You all may continue to misrepresent what I said and meant all you wish. I maintain that we all have eternal life, incorruptible seed, access to God, peace in our hearts (not as the world giveth), and an Advocate (comforter); Jesus Christ the righteous. None of your arguments has negated any of this.
What about wierwille's teachings on......
.....the law of believing?
.....the fear in that mother killed her kid?
.....the word (pfal, etc) takes the place of the absent Christ?
.....the word is the ministry and the ministry (twi) is the word?
.....masturbation was the original sin?
.....cancer is a devil spirit?
Some of vp's plagairized work had truth in it.
Some of vp's own work was flat-out private interpretation.
Some of vp's sharings with corps were pornographic-related.
C'mon J-man........pfal was only an appetizer at Hannibal's table.
I believe Jesus IS fully man and not God and sinless. Did God cover for David?
1 Sam 11:26,27 - and when the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she mourned for her husband. And when the mourning was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord.
Question 1. How much meaningful consent did Bathsheba have in this? Question 2. Did it matter that she didn't literally belong to the King?
1 Sam 12:13 - And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord. And Nathan said unto David, the Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.
Does this make God a coconspirator?
1 Kings 15:5 - Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.
Notice it says the matter of Uriah the Hittite, not Bathsheba. Didn't her life count for anything? Was it God's will for her to be forced to have sex with David? Was it God's will for her to later be forced to become David's wife? David made all that happen to HER, yet he turned not aside...etc.
As I said, the big gray area is that God is not obligated to reveal to us exactly how he metes out justice for every jot and tittle of anyone's life. I didn't say VP turned not aside...etc. I DID say he should have some consequencees. But we now live in the administration of grace. VP didn't have to pray "take not thy holy spirit from me" like David did.
You all may continue to misrepresent what I said and meant all you wish. I maintain that we all have eternal life, incorruptible seed, access to God, peace in our hearts (not as the world giveth), and an Advocate (comforter); Jesus Christ the righteous. None of your arguments has negated any of this.
I have really admired that you have not compared VP's situation with that of David. Seriously.
Okay.....Let's look at this account. You brought it up....let's examine it together and see what the differences are....maybe I can actually help you to understand these scriptures in a different light. We don't use the scriptures to rationalize sin....and I told you that not one rationalization you make is going to stand. That is because....there isn't one. The account of David and Bathsheba is not applicable here unless we twist these scriptures to make them mean something they do not.....and we really don't want to do that.
First of all this account is not held up as an example of how a follower of God should behave. While we are at it...why not use Peter's denial of the Lord as an excuse to deny him.
What David did....displeased the Lord. And it wasn't about Bathsheba OR Uriah.....it was about David sinning AGAINST THE LORD. All sin....no matter who it touches is against the Lord. That is the focus of this account. Not that God covered it or that God winked at it or that God let him get away with it. Maybe that starting point is helpful to see this account in a differing light.
David's sin here....actually effected seven generations. It was larger than you even understand.
Your focus is the people involved. The purpose of this account is to show the magnitude of sin.....sin is bad....it hurts people, but moreover...it displeases God.
David's sin displeased God....when David realized his sin....he had SORROW that he had sinned against God. He repented. He turned from sin all the days of his life. Which means he never did it again. It was only AFTER this that God forgave him.
Did you shut your bible after this....David paid a hefty price. His firstborn died...his kingdom was divided.... Absalom chased him for years trying to kill him. David hid from his own child.......he did NOT spend his days on a motor coach with young women AFTER he had repented.
What David did...legally demanded his death....does that sound like all the women belonged to him? David didn't attempt to rationalize or justify his sin before God. When he was confronted his repentance and admission of guilt was immediate, but God's forgiveness doesn't always remove the consequences of sin.....in this life. David paid and paid and paid.
So, no that does not make God a co conspirator...that makes God merciful in that he didn't take David's life. No where does it say God was covering for David while he was sinning.....or that he in anyway approved of David's actions....it says he was displeased...David deserved death....David had true Godly repentance....and God showed mercy. God is not required to show mercy. If you look at other accounts....people did die for their sins.
David's own son committed the same sin and did not live too long after that. No repentance. He didn't live to do it again.
You said God covered for VP as long as he could......when did he have true Godly repentance and stop sinning so that God forgave him. That is what God required of David. I ran into VP a year before he died. His eyes or I should say eye....was still full of lust.
Maybe the real problem here...why you cannot connect with what we are telling you is that you rely on this idea of dispensationalism a bit to heavily. God doesn't change. He still requires us to have true Godly repentance and turn from sin. There are still consequences of sin in this life. How you tell someone has made Jesus Lord in their life is their conversion. Transformation? Their recognition of sin in their lives and their turning from it. When was it that VP was converted?
When did his life NOT HIS WORDS ever reflect the Lordship of Jesus Christ? You tell me......
He was a corrupt tree that didn't bear good fruit.
VP drank like a fish. If you ever set up for one of his visits you know what was required don't you? A bean bag ashtray....a carton of kool shorties......a coffee cup.....drambuie.....and breath mints. Eyes full of adultery. Well, what is it you claim God covered for him? Insatiable for sin, seeking orgies, pornography, anger, twisting scripture, stealing others intellectual property, he was abusive, he blamed victims......he enticed unsteady souls......he was trained in greed. When VP came to town....do you know what he took with him. Great big paper bags FULL of money. They went on the motor coach and left with him. While we drove rust buckets...he drove Town Cars...and he took our money with him.
When did this stop?
I am starting to get really disgusted and a bit ticked off now....
You may confer sainthood on VP ...the scriptures say he is headed for a different judgment.
First of all, if God covered for David, billions of Christians and Jews wouldn't know all about it
for thousands of years. It's even mentioned in Matthew.
Matthew 1:6b."David was the father of Solomon by Bathsheba who had been the wife of Uriah."
That's not "covering", that's shining a light on it centuries later.
And the Scriptures in Samuel and Kings go into a LOT more detail, which means we all know all
about it because God wanted us to know all about it. Is that "covering"?
No, that's EXPOSING.
II Samuel 11:2-5
2 One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, 3 and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite.” 4 Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (Now she was purifying herself from her monthly uncleanness.) Then she went back home. 5 The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.”
David sinned. We don't need all the tawdry details. What we know is PLENTY.
David's sin ended with a CONSEQUENCE. Now Bathsheba was pregnant.
Who covered for all this, if anyone?
II Samuel 11:6-12
6 So David sent this word to Joab: “Send me Uriah the Hittite.” And Joab sent him to David. 7 When Uriah came to him, David asked him how Joab was, how the soldiers were and how the war was going. 8 Then David said to Uriah, “Go down to your house and wash your feet.” So Uriah left the palace, and a gift from the king was sent after him. 9 But Uriah slept at the entrance to the palace with all his master’s servants and did not go down to his house.
10 David was told, “Uriah did not go home.” So he asked Uriah, “Haven’t you just come from a military campaign? Why didn’t you go home?”
11 Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah are staying in tents, and my commander Joab and my lord’s men are camped in the open country. How could I go to my house to eat and drink and make love to my wife? As surely as you live, I will not do such a thing!”
12 Then David said to him, “Stay here one more day, and tomorrow I will send you back.” So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. 13 At David’s invitation, he ate and drank with him, and David made him drunk. But in the evening Uriah went out to sleep on his mat among his master’s servants; he did not go home.
DAVID covered for David. And it didn't work.
II Samuel 11:14-25.
14 In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. 15 In it he wrote, “Put Uriah out in front where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.”
16 So while Joab had the city under siege, he put Uriah at a place where he knew the strongest defenders were. 17 When the men of the city came out and fought against Joab, some of the men in David’s army fell; moreover, Uriah the Hittite died.
18 Joab sent David a full account of the battle. 19 He instructed the messenger: “When you have finished giving the king this account of the battle, 20 the king’s anger may flare up, and he may ask you, ‘Why did you get so close to the city to fight? Didn’t you know they would shoot arrows from the wall? 21 Who killed Abimelek son of Jerub-Besheth? Didn’t a woman drop an upper millstone on him from the wall, so that he died in Thebez? Why did you get so close to the wall?’ If he asks you this, then say to him, ‘Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.’”
22 The messenger set out, and when he arrived he told David everything Joab had sent him to say. 23 The messenger said to David, “The men overpowered us and came out against us in the open, but we drove them back to the entrance of the city gate. 24 Then the archers shot arrows at your servants from the wall, and some of the king’s men died. Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.”
25 David told the messenger, “Say this to Joab: ‘Don’t let this upset you; the sword devours one as well as another. Press the attack against the city and destroy it.’ Say this to encourage Joab.”
DAVID covered for David- and he conspired to have an innocent man-Uriah- killed to cover David's sin.
II Samuel 11:26
26 When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. 27 After the time of mourning was over, David had her brought to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing David had done displeased the LORD.
DAVID covered DAVID's tracks, and killed an innocent man to cover David's own sins.
The LORD disapproved of David's sin.
II Samuel 12:1-22
1 The LORD sent Nathan to David. When he came to him, he said, “There were two men in a certain town, one rich and the other poor. 2 The rich man had a very large number of sheep and cattle, 3 but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb he had bought. He raised it, and it grew up with him and his children. It shared his food, drank from his cup and even slept in his arms. It was like a daughter to him.
4 “Now a traveler came to the rich man, but the rich man refrained from taking one of his own sheep or cattle to prepare a meal for the traveler who had come to him. Instead, he took the ewe lamb that belonged to the poor man and prepared it for the one who had come to him.”
5 David burned with anger against the man and said to Nathan, “As surely as the LORD lives, the man who did this must die! 6 He must pay for that lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and had no pity.”
7 Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man! This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more. 9 Why did you despise the word of the LORD by doing what is evil in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. 10 Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.’
11 “This is what the LORD says: ‘Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. 12 You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.’”
13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.”
Nathan replied, “The LORD has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. 14 But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die.”
15 After Nathan had gone home, the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. 16 David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. 17 The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.
18 On the seventh day the child died. David’s attendants were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they thought, “While the child was still living, he wouldn’t listen to us when we spoke to him. How can we now tell him the child is dead? He may do something desperate.”
19 David noticed that his attendants were whispering among themselves, and he realized the child was dead. “Is the child dead?” he asked.
“Yes,” they replied, “he is dead.”
20 Then David got up from the ground. After he had washed, put on lotions and changed his clothes, he went into the house of the LORD and worshiped. Then he went to his own house, and at his request they served him food, and he ate.
21 His attendants asked him, “Why are you acting this way? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept, but now that the child is dead, you get up and eat!”
22 He answered, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The LORD may be gracious to me and let the child live.’ 23 But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.”
What conclusions would a REASONABLE person make from reading this?
Did God "cover" David's sin?
No-
God exposed it before all of Israel,
made a permanent record of it in His Word,
David's House would have strife permanently,
and David's son would DROP DEAD.
Is that God "approving"? Is that God "covering?"
Oh, God said David HIMSELF won't be killed for this.
Would a REASONABLE person call that GOD being a "co-conspirator",
or would a reasonable person say that God meted out immediate AND
long-term consequences, and decided it was not necessary to kill
David in addition to everything else.
1 Sam 11:26,27 - and when the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she mourned for her husband. And when the mourning was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord.
Question 1. How much meaningful consent did Bathsheba have in this? Question 2. Did it matter that she didn't literally belong to the King?
1 Sam 12:13 - And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the Lord. And Nathan said unto David, the Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.
Does this make God a coconspirator?
1 Kings 15:5 - Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from anything that He commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.
Notice it says the matter of Uriah the Hittite, not Bathsheba. Didn't her life count for anything? Was it God's will for her to be forced to have sex with David? Was it God's will for her to later be forced to become David's wife? David made all that happen to HER, yet he turned not aside...etc.
Well, we know how well John's processing what he's reading. He's distorted the entire account,
and turned lifelong strife and a DEATH, and PUBLIC RIDICULE FOR CENTURIES
into "God covered", "God co-conspired".....
Meanwhile, we now see a pointless digression into speculation about Bathsheba.
"Didn't her life count for anything?"
It counted for a lot. But her only protest is "I'm pregnant."
We have nothing to indicate she's significantly troubled by having a young,
good-looking, popular, rich king want to have sex with her OR to make her
a Queen.
Did God force her to do anything? No.
Is there any reason we have to think she felt the victim in this?
There is nothing in God's Word to indicate so.
If it's given by GOD, then we'd expect He would include that when everything else is being said.
Anything about Bathsheba being "forced" into all this is all speaking where God was silent.
vpw himself said
"Where the Word of God remains silent, he who speaks is a fool."
He also would call it "private interpretation", which none of Scripture is given for.
Sorry John, but your attempt to fog the issue just exposes more deficiencies in your
understanding of Scripture. You're not even following vpw's own maxims for reading it.
As I said, the big gray area is that God is not obligated to reveal to us exactly how he metes out justice for every jot and tittle of anyone's life. I didn't say VP turned not aside...etc. I DID say he should have some consequencees. But we now live in the administration of grace. VP didn't have to pray "take not thy holy spirit from me" like David did.
You all may continue to misrepresent what I said and meant all you wish. I maintain that we all have eternal life, incorruptible seed, access to God, peace in our hearts (not as the world giveth), and an Advocate (comforter); Jesus Christ the righteous. None of your arguments has negated any of this.
WE haven't misrepresented YOU yet. There's been pages and pages of you painting caricatures
of what we've said, and you accusing us of doing what you were doing.
Do you really think you're fooling anyone besides yourself in all this?
I have really admired that you have not compared VP's situation with that of David. Seriously.
Okay.....Let's look at this account. You brought it up....let's examine it together and see what the differences are....maybe I can actually help you to understand these scriptures in a different light. We don't use the scriptures to rationalize sin....and I told you that not one rationalization you make is going to stand. That is because....there isn't one. The account of David and Bathsheba is not applicable here unless we twist these scriptures to make them mean something they do not.....and we really don't want to do that.
First of all this account is not held up as an example of how a follower of God should behave. While we are at it...why not use Peter's denial of the Lord as an excuse to deny him.
What David did....displeased the Lord. And it wasn't about Bathsheba OR Uriah.....it was about David sinning AGAINST THE LORD. All sin....no matter who it touches is against the Lord. That is the focus of this account. Not that God covered it or that God winked at it or that God let him get away with it. Maybe that starting point is helpful to see this account in a differing light.
David's sin here....actually effected seven generations. It was larger than you even understand.
Your focus is the people involved. The purpose of this account is to show the magnitude of sin.....sin is bad....it hurts people, but moreover...it displeases God.
David's sin displeased God....when David realized his sin....he had SORROW that he had sinned against God. He repented. He turned from sin all the days of his life. Which means he never did it again. It was only AFTER this that God forgave him.
Did you shut your bible after this....David paid a hefty price. His firstborn died...his kingdom was divided.... Absalom chased him for years trying to kill him. David hid from his own child.......he did NOT spend his days on a motor coach with young women AFTER he had repented.
What David did...legally demanded his death....does that sound like all the women belonged to him? David didn't attempt to rationalize or justify his sin before God. When he was confronted his repentance and admission of guilt was immediate, but God's forgiveness doesn't always remove the consequences of sin.....in this life. David paid and paid and paid.
So, no that does not make God a co conspirator...that makes God merciful in that he didn't take David's life. No where does it say God was covering for David while he was sinning.....or that he in anyway approved of David's actions....it says he was displeased...David deserved death....David had true Godly repentance....and God showed mercy. God is not required to show mercy. If you look at other accounts....people did die for their sins.
David's own son committed the same sin and did not live too long after that. No repentance. He didn't live to do it again.
You said God covered for VP as long as he could......when did he have true Godly repentance and stop sinning so that God forgave him. That is what God required of David. I ran into VP a year before he died. His eyes or I should say eye....was still full of lust.
Maybe the real problem here...why you cannot connect with what we are telling you is that you rely on this idea of dispensationalism a bit to heavily. God doesn't change. He still requires us to have true Godly repentance and turn from sin. There are still consequences of sin in this life. How you tell someone has made Jesus Lord in their life is their conversion. Transformation? Their recognition of sin in their lives and their turning from it. When was it that VP was converted?
When did his life NOT HIS WORDS ever reflect the Lordship of Jesus Christ? You tell me......
He was a corrupt tree that didn't bear good fruit.
VP drank like a fish. If you ever set up for one of his visits you know what was required don't you? A bean bag ashtray....a carton of kool shorties......a coffee cup.....drambuie.....and breath mints. Eyes full of adultery. Well, what is it you claim God covered for him? Insatiable for sin, seeking orgies, pornography, anger, twisting scripture, stealing others intellectual property, he was abusive, he blamed victims......he enticed unsteady souls......he was trained in greed. When VP came to town....do you know what he took with him. Great big paper bags FULL of money. They went on the motor coach and left with him. While we drove rust buckets...he drove Town Cars...and he took our money with him.
When did this stop?
I am starting to get really disgusted and a bit ticked off now....
You may confer sainthood on VP ...the scriptures say he is headed for a different judgment.
Thank-you WW for covering the questions about Bathsheba. Johniam's continual sexual references are disturbing. I tend to ignore them. I am glad you addressed them.
The other thing for johniam to begin to consider.....maybe....is Proverbs 31. What was it that Bathsheba went through in her life that brought her to the place where she is held up as the Virtuous Woman?
The account with David is on the opposite end of the scale to proverbs 31and although David's account does not tell us a great deal about her.......Proverbs 31 does.
She found great favor with God.........she was transformed. When we read that Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised. We can consider her experiences with David and Uriah and see that these words come from a place of deep understanding. From her life. Her sins.
She changed....she went from adultery to being virtuous. How? Because she was broken. From that broken place....look at the great things the Lord taught her and the honor given her. It wasn't done without her repentance or humility before God.
Yes, johniam.....the Lord cared deeply for Bathsheba and He took David's sin..... he didn't cover it up... He turned it for good.
quote: It counted for a lot. But her only protest is "I'm pregnant."
We have nothing to indicate she's significantly troubled by having a young,
good-looking, popular, rich king want to have sex with her OR to make her
a Queen.
He wasn't young; he was around 50. Just like VP. Even at the end of his life he had them find Abishag to "keep him warm".
quote:
Anything about Bathsheba being "forced" into all this is all speaking where God was silent.
vpw himself said
"Where the Word of God remains silent, he who speaks is a fool."
David requested her presence. She didn't. She really had a choice? BTW where does "God" speak and not be silent about all the things VP is accused of? Nice bit of selective reasoning on your part; especially when considering how you think it was wrong for me to mention that Jim Doop may have been involved in the same things. We'll see who's really being "fooled".
Why do we even bother comparing VPW to Biblical figures? There was nothing "Biblical" about him. We might as well compare him to famous lumberjacks or shoe salesmen.
Why do we even bother comparing VPW to Biblical figures? There was nothing "Biblical" about him. We might as well compare him to famous lumberjacks or shoe salesmen.
With all the yarns and tall-tales of wierwille.....how about Paul Bunyan?
Remember when vpw....with one swing of his axe cleared the Way Woods?
Why do we even bother comparing VPW to Biblical figures? There was nothing "Biblical" about him. We might as well compare him to famous lumberjacks or shoe salesmen.
What did some poor lumberjack or shoe salesman ever do to you to deserve being compared to VP? :)
The Apostle Paul called men like VP...servants of Satan.....he wasn't laying a charge at God's elect.....he was exposing false teachers who "fool" people. God speaks a great deal about what VP did. Scripture is not silent on the matter...... What have we been saying for the last 7 pages??? Hello....testing...one, two, three,...is this thing on?
And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
So, how is da victoid's "ministry" a safe harbor in all of this? Mighty vic Bunyon, who cleared da woods with one swing of his mighty axe..
thanks Skyrider..
so many legends of gweatness..
but how was it TANGIBLY a safe harbor? Or haven?
How many deaths, accidental or otherwise in this little sample of the surrounding population? Suicides? Rapes? Drug and excessive alcohol consumption? Dreadful diseases, that were not miraculously healed?
All of that in my way years was quietly swept under the rug- "that da ministry(?) be not blamed" was the usual reason. "Don't blame da way. It isn't da WORD'S fault.." oh no. can't happen here. *we* is better than *them*.
It would be an interesting study, to really see statistically how different the proportion of these kind of "negatives" occured in the way sample vs. the surrounding population. Or compared to other "ministries". Or denominations..
but like the financial books, st vic made that kind of information practically impossible for an ordinary follower to acquire.
Nice bit of selective reasoning on your part; especially when considering how you think it was wrong for me to mention that Jim Doop may have been involved in the same things. We'll see who's really being "fooled".
Selective reasoning, Johniam? I note your reasoning as being selective. For example, you ignore things you can't answer. I'm still waiting for a response on post #272 of this thread.
Again, "god covered" for Saint Vic. Which god? And if God covered for his wickedness all those years, why not cover for him a little more by healing his ocular cancer and melanoma?
According to the ministry, cancer is a devil's spirit, so why would God cover for someone full of devil's spirits? (A partial list of the devil's spirit's inhabiting Saint Vic is in post #272 of this thread)
"We'll see who's being fooled." Again, speaking from experience, until fairly recent in my history, I kept telling myself the same thing. I used to think everyone else had the wool pulled over their eyes. I can honestly say now, I was the one being fooled. I bought into Saint Vic's demented circus and took all his rickety rides. I now know I should have asked for a refund on my ticket.
I'm sure, however, Ringmaster Rivenbark isn't worried. After all P.T. Barnum said there was one born every minute.
You see Johniam. you may think we're all a joke. But I'm not concerned. You know why? I know something you don't. I know one day you'll be like us.
I Kings 15:5. "Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite."
quote: It counted for a lot. But her only protest is "I'm pregnant."
We have nothing to indicate she's significantly troubled by having a young,
good-looking, popular, rich king want to have sex with her OR to make her
a Queen.
He wasn't young; he was around 50. Just like VP. Even at the end of his life he had them find Abishag to "keep him warm".
A) The historical dates-and precise age-of David at different events has a disputed range.
"They happened between x and y." You somehow have a source that pins the age and year
down? Please supply it.
(This puts him over 50 and having kids like Solomon.)
B) Even IF David was older, it hardly negates my point- good-looking, popular, rich king.
C) It is a little disturbing to be discussing David in the Bible and for someone to keep
imagining we're discussing vpw. vpw was not named in the Bible. He was not around when any part
was written. He was not one of the heroes of the Bible. And yet some people can't talk about
them for a few minutes without trying to say vpw was like them or they were like vpw.
D) Likewise, David, again, was not like vpw. David committed ONE, count them, ONE, act of sin
against God. (I'm counting the entire affair where he stole another man's wife and had the man
killed as one event because the Bible counts it as one event.) For this, he suffered heavily,
and the consequences lasted hundreds of years. David repented his action, begged God's
forgiveness, and spent the next few DECADES on the straight and narrow.
We know this because God told us that EXCEPT for that, David walked the straight and narrow.
Read the Psalms. David's sorrow and regret were deep, and were followed by DECADES of
right action. None of it erased his sin, but-excepting the Bathsheba travesty-
he was neither a sex maniac, a rapist, a molester, etc.
You have accused him of being so from nothing more than a desire to see him like vpw in
some ways, excusing vpw for being like vpw.
You said
"Even at the end of his life he had them find Abishag to "keep him warm"."
So,
your claim is that David instructed his people to get him Abishag to go to bed with him.
(We know this is the kind of thing vpw would do- did Scripture say DAVID did it?)
I Kings 1:1-4. (KJV)
1Now king David was old and stricken in years; and they covered him with clothes, but he gat no heat.
2Wherefore his servants said unto him, Let there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin: and let her stand before the king, and let her cherish him, and let her lie in thy bosom, that my lord the king may get heat.
3So they sought for a fair damsel throughout all the coasts of Israel, and found Abishag a Shunammite, and brought her to the king.
4And the damsel was very fair, and cherished the king, and ministered to him: but the king knew her not.
I Kings 1:1-4 (NASB)
1Now King David was old, advanced in age; and they covered him with clothes, but he could not keep warm.
2So his servants said to him, "Let them seek a young virgin for my lord the king, and let her attend the king and become his nurse; and let her lie in your bosom, that my lord the king may keep warm."
3So they searched for a beautiful girl throughout all the territory of Israel, and found Abishag the Shunammite, and brought her to the king.
4The girl was very beautiful; and she became the king's nurse and served him, but the king did not cohabit with her.
1. The idea was that of the servants.
2. The entire proceeding was that of the servants.
3. David didn't try to have sex with this woman. This should not surprise people who already remembered
that David was properly married, and to have done so would have been a sin against God.
God told us that David straightened up and flew right after he recovered from his sins against God
concerning Bathsheba and Uriah.
4. The whole idea that David had sex with Abishag seems to be unique to vpw and those he taught.
I Kings 1:4 NIV. "The woman was very beautiful; she took care of the king and waited on him, but the king had no sexual relations with her."
I Kings 1:4 ESV. "The young woman was very beautiful, and she was of service to the king and attended to him, but the king knew her not."
CEV."They brought her to David, and she took care of him. But David did not have sex with her. "
ASV."And the damsel was very fair; and she cherished the king, and ministered to him; but the king knew her not. "
(etc, etc)
vpw-and those who he taught-seem to have this obsession with sex and seeing many Biblical
accounts allowing for more sex than a plain read would indicate.
(I've begun entire threads where we examined some other examples, and they proved to rely
purely on speculation and the word of vpw.)
So, again, vpw the sex felon (he was not charged, but he committed multiple acts of rape
and molestation, and each was a felony whether or not the police caught him)
was not David. vpw was not like David.
David was not like vpw. David committed a hideous sin and spent the rest of his life "clean",
not sinning, and performing right actions.
Now, let's get to the more formal smokescreen...
quote:
Anything about Bathsheba being "forced" into all this is all speaking where God was silent.
vpw himself said
"Where the Word of God remains silent, he who speaks is a fool."
David requested her presence. She didn't. She really had a choice?
John, if you actually gave a tinker's cuss for 20th and 21st century victims
of rape and molestation, you might actually convince us this is actual concern for
Bathsheba's well-being. But when you can actually reach accounts of living people
and actually communicate with them, the compassion is lacking.
As to Bathsheba herself, we only have what the Bible says and what the Bible does
not say.
Her only protest is "I'm pregnant." God knows whether she consented or did not
consent. There is nothing in Scripture to indicate she was coerced, or did not
consent. Therefore, anything along those lines is SPECULATION.
We have nothing to indicate she's significantly troubled by having a rich,
good-looking, popular king want to have sex with her OR to make her a Queen.
We do know that her child was killed as the result of sin. Now, if one ONLY
looked at that, what are the possibilities?
A) David's sin resulted in the death of Bathsheba's child- God required him as
punishment for David's sin, and Bathsheba was innocent. God robbed Bathsheba
of her child for something she was innocent of.
B) David AND BATHSHEBA'S SIN resulted in the death of Bathsheba's child-God
required him as punishment for the sin they BOTH committed. The other penalities
were levied on David because he had more responsibility.
If one is prepared to accept an unjust God, who punishes the righteous with the
wicked, the first possibility is acceptable. The rest of us consider it
senseless, illogical, and inconsistent with the rest of Scripture.
Is there any reason we have to think she felt the victim in this?
There is nothing in God's Word to indicate so.
If it's given by GOD, then we'd expect He would include that when everything else is being said.
Anything about Bathsheba being "forced" into all this is all speaking where God was silent.
vpw himself said
"Where the Word of God remains silent, he who speaks is a fool."
He also would call it "private interpretation", which none of Scripture is given for.
Sorry John, but your attempt to fog the issue just exposes more deficiencies in your
understanding of Scripture. You're not even following vpw's own maxims for reading it.
This is the second time I've refuted your claim from Scripture. If you still insist on
arguing against Scripture on this, I recommend you take it off of this thread.
You might look around and discover that you can actually learn something on this while
not looking among vpw and people he taught. (It's probably the only way to escape these
sex-centric teachings we were all subjected to.)
BTW where does "God" speak and not be silent about all the things VP is accused of?
Ok, now this is just being silly. vpw was not hanging around Israel when David was sinning
against God and against Uriah. So God didn't dedicate verses in I Kings to vpw and his sins.
vpw was not around Palestine during Paul's travels. There's a book of Philemon about Onesimus,
but not a book about vpw. We were told Alexander the coopersmith did much evil, there's no
such warning about vpw the sex maniac.
This is as logical as saying
"The Bible doesn't warn us about Jim Jones by name- therefore God didn't disapprove of his actions.
The Bible doesn't warn us about David Koresh by name-therefore God didn't disapprove of his actions."
And so on.
As I said, this is being silly.
As to the more general warnings, there's plenty of verses warning us of people like vpw
deceiving and hurting God's people. Geisha has been posting them for pages and pages.
The rest of us have actually noticed.
Nice bit of selective reasoning on your part; especially when considering how you think it was wrong for me to mention that Jim D00p may have been involved in the same things. We'll see who's really being "fooled".
"Mention?"
You passed along gossip that ONE PERSON said.
I can find ONE PERSON that says that "where vpw walked, the earth shook."
Even the weakest claims wait for TWO OR THREE WITNESSES, because God has always been well aware
that you can always find ONE nut to put forth the most outrageous claims.
I find it amusing, John, that you can confuse vpw's sins with David,
wonder why vpw's missing from the Bible,
and generally try to claim men of God are all sex maniacs to try to make
vpw look like a man of God rather than an evil man, a wicked man,
and a sex maniac......
And then say "We'll see who's really being 'fooled.'"
Nearly everyone can already see that and don't have to "wait".....
We have 1 Corinthians 5&6 2 Corinthians... Timothy, Titus, Jude, and 2nd Peter reading like VP's unauthorized biography.....first hand accounts of abuse and for the most part ...we all saw the drinking, smoking and heard the profanity.....most of the devious teachings have been explored.....and yet, some nameless/faceless WC guy tells johniam Jim Doop was a womanizer.....and we are to just believe it?
One of the greatest evangelists and servants to ever come along...Billy Graham...and johniam just blithely lays the charge of idolatry at his feet. Like it means nothing.....just rolls off his finger tips.
Yet, he defends a molester. Compares him to KING David.
As disgusting as his argument is, the logic amuses me. Or lack thereof.
the "dialog" goes something like this..
"vic was, and still resembles a turd"
"no, god covered for him. look at da blessings.."
"what blessings? what special protection?"
"just read the bible. you'll see it."
"what is *it*, that I am supposed to see?"
"well, all that counts is *I* got da word of gawd. gawd ordained vic, "covered" for him so *I* could get da word."
"what about the rapes, theft, plagiarism, alcohol, lack of control, breaking into violent outbursts, and sexual morals lower than a Guinea Pig he demonstrated?"
"no problem. If he's guilty, so is David, Solomon, etc.. and Dopp(????)"
so, in other words.. that justifies it all. One soul(?) gets redeemed by the greatness(?) of vic's(?) word and *ministry*(?)..
and that supposedly fixes everything? Or maybe justifies it?
well, I dare not allow any amount of self-righteous morals touch MY righteousnessssssss hiss.
Is that a close description of this dialogue?
I would look a tad bit closer to what he sold you that you regard as salvation..
you may think it is incorruptible and going to heaven, all hell not being able to stop it from going..
. . BTW where does "God" speak and not be silent about all the things VP is accused of? Nice bit of selective reasoning on your part; especially when considering how you think it was wrong for me to mention that Jim Doop may have been involved in the same things. We'll see who's really being "fooled".
Are you saying VPW was not a Wayfer? The evidence is clear he was with The Way . . . his pictures are up at HQ . . . there's pamphlets and his name is on the books . . .
. . . think about the type of people who associate with The Way . . . VPW must have been dangerous . . . else, what was he doing with that group?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
61
148
118
61
Popular Days
Feb 23
32
Feb 20
32
Feb 2
31
Feb 19
29
Top Posters In This Topic
johniam 61 posts
Ham 148 posts
waysider 118 posts
So_crates 61 posts
Popular Days
Feb 23 2011
32 posts
Feb 20 2011
32 posts
Feb 2 2011
31 posts
Feb 19 2011
29 posts
Popular Posts
Broken Arrow
I
WordWolf
Have I mentioned lately that I'm actually getting quite a bit out of this thread? I don't just mean in a sense of psychology/sociology/criminology, but in a sense of Christian learning. The whole p
T-Bone
morals are man-made? Really?!?! please provide some documentation to back up that philosophical assertion. personally i lean toward the christian idea [that does have a biblical basis] that man is m
skyrider
What about wierwille's teachings on......
.....the law of believing?
.....the fear in that mother killed her kid?
.....the word (pfal, etc) takes the place of the absent Christ?
.....the word is the ministry and the ministry (twi) is the word?
.....masturbation was the original sin?
.....cancer is a devil spirit?
Some of vp's plagairized work had truth in it.
Some of vp's own work was flat-out private interpretation.
Some of vp's sharings with corps were pornographic-related.
C'mon J-man........pfal was only an appetizer at Hannibal's table.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
I have really admired that you have not compared VP's situation with that of David. Seriously.
Okay.....Let's look at this account. You brought it up....let's examine it together and see what the differences are....maybe I can actually help you to understand these scriptures in a different light. We don't use the scriptures to rationalize sin....and I told you that not one rationalization you make is going to stand. That is because....there isn't one. The account of David and Bathsheba is not applicable here unless we twist these scriptures to make them mean something they do not.....and we really don't want to do that.
First of all this account is not held up as an example of how a follower of God should behave. While we are at it...why not use Peter's denial of the Lord as an excuse to deny him.
What David did....displeased the Lord. And it wasn't about Bathsheba OR Uriah.....it was about David sinning AGAINST THE LORD. All sin....no matter who it touches is against the Lord. That is the focus of this account. Not that God covered it or that God winked at it or that God let him get away with it. Maybe that starting point is helpful to see this account in a differing light.
David's sin here....actually effected seven generations. It was larger than you even understand.
Your focus is the people involved. The purpose of this account is to show the magnitude of sin.....sin is bad....it hurts people, but moreover...it displeases God.
David's sin displeased God....when David realized his sin....he had SORROW that he had sinned against God. He repented. He turned from sin all the days of his life. Which means he never did it again. It was only AFTER this that God forgave him.
Did you shut your bible after this....David paid a hefty price. His firstborn died...his kingdom was divided.... Absalom chased him for years trying to kill him. David hid from his own child.......he did NOT spend his days on a motor coach with young women AFTER he had repented.
What David did...legally demanded his death....does that sound like all the women belonged to him? David didn't attempt to rationalize or justify his sin before God. When he was confronted his repentance and admission of guilt was immediate, but God's forgiveness doesn't always remove the consequences of sin.....in this life. David paid and paid and paid.
So, no that does not make God a co conspirator...that makes God merciful in that he didn't take David's life. No where does it say God was covering for David while he was sinning.....or that he in anyway approved of David's actions....it says he was displeased...David deserved death....David had true Godly repentance....and God showed mercy. God is not required to show mercy. If you look at other accounts....people did die for their sins.
David's own son committed the same sin and did not live too long after that. No repentance. He didn't live to do it again.
You said God covered for VP as long as he could......when did he have true Godly repentance and stop sinning so that God forgave him. That is what God required of David. I ran into VP a year before he died. His eyes or I should say eye....was still full of lust.
Maybe the real problem here...why you cannot connect with what we are telling you is that you rely on this idea of dispensationalism a bit to heavily. God doesn't change. He still requires us to have true Godly repentance and turn from sin. There are still consequences of sin in this life. How you tell someone has made Jesus Lord in their life is their conversion. Transformation? Their recognition of sin in their lives and their turning from it. When was it that VP was converted?
When did his life NOT HIS WORDS ever reflect the Lordship of Jesus Christ? You tell me......
He was a corrupt tree that didn't bear good fruit.
VP drank like a fish. If you ever set up for one of his visits you know what was required don't you? A bean bag ashtray....a carton of kool shorties......a coffee cup.....drambuie.....and breath mints. Eyes full of adultery. Well, what is it you claim God covered for him? Insatiable for sin, seeking orgies, pornography, anger, twisting scripture, stealing others intellectual property, he was abusive, he blamed victims......he enticed unsteady souls......he was trained in greed. When VP came to town....do you know what he took with him. Great big paper bags FULL of money. They went on the motor coach and left with him. While we drove rust buckets...he drove Town Cars...and he took our money with him.
When did this stop?
I am starting to get really disgusted and a bit ticked off now....
You may confer sainthood on VP ...the scriptures say he is headed for a different judgment.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
NO.
First of all, if God covered for David, billions of Christians and Jews wouldn't know all about it
for thousands of years. It's even mentioned in Matthew.
Matthew 1:6b."David was the father of Solomon by Bathsheba who had been the wife of Uriah."
That's not "covering", that's shining a light on it centuries later.
And the Scriptures in Samuel and Kings go into a LOT more detail, which means we all know all
about it because God wanted us to know all about it. Is that "covering"?
No, that's EXPOSING.
II Samuel 11:2-5
2 One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, 3 and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, “She is Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite.” 4 Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (Now she was purifying herself from her monthly uncleanness.) Then she went back home. 5 The woman conceived and sent word to David, saying, “I am pregnant.”
David sinned. We don't need all the tawdry details. What we know is PLENTY.
David's sin ended with a CONSEQUENCE. Now Bathsheba was pregnant.
Who covered for all this, if anyone?
II Samuel 11:6-12
6 So David sent this word to Joab: “Send me Uriah the Hittite.” And Joab sent him to David. 7 When Uriah came to him, David asked him how Joab was, how the soldiers were and how the war was going. 8 Then David said to Uriah, “Go down to your house and wash your feet.” So Uriah left the palace, and a gift from the king was sent after him. 9 But Uriah slept at the entrance to the palace with all his master’s servants and did not go down to his house.
10 David was told, “Uriah did not go home.” So he asked Uriah, “Haven’t you just come from a military campaign? Why didn’t you go home?”
11 Uriah said to David, “The ark and Israel and Judah are staying in tents, and my commander Joab and my lord’s men are camped in the open country. How could I go to my house to eat and drink and make love to my wife? As surely as you live, I will not do such a thing!”
12 Then David said to him, “Stay here one more day, and tomorrow I will send you back.” So Uriah remained in Jerusalem that day and the next. 13 At David’s invitation, he ate and drank with him, and David made him drunk. But in the evening Uriah went out to sleep on his mat among his master’s servants; he did not go home.
DAVID covered for David. And it didn't work.
II Samuel 11:14-25.
14 In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. 15 In it he wrote, “Put Uriah out in front where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die.”
16 So while Joab had the city under siege, he put Uriah at a place where he knew the strongest defenders were. 17 When the men of the city came out and fought against Joab, some of the men in David’s army fell; moreover, Uriah the Hittite died.
18 Joab sent David a full account of the battle. 19 He instructed the messenger: “When you have finished giving the king this account of the battle, 20 the king’s anger may flare up, and he may ask you, ‘Why did you get so close to the city to fight? Didn’t you know they would shoot arrows from the wall? 21 Who killed Abimelek son of Jerub-Besheth? Didn’t a woman drop an upper millstone on him from the wall, so that he died in Thebez? Why did you get so close to the wall?’ If he asks you this, then say to him, ‘Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.’”
22 The messenger set out, and when he arrived he told David everything Joab had sent him to say. 23 The messenger said to David, “The men overpowered us and came out against us in the open, but we drove them back to the entrance of the city gate. 24 Then the archers shot arrows at your servants from the wall, and some of the king’s men died. Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.”
25 David told the messenger, “Say this to Joab: ‘Don’t let this upset you; the sword devours one as well as another. Press the attack against the city and destroy it.’ Say this to encourage Joab.”
DAVID covered for David- and he conspired to have an innocent man-Uriah- killed to cover David's sin.
II Samuel 11:26
26 When Uriah’s wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. 27 After the time of mourning was over, David had her brought to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing David had done displeased the LORD.
DAVID covered DAVID's tracks, and killed an innocent man to cover David's own sins.
The LORD disapproved of David's sin.
II Samuel 12:1-22
1 The LORD sent Nathan to David. When he came to him, he said, “There were two men in a certain town, one rich and the other poor. 2 The rich man had a very large number of sheep and cattle, 3 but the poor man had nothing except one little ewe lamb he had bought. He raised it, and it grew up with him and his children. It shared his food, drank from his cup and even slept in his arms. It was like a daughter to him.
4 “Now a traveler came to the rich man, but the rich man refrained from taking one of his own sheep or cattle to prepare a meal for the traveler who had come to him. Instead, he took the ewe lamb that belonged to the poor man and prepared it for the one who had come to him.”
5 David burned with anger against the man and said to Nathan, “As surely as the LORD lives, the man who did this must die! 6 He must pay for that lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and had no pity.”
7 Then Nathan said to David, “You are the man! This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. 8 I gave your master’s house to you, and your master’s wives into your arms. I gave you all Israel and Judah. And if all this had been too little, I would have given you even more. 9 Why did you despise the word of the LORD by doing what is evil in his eyes? You struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and took his wife to be your own. You killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. 10 Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own.’
11 “This is what the LORD says: ‘Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight. 12 You did it in secret, but I will do this thing in broad daylight before all Israel.’”
13 Then David said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the LORD.”
Nathan replied, “The LORD has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. 14 But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die.”
15 After Nathan had gone home, the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife had borne to David, and he became ill. 16 David pleaded with God for the child. He fasted and spent the nights lying in sackcloth on the ground. 17 The elders of his household stood beside him to get him up from the ground, but he refused, and he would not eat any food with them.
18 On the seventh day the child died. David’s attendants were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they thought, “While the child was still living, he wouldn’t listen to us when we spoke to him. How can we now tell him the child is dead? He may do something desperate.”
19 David noticed that his attendants were whispering among themselves, and he realized the child was dead. “Is the child dead?” he asked.
“Yes,” they replied, “he is dead.”
20 Then David got up from the ground. After he had washed, put on lotions and changed his clothes, he went into the house of the LORD and worshiped. Then he went to his own house, and at his request they served him food, and he ate.
21 His attendants asked him, “Why are you acting this way? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept, but now that the child is dead, you get up and eat!”
22 He answered, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The LORD may be gracious to me and let the child live.’ 23 But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.”
What conclusions would a REASONABLE person make from reading this?
Did God "cover" David's sin?
No-
God exposed it before all of Israel,
made a permanent record of it in His Word,
David's House would have strife permanently,
and David's son would DROP DEAD.
Is that God "approving"? Is that God "covering?"
Oh, God said David HIMSELF won't be killed for this.
Would a REASONABLE person call that GOD being a "co-conspirator",
or would a reasonable person say that God meted out immediate AND
long-term consequences, and decided it was not necessary to kill
David in addition to everything else.
Well, we know how well John's processing what he's reading. He's distorted the entire account,
and turned lifelong strife and a DEATH, and PUBLIC RIDICULE FOR CENTURIES
into "God covered", "God co-conspired".....
Meanwhile, we now see a pointless digression into speculation about Bathsheba.
"Didn't her life count for anything?"
It counted for a lot. But her only protest is "I'm pregnant."
We have nothing to indicate she's significantly troubled by having a young,
good-looking, popular, rich king want to have sex with her OR to make her
a Queen.
Did God force her to do anything? No.
Is there any reason we have to think she felt the victim in this?
There is nothing in God's Word to indicate so.
If it's given by GOD, then we'd expect He would include that when everything else is being said.
Anything about Bathsheba being "forced" into all this is all speaking where God was silent.
vpw himself said
"Where the Word of God remains silent, he who speaks is a fool."
He also would call it "private interpretation", which none of Scripture is given for.
Sorry John, but your attempt to fog the issue just exposes more deficiencies in your
understanding of Scripture. You're not even following vpw's own maxims for reading it.
WE haven't misrepresented YOU yet. There's been pages and pages of you painting caricatures
of what we've said, and you accusing us of doing what you were doing.
Do you really think you're fooling anyone besides yourself in all this?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Thank-you WW for covering the questions about Bathsheba. Johniam's continual sexual references are disturbing. I tend to ignore them. I am glad you addressed them.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other thing for johniam to begin to consider.....maybe....is Proverbs 31. What was it that Bathsheba went through in her life that brought her to the place where she is held up as the Virtuous Woman?
The account with David is on the opposite end of the scale to proverbs 31and although David's account does not tell us a great deal about her.......Proverbs 31 does.
She found great favor with God.........she was transformed. When we read that Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised. We can consider her experiences with David and Uriah and see that these words come from a place of deep understanding. From her life. Her sins.
She changed....she went from adultery to being virtuous. How? Because she was broken. From that broken place....look at the great things the Lord taught her and the honor given her. It wasn't done without her repentance or humility before God.
Yes, johniam.....the Lord cared deeply for Bathsheba and He took David's sin..... he didn't cover it up... He turned it for good.
That is what God does.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: It counted for a lot. But her only protest is "I'm pregnant."
We have nothing to indicate she's significantly troubled by having a young,
good-looking, popular, rich king want to have sex with her OR to make her
a Queen.
He wasn't young; he was around 50. Just like VP. Even at the end of his life he had them find Abishag to "keep him warm".
quote:
Anything about Bathsheba being "forced" into all this is all speaking where God was silent.
vpw himself said
"Where the Word of God remains silent, he who speaks is a fool."
David requested her presence. She didn't. She really had a choice? BTW where does "God" speak and not be silent about all the things VP is accused of? Nice bit of selective reasoning on your part; especially when considering how you think it was wrong for me to mention that Jim Doop may have been involved in the same things. We'll see who's really being "fooled".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Why do we even bother comparing VPW to Biblical figures? There was nothing "Biblical" about him. We might as well compare him to famous lumberjacks or shoe salesmen.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
With all the yarns and tall-tales of wierwille.....how about Paul Bunyan?
Remember when vpw....with one swing of his axe cleared the Way Woods?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
What did some poor lumberjack or shoe salesman ever do to you to deserve being compared to VP? :)
_______________________________________________________________________________
The Apostle Paul called men like VP...servants of Satan.....he wasn't laying a charge at God's elect.....he was exposing false teachers who "fool" people. God speaks a great deal about what VP did. Scripture is not silent on the matter...... What have we been saying for the last 7 pages??? Hello....testing...one, two, three,...is this thing on?
And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Then he and his bull "Babe" moved the Word Over the World! That's right, VP always had a lot of bull with him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
So, how is da victoid's "ministry" a safe harbor in all of this? Mighty vic Bunyon, who cleared da woods with one swing of his mighty axe..
thanks Skyrider..
so many legends of gweatness..
but how was it TANGIBLY a safe harbor? Or haven?
How many deaths, accidental or otherwise in this little sample of the surrounding population? Suicides? Rapes? Drug and excessive alcohol consumption? Dreadful diseases, that were not miraculously healed?
All of that in my way years was quietly swept under the rug- "that da ministry(?) be not blamed" was the usual reason. "Don't blame da way. It isn't da WORD'S fault.." oh no. can't happen here. *we* is better than *them*.
It would be an interesting study, to really see statistically how different the proportion of these kind of "negatives" occured in the way sample vs. the surrounding population. Or compared to other "ministries". Or denominations..
but like the financial books, st vic made that kind of information practically impossible for an ordinary follower to acquire.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
You remember the song, don't you?
...Six-foot three at his ankles high
...His feet on the ground, his head in the sky,
...Hey, Pauuuuuul, Hey Pauuuuuuul,
...Victor Paul Bunyan!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I'd dying here..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clPYfaTvHT0
SoCrates
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Selective reasoning, Johniam? I note your reasoning as being selective. For example, you ignore things you can't answer. I'm still waiting for a response on post #272 of this thread.
Again, "god covered" for Saint Vic. Which god? And if God covered for his wickedness all those years, why not cover for him a little more by healing his ocular cancer and melanoma?
According to the ministry, cancer is a devil's spirit, so why would God cover for someone full of devil's spirits? (A partial list of the devil's spirit's inhabiting Saint Vic is in post #272 of this thread)
"We'll see who's being fooled." Again, speaking from experience, until fairly recent in my history, I kept telling myself the same thing. I used to think everyone else had the wool pulled over their eyes. I can honestly say now, I was the one being fooled. I bought into Saint Vic's demented circus and took all his rickety rides. I now know I should have asked for a refund on my ticket.
I'm sure, however, Ringmaster Rivenbark isn't worried. After all P.T. Barnum said there was one born every minute.
You see Johniam. you may think we're all a joke. But I'm not concerned. You know why? I know something you don't. I know one day you'll be like us.
SoCrates
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
"interesting(?)" reasoning there though isn't it? "welll.. if *st* vic is guilty, so is the other guy.."
yeah, yeah.. it would be like a mobster on trial for his life..
"but your honor, ladies and gentlemen of da jury. Everybody else was robbing, killing, maiming and raping. What's da big deal?"
and it's based, not on fact,but an allusion to the possibility that a hippie in the sixties in San Francisco had sex with people..
you have to be kidding me..
so a hippie having some remote possibility of being identified as having sex with more than one partner..
the implication is that the victoid had some god given *ministry* ..?
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I Kings 15:5. "Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite."
A) The historical dates-and precise age-of David at different events has a disputed range.
"They happened between x and y." You somehow have a source that pins the age and year
down? Please supply it.
(This puts him over 50 and having kids like Solomon.)
B) Even IF David was older, it hardly negates my point- good-looking, popular, rich king.
C) It is a little disturbing to be discussing David in the Bible and for someone to keep
imagining we're discussing vpw. vpw was not named in the Bible. He was not around when any part
was written. He was not one of the heroes of the Bible. And yet some people can't talk about
them for a few minutes without trying to say vpw was like them or they were like vpw.
D) Likewise, David, again, was not like vpw. David committed ONE, count them, ONE, act of sin
against God. (I'm counting the entire affair where he stole another man's wife and had the man
killed as one event because the Bible counts it as one event.) For this, he suffered heavily,
and the consequences lasted hundreds of years. David repented his action, begged God's
forgiveness, and spent the next few DECADES on the straight and narrow.
We know this because God told us that EXCEPT for that, David walked the straight and narrow.
Read the Psalms. David's sorrow and regret were deep, and were followed by DECADES of
right action. None of it erased his sin, but-excepting the Bathsheba travesty-
he was neither a sex maniac, a rapist, a molester, etc.
You have accused him of being so from nothing more than a desire to see him like vpw in
some ways, excusing vpw for being like vpw.
You said
"Even at the end of his life he had them find Abishag to "keep him warm"."
So,
your claim is that David instructed his people to get him Abishag to go to bed with him.
(We know this is the kind of thing vpw would do- did Scripture say DAVID did it?)
I Kings 1:1-4. (KJV)
1Now king David was old and stricken in years; and they covered him with clothes, but he gat no heat.
2Wherefore his servants said unto him, Let there be sought for my lord the king a young virgin: and let her stand before the king, and let her cherish him, and let her lie in thy bosom, that my lord the king may get heat.
3So they sought for a fair damsel throughout all the coasts of Israel, and found Abishag a Shunammite, and brought her to the king.
4And the damsel was very fair, and cherished the king, and ministered to him: but the king knew her not.
I Kings 1:1-4 (NASB)
1Now King David was old, advanced in age; and they covered him with clothes, but he could not keep warm.
2So his servants said to him, "Let them seek a young virgin for my lord the king, and let her attend the king and become his nurse; and let her lie in your bosom, that my lord the king may keep warm."
3So they searched for a beautiful girl throughout all the territory of Israel, and found Abishag the Shunammite, and brought her to the king.
4The girl was very beautiful; and she became the king's nurse and served him, but the king did not cohabit with her.
1. The idea was that of the servants.
2. The entire proceeding was that of the servants.
3. David didn't try to have sex with this woman. This should not surprise people who already remembered
that David was properly married, and to have done so would have been a sin against God.
God told us that David straightened up and flew right after he recovered from his sins against God
concerning Bathsheba and Uriah.
4. The whole idea that David had sex with Abishag seems to be unique to vpw and those he taught.
I Kings 1:4 NIV. "The woman was very beautiful; she took care of the king and waited on him, but the king had no sexual relations with her."
I Kings 1:4 ESV. "The young woman was very beautiful, and she was of service to the king and attended to him, but the king knew her not."
CEV."They brought her to David, and she took care of him. But David did not have sex with her. "
ASV."And the damsel was very fair; and she cherished the king, and ministered to him; but the king knew her not. "
(etc, etc)
vpw-and those who he taught-seem to have this obsession with sex and seeing many Biblical
accounts allowing for more sex than a plain read would indicate.
(I've begun entire threads where we examined some other examples, and they proved to rely
purely on speculation and the word of vpw.)
So, again, vpw the sex felon (he was not charged, but he committed multiple acts of rape
and molestation, and each was a felony whether or not the police caught him)
was not David. vpw was not like David.
David was not like vpw. David committed a hideous sin and spent the rest of his life "clean",
not sinning, and performing right actions.
Now, let's get to the more formal smokescreen...
John, if you actually gave a tinker's cuss for 20th and 21st century victims
of rape and molestation, you might actually convince us this is actual concern for
Bathsheba's well-being. But when you can actually reach accounts of living people
and actually communicate with them, the compassion is lacking.
As to Bathsheba herself, we only have what the Bible says and what the Bible does
not say.
Her only protest is "I'm pregnant." God knows whether she consented or did not
consent. There is nothing in Scripture to indicate she was coerced, or did not
consent. Therefore, anything along those lines is SPECULATION.
We have nothing to indicate she's significantly troubled by having a rich,
good-looking, popular king want to have sex with her OR to make her a Queen.
We do know that her child was killed as the result of sin. Now, if one ONLY
looked at that, what are the possibilities?
A) David's sin resulted in the death of Bathsheba's child- God required him as
punishment for David's sin, and Bathsheba was innocent. God robbed Bathsheba
of her child for something she was innocent of.
B) David AND BATHSHEBA'S SIN resulted in the death of Bathsheba's child-God
required him as punishment for the sin they BOTH committed. The other penalities
were levied on David because he had more responsibility.
If one is prepared to accept an unjust God, who punishes the righteous with the
wicked, the first possibility is acceptable. The rest of us consider it
senseless, illogical, and inconsistent with the rest of Scripture.
Is there any reason we have to think she felt the victim in this?
There is nothing in God's Word to indicate so.
If it's given by GOD, then we'd expect He would include that when everything else is being said.
Anything about Bathsheba being "forced" into all this is all speaking where God was silent.
vpw himself said
"Where the Word of God remains silent, he who speaks is a fool."
He also would call it "private interpretation", which none of Scripture is given for.
Sorry John, but your attempt to fog the issue just exposes more deficiencies in your
understanding of Scripture. You're not even following vpw's own maxims for reading it.
This is the second time I've refuted your claim from Scripture. If you still insist on
arguing against Scripture on this, I recommend you take it off of this thread.
You might look around and discover that you can actually learn something on this while
not looking among vpw and people he taught. (It's probably the only way to escape these
sex-centric teachings we were all subjected to.)
Ok, now this is just being silly. vpw was not hanging around Israel when David was sinning
against God and against Uriah. So God didn't dedicate verses in I Kings to vpw and his sins.
vpw was not around Palestine during Paul's travels. There's a book of Philemon about Onesimus,
but not a book about vpw. We were told Alexander the coopersmith did much evil, there's no
such warning about vpw the sex maniac.
This is as logical as saying
"The Bible doesn't warn us about Jim Jones by name- therefore God didn't disapprove of his actions.
The Bible doesn't warn us about David Koresh by name-therefore God didn't disapprove of his actions."
And so on.
As I said, this is being silly.
As to the more general warnings, there's plenty of verses warning us of people like vpw
deceiving and hurting God's people. Geisha has been posting them for pages and pages.
The rest of us have actually noticed.
"Mention?"
You passed along gossip that ONE PERSON said.
I can find ONE PERSON that says that "where vpw walked, the earth shook."
Even the weakest claims wait for TWO OR THREE WITNESSES, because God has always been well aware
that you can always find ONE nut to put forth the most outrageous claims.
I find it amusing, John, that you can confuse vpw's sins with David,
wonder why vpw's missing from the Bible,
and generally try to claim men of God are all sex maniacs to try to make
vpw look like a man of God rather than an evil man, a wicked man,
and a sex maniac......
And then say "We'll see who's really being 'fooled.'"
Nearly everyone can already see that and don't have to "wait".....
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Maybe not Saint Vic, but you must admit Craigmeister slayed the believers with the jawbone of an a$$.
SoCrates
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
We have 1 Corinthians 5&6 2 Corinthians... Timothy, Titus, Jude, and 2nd Peter reading like VP's unauthorized biography.....first hand accounts of abuse and for the most part ...we all saw the drinking, smoking and heard the profanity.....most of the devious teachings have been explored.....and yet, some nameless/faceless WC guy tells johniam Jim Doop was a womanizer.....and we are to just believe it?
One of the greatest evangelists and servants to ever come along...Billy Graham...and johniam just blithely lays the charge of idolatry at his feet. Like it means nothing.....just rolls off his finger tips.
Yet, he defends a molester. Compares him to KING David.
I have to go now....my head may explode.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
As disgusting as his argument is, the logic amuses me. Or lack thereof.
the "dialog" goes something like this..
"vic was, and still resembles a turd"
"no, god covered for him. look at da blessings.."
"what blessings? what special protection?"
"just read the bible. you'll see it."
"what is *it*, that I am supposed to see?"
"well, all that counts is *I* got da word of gawd. gawd ordained vic, "covered" for him so *I* could get da word."
"what about the rapes, theft, plagiarism, alcohol, lack of control, breaking into violent outbursts, and sexual morals lower than a Guinea Pig he demonstrated?"
"no problem. If he's guilty, so is David, Solomon, etc.. and Dopp(????)"
so, in other words.. that justifies it all. One soul(?) gets redeemed by the greatness(?) of vic's(?) word and *ministry*(?)..
and that supposedly fixes everything? Or maybe justifies it?
well, I dare not allow any amount of self-righteous morals touch MY righteousnessssssss hiss.
Is that a close description of this dialogue?
I would look a tad bit closer to what he sold you that you regard as salvation..
you may think it is incorruptible and going to heaven, all hell not being able to stop it from going..
I'd take a closer look..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Are you saying VPW was not a Wayfer? The evidence is clear he was with The Way . . . his pictures are up at HQ . . . there's pamphlets and his name is on the books . . .
. . . think about the type of people who associate with The Way . . . VPW must have been dangerous . . . else, what was he doing with that group?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Then why doe Ecc. 9:18 say: Wisdom is better than weapons of war, but one sinner destroyeth much good?
SoCrates
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Actually, Johniam's argument narrows to:
SoCrates
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
:
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
?
Edited by Broken ArrowLink 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.