Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

A note on forgiving


Nathan Friedly
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Ham, this is where the doctrine, the knowledge of twi led us. All of the focus on speaking in tongues, on knowledge of the scriptures, on operation of principles, the application of immutable laws, the perfectly in order physicals.

If galatians is to be believed, I think that wierwille missed the boat spiritually and led a lot of people down the toilet with him.

Hey, Rascal....just Praise the Lord!

At least with me.....SOMEONE FORGOT TO FLUSH THE DAM THING!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much time have you put into I Corinthians 3 as it relates to these matters in Galatians? There's quite a long passage there from verse 5 to verse 17.

We were taught to use ALL of the scriptures that relate. How many of the others besides Galatians do you use? If you have not extensively worked this area in Corinthians ALONG WITH Galatians, then you only have part of the story to begin with, let alone what you end up with.

If you can't look at I Cor. 3:17 and feel safe, then this is uncharted seas for you and we have a lot of work to do.

Just to test everyone's acumen here, how is this a warm and soothing verse? "If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are."

Really, rascal, if you can show me why this is a warm and soothing verse, then I'll know you worked the preceding verses in conjunction with what you preach on Galatians.

It REALLY IS a warm and soothing verse, HONEST. I can show you how if you want to see it. There's a little translation problem....

That is interesting to bring up the I Corinthians 3 passage in this discussion:

I Corinthians 3:5-17 KJV

5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?

6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

7 So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase.

8 Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.

9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

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

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

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

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

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

16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

Hmmmm…silly assumption – that vp can be compared to Paul, Apollos or that an organization known as TWI has anything to do with the temple of God…Personally, I think that's laughable…The only "foundation" vp laid was the foundational class PFAL – formed by plagiarism [stealing and lying on a massive scale] and twisting Scripture – and building on that foundation more lies, hypocrisy and immorality by the way he modeled the "Christian" lifestyle. [by the way, Jesus Christ was only a window dressing mentioned early in the class – to lend it the appearance of being Christ-centered.]

You know, verse 17 can work the other way too, in regards to vp and the harm he's done to the true church [the invisible church – the body of Christ]. The word "defile" and "destroy" in the KJV are the same Greek word phtheiro [Strong's # 5351]; according to An Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words by W.E. Vine, Merrill Unger & William White, page 234, phtheiro means to "…destroy by means of corrupting, and so bringing into a worse state…with the significance of destroying, it is used of marring a local church by leading it away from the condition of holiness of life and purity of doctrine…I Corinthians 3:17…"

And along those lines, vp's practice of showing his favorite porn video and quoting "unto the pure all things are pure" to justify his sexual immorality come to mind…Perhaps all the crap leaking out of the Lock Boxes now – is God's way of ruining his "man-of-god" persona. He brought it on himself…Check out verse 17 in another translation:

I Corinthians 3:17 Holman Christian Standard Bible

If anyone ruins God's sanctuary, God will ruin him; for God's sanctuary is holy, and that is what you are.

[edited for those who feel safe with TWI or PFAL :) ]

Edited by T-Bone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And along those lines, vp's practice of showing his favorite porn video and quoting "unto the pure all things are pure" to justify his sexual immorality come to mind…Perhaps all the crap leaking out of the Lock Boxes now – is God's way of ruining his "man-of-god" persona. He brought it on himself…Check out verse 17 in another translation:

I Corinthians 3:17 Holman Christian Standard Bible

If anyone ruins God's sanctuary, God will ruin him; for God's sanctuary is holy, and that is what you are.

[edited for those who feel safe with TWI or PFAL ]

Did he actually show porn videos? Was that what went on at the night owls? I always felt that he was showing the class "Christian family and sex" to see if anyone was open to the spirit of lust. What I think is interesting is that the Greek word is "porn-ay". So if he was then showing further videos, that was to fully indoctrinate the victim so that they wouldn't think it was strange when the moves were made on them.

Edited by brideofjc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have added to this to my last "other" post as well....

Not only did the HOLY SPIRIT rescue me from the CRAPPER, He cleansed me with the

PRECIOUS BLOOD OF JESUS, and then WASHED me with the washing of the REAL WORD.

and then he put me on the right road...ya know....the straight and narrow one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i still remember a few lines i love

jesus christ saves to the uttermost

as far as the east is from the west

all that stuff i needed and need always (for me personally)

god's desire for everyone i think

the hurtful unkind devious things that happened to me.... that is not my call

i will never say it helped me along "the way"

i hope this makes sense

thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did he actually show porn videos? Was that what went on at the night owls? I always felt that he was showing the class "Christian family and sex" to see if anyone was open to the spirit of lust. What I think is interesting is that the Greek word is "porn-ay". So if he was then showing further videos, that was to fully indoctrinate the victim so that they wouldn't think it was strange when the moves were made on them.

Yes – on numerous occasions and in various settings - below are a few links regarding vp's porn video and moral depravity…I saw it when he showed it at a pajama party with the Family Corps – and TEENAGERS were present! I don't think his moral depravity knew any boundaries…And I would say you're dead on with it being part of an indoctrination process that was he11 bent on sabotaging the moral compass of followers.

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?s=&showtopic=9344&view=findpost&p=220430

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?s=&showtopic=283&view=findpost&p=45015

http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?s=&showtopic=268&view=findpost&p=26978

Edited by T-Bone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

he showed porn and chuckled about the dogs having more sense than the lesbians or something along those lines

he said A LOT of weird sheet at night owls and "private sit-down-at-his-feet" meetings, but i can't tell you because i already got in trouble about it.... for posting it on here.....

aside from the above

i can tell you, that his rationale for wanting to "get me" was to heal me

that's honest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FRUIT!!

Ok, so let's digress for a moment to talk about fruit.

Did Wierwille have "love"? There's no way to know.

Did he have "joy"? Again, I don't know.

(If he did, he certainly did not exhibit it.)

"Peace"? Don't know.

(He didn't seem to display it when he was off-stage.)

"Longsuffering"? Well if he did, you wouldn't know it from the way he carried on, ranting and raving at the least little thing that he deem incorrect.

"Gentleness"? That's the "encouraging" fruit. I think it should be obvious where he stood on that one.

How about "goodness" or "faith", which he said was actually "believing".

Then, of course, there is "meekness" and "temperance", which VPW told us was the exercising of "self control".

It should be obvious how he rated on those two.

So, did he have fruit of the spirit in his life? I don't know.

If he did, you surely wouldn't have known it by the example he set.

And isn't that what he was supposed to do?, set an example for his devote

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

I didn't have time to finish this train of thought before work today.

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

In the Power For Ab^nd@nt Living class( The class that God gave to him by revelation), VPW teaches that the section of Galations where this is found is an example of "asynditon"(sp?), a figure of speech that removes emphasis from the individual items and refocuses it on the point being made. In this case, the point being made is that there is no law against fruit of the spirit.

In addition, he,VPW, taught that there is no need for the law if one is walking by the spirit.

So the question that poses itself is this.

Was he walking "by the spirit" when he drank himself into an alcoholic rage or chain smoked his Kool "shorties" or took liberty with the female parishioners with whom he was entrusted or used ministry funds to purchase new additions to his fleet of vintage vehicles?

No wonder he had no use for any kind of law that would have curbed his "freedom" to do these things.

Sounds more to me like he "manifested" the fruit of his lusts.

But then again, that's just my opinion.

Edited by waysider
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is interesting to bring up the I Corinthians 3 passage in this discussion

T-Bone,

You missed it. How can verse 17 be a warm and soothing verse when it talks that way?

I'm often amazed at how so many grads are totally ignorant of this wonderful passage. When I first came across verse 17 it really bothered me. It seems to not only contradict the previous verses, it even seems to contradict itself!

Do you see it? Do you see the contradictions?

There's one word improperly translated in most versions that turn that verse from a warm and soothing one to a nasty, condemning SNL Church Lady verse. I hope someone here wants to see how this difficult KJV Corinthian passage is properly translated into a warm and soothing passage, and THEN how it furthers a deeper understanding of the Galatians verses so often flung about.

Edited by Mike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

?

There's one word improperly translated in most versions that turn that verse from a warm and soothing one to a nasty, condemning SNL Church Lady verse. I hope someone here wants to see how this difficult KJV Corinthian passage is properly translated into a warm and soothing passage, and THEN how it furthers a deeper understanding of the Galatians verses so often flung about.

Well, like they say in show biz, "You're on, big guy!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting how twi "soothed" harsh pasages, like threats of eternal fire, hanging millstones about heads of perpetrators, loss of inheritance, warnings against adultery, etc. etc.

and "harshed" smooth passages, like the lord's return, when people would have to endure interrogation from the lord himself for not standing with der man-o-gawd..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a manuscript somewhere, if I could just find it..

you stinking research people better get on the ball.. it's there somewhere.

"when thou art smitest by der man-o-gawd, think nothing of it. It is thy common lot. For thou are smitest by the king of kings, the lord of.."

you have to see it in the original.

:biglaugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huh?

I thought you said (or implied) you would show us!!!

(2 posts back)

I had to leave my house for a while to run an errand.

Now I have to search around to see if I have some pre-typed elaboration of that passage somewhere.

How's the suspense building?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting how twi "soothed" harsh pasages, like threats of eternal fire, hanging millstones about heads of perpetrators, loss of inheritance, warnings against adultery, etc. etc.

and "harshed" smooth passages, like the lord's return, when people would have to endure interrogation from the lord himself for not standing with der man-o-gawd..

There IS a verse on the Return to that effect. It's another verse hardly any grads knew about, or at least the ones I tried to talk to about it. This verse is I John 2:28. It's not exactly your warm and soothing Return of Christ verse, unless you've been hurt and need to know that God evens the score sooner or later.

This verse may apply to some posters here too, though, so be careful how much you want to see the verse happen. Can you imagine justifying your posts, each and every one, to Jesus Christ personally?

Edited by Mike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you imagine justifying your posts, each and every one, to Jesus Christ personally?

I don't expect it to be necessary.

I have a good imagination, though, so, for the sake of discussion, I can picture it.

I stand behind my posts.

If Jesus found it profitable to hear me expound on every one of them, I'd accept that

as his due, but disagree (while doing it) as to whether it's worth the effort.

I'm not bothering to justify them for anyone SHORT of Jesus Christ PERSONALLY.

Either people get them-and need no explanation- or they reject them-and no

explanation will change their emotions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to leave my house for a while to run an errand.

Now I have to search around to see if I have some pre-typed elaboration of that passage somewhere.

How's the suspense building?

Either you have the goods or you don't!

Your call, Mr. Exegesis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 Corinthians

3:17 εἴ τις τὸν ναὸν τοῦ θεοῦ φθείρει φθερεῖ τοῦτον ὁ θεός ὁ γὰρ ναὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἅγιός ἐστιν οἵτινές ἐστε ὑμεῖς

PARSE AWAY, PARSE AWAY, PARSE AWAY ALL! :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

T-Bone,

You missed it. How can verse 17 be a warm and soothing verse when it talks that way?

I'm often amazed at how so many grads are totally ignorant of this wonderful passage. When I first came across verse 17 it really bothered me. It seems to not only contradict the previous verses, it even seems to contradict itself!

Do you see it? Do you see the contradictions?

There's one word improperly translated in most versions that turn that verse from a warm and soothing one to a nasty, condemning SNL Church Lady verse. I hope someone here wants to see how this difficult KJV Corinthian passage is properly translated into a warm and soothing passage, and THEN how it furthers a deeper understanding of the Galatians verses so often flung about.

Thank you for your response…Just thought I'd encapsulate your post – I look forward to you showing the following:

1. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts the previous verses [verses 5-16]

2. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts itself

3. Identify the one improperly translated word in I Corinthians 3:17 and

4. Demonstrate the correct method of translating the passage

5. Explain how the correct translation you suggest - changes the tone of the verse from condemning to warm and soothing

6. Explain how I Corinthians 3:17 correctly translated by you, furthers a deeper understanding of Galatians 5

Edited by T-Bone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for your response…Just thought I'd encapsulate your post – I look forward to you showing the following:

1. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts the previous verses [verses 5-16]

2. Explain how the current translation(s) of I Corinthians 3:17 contradicts itself

3. Identify the one improperly translated word in I Corinthians 3:17 and

4. Demonstrate the correct method of translating the passage

5. Explain how the correct translation of this "key" word you've identified changes the tone of the verse from condemning to warm and soothing

6. Explain how I Corinthians 3:17 correctly translated by you, furthers a deeper understanding of Galatians 5

Watch it T-Bone -If promises get made here - then we'll have another green card... :evildenk:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 Corinthians

3:17 εἴ τις τὸν ναὸν τοῦ θεοῦ φθείρει φθερεῖ τοῦτον ὁ θεός ὁ γὰρ ναὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἅγιός ἐστιν οἵτινές ἐστε ὑμεῖς

PARSE AWAY, PARSE AWAY, PARSE AWAY ALL! :rolleyes:

I don't know about parsing, but I do see a usage of antanaclasis. Since it is in the same sentence, I don't think it's an anadiplosis..

but what do I know..

:biglaugh:

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...