how His will finally prevails.
Jesus too had something shown to him, and I don’t believe it was a one time short flick on the cross. It says he endured the cross for the joy that was set before him.
In a late (hence missed by most) Way Magazine article “The Capacity to Endure,” Jan/Feb 85, Dr writes this by revelation:
“ What could that joy that was set before Jesus Christ have been? He saw that someday people would rise up to believe, and that the works he had done they would do. He saw that they would do even greater works after he went to his Father in heaven. He saw all that and more.”
Do I believe Paul and Jesus actually sat through the 36 hours for three weeks, four nights a week? No. They’d have to have learned English for that and it hadn’t been invented yet. Did you think that I would say they both had signed green cards?
I simply believe God taught them in their own tongue (like us) the same general gist and principles that are set forth in PFAL. Dr had 17 different ways of teaching the class (Walter told me this) when he was doing it live. There are always lots of ways to teach the same basic material.
This is a lot like the argument I presented just today to anotherdan in excathedra’s thread on “did anyone hear Dr SIT,” where I pointed out three different formats God has used to present the same basic message: the stars, ancient writings, and modern PFAL. Different formats; same Word. This shouldn’t be hard to see. The same is the case with interpretation of tongues: it’s the GIST, not a word for word translation. Paul and Jesus were taught the same things by God that God taught to Dr and then Dr taught us in PFAL.
As for my arrogance, that’s only true if what I serve is not the truth of God’s Word like it has not been known since the first century. It’s PFAL is false, then I must plead guilty to arrogance, but at least I’d be arrogant with a willingness to serve what I THINK is the truth. I could be worse, like arrogant WITHOUT a willingness to serve.
But if PFAL is from God, THEN I’m not arrogant, just accurate, and willing to serve the accuracy of God’s wonderful matchless Word.
Correct.
And since your premise- pfal being from God-has been discredited beyond
REASONABLE doubt,
you're arrogant serving something you THINK is the truth.
How do you know Jesus didn’t take PFAL? I’ve heard that one before, but usually it’s Paul that people point out could not have taken PFAL.
I just wanted to let that sit on its own. That's a question I never expected
anyone to raise.
I'll keep it next to "how do you know Jesus didn't eat sour cream on Wednesdays?"
Paul went on his time travel trip to the future to see why he was busting his arss so bad. God showed and taught him by revelation (It was not physics type relativistic time travel.) God showed him how His will finally prevails.
I notice you're still pushing this "Paul travelled in time" theology because vpw couldn't
keep track of Paul vs "this guy Paul knows." I can repost the summary of the previous
discussions on that, if anyone's curious. I know if YOU were, you'd have learned the last
time we went over this.
Do I believe Paul and Jesus actually sat through the 36 hours for three weeks, four nights a week? No. They’d have to have learned English for that and it hadn’t been invented yet. Did you think that I would say they both had signed green cards?
I simply believe God taught them in their own tongue (like us) the same general gist and principles that are set forth in PFAL. Dr had 17 different ways of teaching the class (Walter told me this) when he was doing it live. There are always lots of ways to teach the same basic material.
I wonder how God covered the "woman's fear killed her kid by hitting him with a car"
part of session 1 without any cars or modern schools. Maybe he used an example with a
chariot. I also wonder why neither Jesus nor Paul mentioned this supposedly foundational
foundation (so important it was in the very first session) principle if God actually taught it to
them. There's neither Scriptural nor historic record of it-or a contemporary equivalent-
ever coming up.
All the "documentation" for it is in the beliefs of Mike.
Or the opinions of Mike.
Or, as vpw might have phrased it, the "private interpretation" of Mike.
=============
In other news,
we went from "the Holocaust" to "Mike's commercials" in one page.
Again.
Will this entire thread be hijacked-again?
If so, was the purpose of derailing it TO DISTRACT FROM THE DISCUSSION OF
Nice to see you are alive and you appear to be doing well. You already know I very much disagree with much of what you said. I don't see the point in debating it with you, neither of us is likely to change our positions much.
Nice to see you are alive and you appear to be doing well. You already know I very much disagree with much of what you said. I don't see the point in debating it with you, neither of us is likely to change our positions much.
Peace and have a good day.
Hi Abigail,
I can live with that. I'm thankful for one such round of friendly debate.
I distinctly remember (and have verified these points) that in the late 60’s and early 70’s the country was all abuzz on Hal Lindsey’s “Late Great Planet Earth.” In that VERY popular book Hal Lindsey makes as his MAIN POINT that the late 1940’s United Nations formation of a country in the Middle East was an act of God and that that new resulting country was a actually RE-formation of Biblical Israel. He insists that that country’s formation was the beginning of the Return. Modern Israel being Biblical Israel is the fulcrum for his whole “ministry.”
My memory of the holocaust books, as well as Arthur Koestler’s “The Thirteenth Tribe,” was that their ONLY purpose was to help diminish the impact of Hal Lindsey’s “Late Great Planet Earth” main thesis on grads. ...
***
In summary, all of the acts of VPW regarding the contents of this thread were to help us think clearly regarding the Return of Christ, un-muddied by Hal Lindsey’s “Late Great Planet Earth” and The United Nations formation of a country, especially one the somewhat officially rejects Jesus Christ as the Messiah.
Thanks for that information Mike. I would add that in addition to all this VP didn't like the idea of the U.S. sending billions of $$$ to Israel every year .
I can't believe anyone in his right mind would compare Ronald Reagan to Adolf Hitler. Let's keep in mind that people who DIDN'T love RR didn't have to worry about the Gestapo tapping on their door in the middle of the night, and that The Gipper accomplished what he did for our economy legally, without killing off a people, invading and assimilating Canada, Mexico, Greenland, and South America. War boosts economy. Maybe that was part of the reason for Germany's econonimc recovery? I don't know, and don't care.
RR was a great man. Hitler was an unworthy cur who should've been put down long before he murdered millions.
Mike, that comparison just sucks like an open chest wound. How dare you?
There are people who hated Ronald Reagan and would compare him to the Antichrist.
I worked with one of them. One time, she told me that Reagan was the Antichrist, and she believed it! She said one reason was "because just look at his name, it represents 666".
I think you are too predisposed to judge me in the wrong. Please try reading it again without prejudice.
I was not comparing the men’s characters, but the historical circumstances that had some similarities. Note I said “some.” Those similar circumstances stand in the midst of PLENTY of great dissimilarities.
If you re-read what I wrote,
keeping “the many” dissimilarities OUT of mind,
you’ll note that I was making a point
with “the few” similarities
quite far removed
from besmirching or lauding
Reagan’s and Hitler’s respective characters.
It would appear that you missed that point by focusing on something emotionally negative and far removed from my point.
Or then again (and I’m not saying that YOU are into this but some others here are) MAYBE you (OR others in other instances) had no intention of reading, understanding, or responding to my point there.
Maybe (and I’ll believe you if you say it isn’t so but still some others will think this way) you were just looking for a way to paint me in a negative light with your post, couldn’t quite find a legitimate one, so went with the illogical one, hoping it would influence others who don’t really want too much logic anyway.
Being the gentleman that I am, why don’t I offer you (or/and those others) a second chance to do this, paint me in a negative light? How’s this? In my third paragraph above, you (or/and those others) could quote my kernel sentence and then comment thusly:
Mike, you wrote: “I was making a point with 'the few' similarities quite far removed from besmirching or lauding
Reagan’s and Hitler’s respective characters.”
Mike, I can't believe anyone in his right mind would use the word "respective" in the same sentence next to Adolf Hitler.
Anyway, you asked "how dare" I, and THAT’S how I dare.
*******
WordWolf,
You wrote: “He's entitled to his own opinions. Me, I say his conclusions were all SPECULATION and are UNSUPPORTED.”
I want to thank and challenge these two adjacent sentences of yours regarding me, respectively.
Now, didn’t you actually mean to say in the second sentence: “Me, I opine...” ?
Ok, I know it’s too late for you to edit that second sentence now, but maybe next time you’ll remember.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
6
8
14
8
Popular Days
Sep 9
33
Sep 7
21
Sep 10
12
Sep 8
9
Top Posters In This Topic
oldiesman 6 posts
WordWolf 8 posts
Mike 14 posts
waysider 8 posts
Popular Days
Sep 9 2007
33 posts
Sep 7 2007
21 posts
Sep 10 2007
12 posts
Sep 8 2007
9 posts
George Aar
Well, I've got serious reservations about some "god" doing anything, Mike, sorry. Maybe it was Superman, or Hercules?
But if you buy the notion that there IS an Almighty God that once had a pact with the Israelites, why couldn't the U.N. have been used as a tool to reestablish that nation? Is there some sort of Biblical prohibition against the U.N.?
And as for your second question, if there's substantial genetic evidence that a large proportion of modern Israelies (and there DOES seem to be such evidence) are descended from the ancient inhabitants of that land, what IS the difference between the "Israel" of old and that of today? I mean, other than theological tenets of you and them?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
George,
You wrote: “But if you buy the notion that there IS an Almighty God that once had a pact with the Israelites, why couldn't the U.N. have been used as a tool to reestablish that nation? Is there some sort of Biblical prohibition against the U.N.?”
I mentioned it earlier. A country that fundamentally rejects God’s Messiah rejects God.
***
You wrote: “...what IS the difference between the "Israel" of old and that of today? I mean, other than theological tenets of you and them?”
Why the qualifier “other than theological tenets of you and them” ? That IS the fundamental difference.
In the OT, when Israel would reject God, then He would reject them. When they believed, God would accept them. When NON-Israel humans would believe He would accept them. This is Biblically addressed in the figure of Abraham’s two offspring, one of believing God and one of believing the flesh.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
mike, i always get creeped out by that "grads" thing
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wrdsandwrks
Here's one I heard him say:
5. The US was fought on the wrong side in WW II. We should have sided with Germany against the Russians.
Nope, never heard him say, "I hate the Jews."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
wrdsandwrks,
The bottom line is that we did not ever have a problem with our Jewish friends AND we did bring a lot of them to twig. There was no following VPW into anti-Semitism because there was no leading into anti-Semitism. It's all being manufactured now in threads like this.
***
George,
In response to your last question, have you never heard of outward expressions POSSIBLY being phony in any way? God looks on the heart.
***
Exy,
I think you get creeped out too easily.
If you could deal with such a simple non-threatening idea of a "grad" better,
then you could move on to dealing with lots of other things that bother you.
We are graduates of PFAL. That is our fundamental commonality.
If you were not a grad I could see it a little,
and I can see it a little (how you feel) when it comes to how we treat non-grads,
but even there I think you need to relax.
Elitism in itself is creepy,
but when an elite crew actually get a very difficult job done,
then THAT kind of elitism is honorable.
As grads we are to become elite servants.
This is still possible to do.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Yes, Mike, I admit I quoted you out of context.
Somehow, though, I just felt like the rest of it got in the way of those two gems.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
No Mike...as spirit filled Christians we are to become elite servants....not as "grads"...You're mistaking the message for the reality behind the message...and in this case, the message was severely flawed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Elitism in itself is self worship.
Being an elite servant, in my supplied context, means getting a real big job done for God. It is love. Someone's got to be the best at agape, why not us?
Groucho,
Lots of people claim to be Christians.
Some have something to serve.
Grads have the most. That's not something to bust buttons over. In fact, busting buttons is NOT doing th serving. Busting open the books is where the best service can come from.
Let's be the best at serving.
So long for now, folks.
It's been fun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Funny, Mike. Are you then God? Because based on what you have posted, one could easily infer you KNOW that the Jews have rejected God and the implication is that any expression of devotion to God by a Jew is simply phony.
Hmmmm
OMG if that isn't the most arrogant bunch of hogwash I have read in such a very very long time. Funny, because Christian doctrine as I understand it, would lead one to believe Jesus was the best at agape, yet he never even took PFAL.
Mike, true agape leads little room for arrogance.
Edited by AbigailLink to comment
Share on other sites
railroader II
Reading through this topic, I would like to add an observation and a few feelings of my own as this reaches home. Everyone talks about docvic being proud of his German heritage. As my background is also German, I wonder if there is a distict possibility, because of that, that he could not face up to the reality of his country doing something so horrible? I know, from discussions in our own house, that my relatives had an extremely hard time handling the truth of the Holocaust. When the first reports started tricking out of Germany in '41 & '42, no one would believe it. They felt no civilized country could be so guilty. What they did not realize was the fact that old Uncle Joe Stalin was doing the same, if not worse, for years prior to the start of WW II. Look at the purges of the Russian Officer Corps during the 30's. That left the army so decimated that they Russians were totally unprepared when Hitler turned on them. Growing up, I talked to my great-grandfather & grandfather about things and they were so ashamed of what happened that they would not admit for many years that they actually were German. It was a major case of self-denial. I grew up around veterans of Patton's 3rd Army who could never get rid of the nightmares of what they saw when they entered some of the camps in Germany.
In regards to present day Israel, read your history. When the Arab Revolt occured during WW I, the Middle EasT WAS SUPPOSED to be turned over to the Arabs. Instead the British & French divided it among themselves for the oil. As part of the Balfour Declaration, drawn up by Churchill & others, Palistine was designated as a new homeland for the Jews. Instead, that was carved up also, and part became present day Jordan. I xcould go on about the UN but that ios a totally different topic which I could fill a book about.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Hi railroader II,
I don’t mean to bury your thoughtful post with my long one, but I had spent the last half hour composing the following response to Abigail.
Responding to your post, though, I think Dr was human and sinful, just like us all. Sure it must have been very unpleasant for him, as well as all Germans living through those times.
I talked a lot with Jimmy Doop a few years ago, and during the 90’s. He said that Dr had said that Hitler hat some very right ideas early on, but that he later went insane. From Jimmy’s mouth I heard that Dr knew and believed and admitted that Hitler was insane, but still possessing some impressive skills. Kinda reminds me of Craig.
It’s no small fact that Hitler was very successful in pulling Germany up from and out of a huge financial and psychological depression. He was loved like Ronald Regan who did a similar thing (not as intense, though) in pulling us up from a much milder financial and psychological depression. Remember 17% inflation under Carter, and the Vietnam malaise? I think Germany’s inflation rate was in the thousands, or at least far above 100%, and they were heavily oppressed by the Treaty of Versailles ending WWI.
I don’t think Dr had any problem with the sad affairs of WWII Germany by the time he taught us the class. Dr did admit having psychological problems with blacks, because his brother was killed by one, but he also reported that he eventually overcame this, as HCW has verified here. My co-worker on staff went to high school with Dr. She told me of some of his early problems and how he overcame them.
*******
Hi Abigail,
Long time no talk. It's good to see you.
No, I'm not God, AND I am (believe it or not) not in the least bit looking down on anyone. I picked up what I posted there from Romans and a few other sources, including first hand experience.
I know firsthand how phony I can be and have been. I know firsthand how phony religious people can sometimes be, but have a good outward show. Didn’t you see any of that in TWI? Of course you did. It’s the norm for humans.
I am convinced that ALL human beings (not just Jews, to your "Hmmm" comment) of body and soul are incapable of pleasing God and are in fact, enemies with God, the True God. Much is needed to overcome this, but chanting prayers out loud is useless.
Humans show off their religiosity for each other all the time and it means nothing to God. He said this in the OT many times... in vain do they worship me, He says. Jesus said it too.
Sorry, I'm just the messenger of a sad reality, that humans are mere animals that THINK they are spiritual and that they know God when the opposite is the case, they (as children of Adam) are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the devil.
It takes much to overcome this, like lots of desire on the human’s part and lots of power on God’s part and few even try beyond what they think they must do. God is their fire-escape from hell at best, and it’s definitely not a love (agape) thing.
***
As for my arrogance, that’s only true if what I serve is not the truth of God’s Word like it has not been known since the first century. It’s PFAL is false, then I must plead guilty to arrogance, but at least I’d be arrogant with a willingness to serve what I THINK is the truth. I could be worse, like arrogant WITHOUT a willingness to serve.
But if PFAL is from God, THEN I’m not arrogant, just accurate, and willing to serve the accuracy of God’s wonderful matchless Word.
Babe Ruth said (and many agree) that if a man says he can jump over a barn, and he can actually do it, THEN it’s not bragging. I like that usage of the word “brag.” I think it works for arrogance too. I think you too, if you look at what you do well for others, would feel the same basic thing I just expressed.
Have you ever looked at the 4 Gospels with the same anti-arrogance stance as you just looked at my post? What do you think of Jesus saying that he was the ONLY way to God? What do you think of Jesus’ claim that anyone who tries to enter heaven bypassing him were like thieves and would fail, that he was the bread of life, the resurrection, etc., etc. He was NOT arrogant because he was accurate and he had a willingness to serve with his God-granted superiority.
I happen to be a little taller than many other people. That’s accurate, not arrogant, if I use my tallness to serve others, reaching things on high shelves for them. If I expect others to worship me for each inch I have over them, then I have a problem.
The same thing hold for brains, beauty, and bucks. Having a lot of either can make someone arrogant with no willingness to serve others with their God-granted gifts, OR they can thank God for their bounty and serve others with it.
***
How do you know Jesus didn’t take PFAL? I’ve heard that one before, but usually it’s Paul that people point out could not have taken PFAL.
Paul went on his time travel trip to the future to see why he was busting his arss so bad. God showed and taught him by revelation (It was not physics type relativistic time travel.) God showed him how His will finally prevails.
Jesus too had something shown to him, and I don’t believe it was a one time short flick on the cross. It says he endured the cross for the joy that was set before him.
In a late (hence missed by most) Way Magazine article “The Capacity to Endure,” Jan/Feb 85, Dr writes this by revelation:
“ What could that joy that was set before Jesus Christ have been? He saw that someday people would rise up to believe, and that the works he had done they would do. He saw that they would do even greater works after he went to his Father in heaven. He saw all that and more.”
Do I believe Paul and Jesus actually sat through the 36 hours for three weeks, four nights a week? No. They’d have to have learned English for that and it hadn’t been invented yet. Did you think that I would say they both had signed green cards?
I simply believe God taught them in their own tongue (like us) the same general gist and principles that are set forth in PFAL. Dr had 17 different ways of teaching the class (Walter told me this) when he was doing it live. There are always lots of ways to teach the same basic material.
This is a lot like the argument I presented just today to anotherdan in excathedra’s thread on “did anyone hear Dr SIT,” where I pointed out three different formats God has used to present the same basic message: the stars, ancient writings, and modern PFAL. Different formats; same Word. This shouldn’t be hard to see. The same is the case with interpretation of tongues: it’s the GIST, not a word for word translation. Paul and Jesus were taught the same things by God that God taught to Dr and then Dr taught us in PFAL.
Edited by MikeLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Correct.
And since your premise- pfal being from God-has been discredited beyond
REASONABLE doubt,
you're arrogant serving something you THINK is the truth.
I just wanted to let that sit on its own. That's a question I never expectedanyone to raise.
I'll keep it next to "how do you know Jesus didn't eat sour cream on Wednesdays?"
I notice you're still pushing this "Paul travelled in time" theology because vpw couldn't
keep track of Paul vs "this guy Paul knows." I can repost the summary of the previous
discussions on that, if anyone's curious. I know if YOU were, you'd have learned the last
time we went over this.
I wonder how God covered the "woman's fear killed her kid by hitting him with a car"
part of session 1 without any cars or modern schools. Maybe he used an example with a
chariot. I also wonder why neither Jesus nor Paul mentioned this supposedly foundational
foundation (so important it was in the very first session) principle if God actually taught it to
them. There's neither Scriptural nor historic record of it-or a contemporary equivalent-
ever coming up.
All the "documentation" for it is in the beliefs of Mike.
Or the opinions of Mike.
Or, as vpw might have phrased it, the "private interpretation" of Mike.
=============
In other news,
we went from "the Holocaust" to "Mike's commercials" in one page.
Again.
Will this entire thread be hijacked-again?
If so, was the purpose of derailing it TO DISTRACT FROM THE DISCUSSION OF
HOW VPW SUPPORTED HOLOCAUST DENIAL?
Time will tell.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
Mike,
Nice to see you are alive and you appear to be doing well. You already know I very much disagree with much of what you said. I don't see the point in debating it with you, neither of us is likely to change our positions much.
Peace and have a good day.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Hi Abigail,
I can live with that. I'm thankful for one such round of friendly debate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Thanks for that information Mike. I would add that in addition to all this VP didn't like the idea of the U.S. sending billions of $$$ to Israel every year .
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Thank him for OFFERING HIS OPINIONS.
He's entitled to his own opinions.
Me, I say his conclusions were all SPECULATION and are UNSUPPORTED.
If this was his PRIMARY GOAL, as you've suggested before,
or even just a major consideration,
then he should have just SAID THAT.
Then again, since that's a POLITICAL issue, perhaps he should have just kept that as a PERSONAL OPINION
and used that time at the pulpit MORE PRODUCTIVELY by TEACHING THE BIBLE MORE instead of dictating
political opinions to twi folk.
I bet you HATE it when any homileticist OTHER THAN vpw dictates political opinions from the pulpit,
especially when they disagree with what positions should be endorsed....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
I can't believe anyone in his right mind would compare Ronald Reagan to Adolf Hitler. Let's keep in mind that people who DIDN'T love RR didn't have to worry about the Gestapo tapping on their door in the middle of the night, and that The Gipper accomplished what he did for our economy legally, without killing off a people, invading and assimilating Canada, Mexico, Greenland, and South America. War boosts economy. Maybe that was part of the reason for Germany's econonimc recovery? I don't know, and don't care.
RR was a great man. Hitler was an unworthy cur who should've been put down long before he murdered millions.
Mike, that comparison just sucks like an open chest wound. How dare you?
WG
Edited by Watered GardenLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
There are people who hated Ronald Reagan and would compare him to the Antichrist.
I worked with one of them. One time, she told me that Reagan was the Antichrist, and she believed it! She said one reason was "because just look at his name, it represents 666".
R-O-N-A-L D = 6
W-I-L-S-O-N = 6
R-E-A-G-A-N = 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Oh, please!
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
I guess I stand corrected. I always thought that your position was "Jesus is PFAL", and because of that he didn't need to take the class.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I didn't say it was true nor do I believe it. All I said was that he was/is hated and was thought of as the Antichrist.
Don't believe me, check this out :
666
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
Why bother? Some people probably St. William of Clinton was the antichrist, and some probably thought he was the second coming.
Not that big a deal and I am not trying to start something with you. So please don't try to start something with me.
WG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mike
Watered Garden,
How dare I?
I think you are too predisposed to judge me in the wrong. Please try reading it again without prejudice.
I was not comparing the men’s characters, but the historical circumstances that had some similarities. Note I said “some.” Those similar circumstances stand in the midst of PLENTY of great dissimilarities.
If you re-read what I wrote,
keeping “the many” dissimilarities OUT of mind,
you’ll note that I was making a point
with “the few” similarities
quite far removed
from besmirching or lauding
Reagan’s and Hitler’s respective characters.
It would appear that you missed that point by focusing on something emotionally negative and far removed from my point.
Or then again (and I’m not saying that YOU are into this but some others here are) MAYBE you (OR others in other instances) had no intention of reading, understanding, or responding to my point there.
Maybe (and I’ll believe you if you say it isn’t so but still some others will think this way) you were just looking for a way to paint me in a negative light with your post, couldn’t quite find a legitimate one, so went with the illogical one, hoping it would influence others who don’t really want too much logic anyway.
Being the gentleman that I am, why don’t I offer you (or/and those others) a second chance to do this, paint me in a negative light? How’s this? In my third paragraph above, you (or/and those others) could quote my kernel sentence and then comment thusly:
Mike, you wrote: “I was making a point with 'the few' similarities quite far removed from besmirching or lauding
Reagan’s and Hitler’s respective characters.”
Mike, I can't believe anyone in his right mind would use the word "respective" in the same sentence next to Adolf Hitler.
Anyway, you asked "how dare" I, and THAT’S how I dare.
*******
WordWolf,
You wrote: “He's entitled to his own opinions. Me, I say his conclusions were all SPECULATION and are UNSUPPORTED.”
I want to thank and challenge these two adjacent sentences of yours regarding me, respectively.
Now, didn’t you actually mean to say in the second sentence: “Me, I opine...” ?
Ok, I know it’s too late for you to edit that second sentence now, but maybe next time you’ll remember.
Edited by MikeLink 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.