Martindale took Genesis 3:6 and "defined" virtually every word as having a primarily sexual meaning. A simple look at a concordance or any other research source showed that his definitions were wrong.
By the time he gets to the end of the verse he is convinced that the original sin of mankind was "in the sexual catagory", because of the "sexual imagry" in the verse (imagry that isn't there unless you make up your own definitions).
Since he has already defined homosexuality as the lowest form of degradation in the sexual catagory, then the original sin of mankind "must have been" homosexuality. Since Eve was (obviously) a woman, then she "must have" had lesbian sex with the devil, who had "come into concretion" as a beautiful woman. Adam's sin was that he did not speak up, but by his silence approved of Eve's sin.
There's more detail, but its not really necessary IMHO.
Thank you for the explanation -- I am interested in learning more. Every believer I ever asked to show me where it says in the bible that homosexuality is the lowest form of humans -- pointed me to Romans 1 and just said...."because God says." -- I'm not a homosexual, nor sticking up for it -- but can someone please tell me what I'm missing here?
quote: Since he has already defined homosexuality as the lowest form of degradation in the sexual catagory, then the original sin of mankind "must have been" homosexuality
Right. --> vpw defined the original sin as masturbation.
It is obvious that both of these characters were thinking, but with "brains" not located anywhere near the shoulders.
And WordWolf is right. There is no "hierarchy" to sin. One is as bad as another, since all are sin, and earn you death.
I never heard lcm teach this, but if I did, I would have to ask for "chapter and verse" documenting what he was saying/teaching.
There are many verses on other categories of sin besides Romans 1, and the homosexuality issue. (imho) if you intend to address the issue of sin, make it inclusive, and don't single out one above the other.
Well if Loy was right, at least we know it wasn't "Adam and Steve." :D-->
But when one is really determined to one can read all kinds of things in and the Bible has been used to support many prejudices.
One wonders how VP could possibly have missed this in the "five steps Satan used to deceive Eve" which he used to get ad nauseum in Piffle?
On wonder how none of the learned Jewish Rabbis who were responsible for the Talmud and the Midrash also failed to notice it.
For Loy to ask people if they could see it too is like the Hans Christian Anserson's story The Emperor's New Clothes. The people were afraid to be seen as fools because they could not see the gorgeous apparel the swindler claimed.
That's easy. Because he assembled the vast well-qualified research team at his disposal including ... uh ... uh ... hmmmm .... wait... (scratches head)
I don't know the facts enough -- but it doesn't seem to make sense. If all sins are equal -- how is homosexuality the lowest sin a person can go? I've never understood that.As for Eve being a lesbian -- sounds like a played out fantasy in martindale's eyes. (Why do you guys call him Loy?)
Oh Wolf of the Word, (another fine example that furry is better!) You are onto something that is well documented on the *net*. If I recall correctly there is a posting over on the Judas site of the well known WayDale court case that testimony of a threesome started the misrepresented *affair* that lead to WayDale and the case. I have also heard of a woman that *alleges* she was told directly she could either do him alone or in a threesome or get out! Evidently married big-foreheads were not her type as she took the *best* choice, number 3!
But, during the homo purges it was not that uncommon to hear references concerning women of beauty that could”have any man they wanted”, they always “hung out in groups together” and were lesbians! Could these have been women of beauty inside and out, whose *sin* was saying NO to the MOG??? In retrospect I lean towards this school of thought.
I've been reading about the Sumerian and Babylonian religions that are the precursors to Judaism and it's pretty interesting. Adam is Adapa, and created as the first man by the gods (I forgot if it was Enki or Enlil who created man in them) but Eve appears to be a modified version of the goddess Ananna. From my understanding, what she did was to bring Adapa to the place where the gods lived (think of Mt. Olympus for the greeks) and gave him the fruit of the tree of life, which is one of the ingredients that seperate the gods from man. This angered Anu and so Adapa was sent back to Earth, and Ananna was sent to the underworld as a punishment.
So, according to the stories that the biblical events were based on, it was not sexual at all, but rather that man had tried to become a god, sort of.
Martinpuke's ego led up to this doctrine I'm sure. When I was on staff I heard him say that the reason vpw's theory on man's origial sin didn't take off because it wasn't completely clear. After spending a few years listening to martinpuke at lunch every day, I know he likes the spotlight. I'm surprised he didn't call himself an apostle for shedding new light on this area of the Bible.....ok i'm gagging here.
Anyway, I never understood why veepee said masturbation was man's original sin, and then turns around later IN THE SAME CLASS and says masturbation is something we should do if we are single. I alway scratched my head on that one. But as a good little wayfer, I "held it in abeyance" until I became more spiritual...whatever.
When martinpuke let the grads see his foundational class, the response of people in my class on the eve being a lesbian thing was shocking to say the least. It raised all kinds of questions in my brain. It was confusing, and I never understood how he got to that answer. I know now: HE WAS/IS FULL OF ....!!!
I'm still waiting to hear the official explaination for the doctrinal descrepancy that I pointed out to my spouse a number of months ago. I reminded out to him that we had always been taught that spirit is spirit and flesh is flesh---this was taught in reference to the eroneous idea that God could have "had sex" with Mary in order for the conception of Christ to have occured. God is "Spirit", and cannot "have sex" with a human being, they said. But I pointed out that Angels are also spirit beings and that we were never taught that Angels and Man(kind) ever engaged in sexual relations. The Devil, of course, was once the "Head Angel in Charge".
There is supposedly some Christian sect or other that believes that Men and Angels (demons, actually) did indeed engage in sexual relations with one another, and even produced offspring. These liasons resulted in the race of men referred to in the Bible as, "Giants of the Earth".
However, The Way never taught any such thing. However, if they persist in promoting the Devil/Eve/Lesbian connection, they may need to present the concept as "new light", in order to make the Eve/Devil sexual encounter doctrine hold together somewhat better.
quote:There is supposedly some Christian sect or other that believes that Men and Angels (demons, actually) did indeed engage in sexual relations with one another, and even produced offspring. These liasons resulted in the race of men referred to in the Bible as, "Giants of the Earth".
This is taught by John Schoenheit of CES. Not sure if he taught it (or believed it) during his stint with TWI.
quote:There is supposedly some Christian sect or other that believes that Men and Angels (demons, actually) did indeed engage in sexual relations with one another, and even produced offspring. These liasons resulted in the race of men referred to in the Bible as, "Giants of the Earth".
Wasn't this also a belief of Bullenger? I thought I had read this in one of his appendices in the Companion Bible.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
9
5
6
4
Popular Days
Jun 14
26
Nov 3
10
Jun 15
9
Jun 16
5
Top Posters In This Topic
WordWolf 9 posts
Oakspear 5 posts
JustThinking 6 posts
Nottawayfer 4 posts
Popular Days
Jun 14 2004
26 posts
Nov 3 2005
10 posts
Jun 15 2004
9 posts
Jun 16 2004
5 posts
Posted Images
Oakspear
Hooner:
Martindale took Genesis 3:6 and "defined" virtually every word as having a primarily sexual meaning. A simple look at a concordance or any other research source showed that his definitions were wrong.
By the time he gets to the end of the verse he is convinced that the original sin of mankind was "in the sexual catagory", because of the "sexual imagry" in the verse (imagry that isn't there unless you make up your own definitions).
Since he has already defined homosexuality as the lowest form of degradation in the sexual catagory, then the original sin of mankind "must have been" homosexuality. Since Eve was (obviously) a woman, then she "must have" had lesbian sex with the devil, who had "come into concretion" as a beautiful woman. Adam's sin was that he did not speak up, but by his silence approved of Eve's sin.
There's more detail, but its not really necessary IMHO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hooner
Oakspear:
Thank you for the explanation -- I am interested in learning more. Every believer I ever asked to show me where it says in the bible that homosexuality is the lowest form of humans -- pointed me to Romans 1 and just said...."because God says." -- I'm not a homosexual, nor sticking up for it -- but can someone please tell me what I'm missing here?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Sheesh.
Sin is sin.
I'm not sticking up for any category of sin, but I'm not shoving myself in
anyone's face for it, either. They know where to find me it they want my
opinion or my help.
lcm, in particular, grew obsessed with homosexuality. It's possibly because he
thought of himself as a dumb jock. (Not so much an athlete as a stereotype of
an athlete.) So, that included full-blown hatred, intolerance and crude jokes
(as well as parents saying their kids learned to curse from listening to lcm),
as well as tirades on it. Eventually, lcm tied just about every evil in mankind
to homosexuality, and slapped labels on everyone who disagreed with him as a
"homo or homo sympathizer", and he kept seeing "homos" lurking around every
corner. (One might wonder what fueled this obsession...)
lcm condemned THIS sin of lust roundly, but was perfectly fine with his OWN sins
of lust-he cheated on his wife, and used some members ("followers") for his
own gratification. Nice double-standard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Right.
--> vpw defined the original sin as masturbation.
It is obvious that both of these characters were thinking, but with "brains" not located anywhere near the shoulders.
Nuff said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Originally posted by WordWolf --
And WordWolf is right. There is no "hierarchy" to sin. One is as bad as another, since all are sin, and earn you death.
I never heard lcm teach this, but if I did, I would have to ask for "chapter and verse" documenting what he was saying/teaching.
There are many verses on other categories of sin besides Romans 1, and the homosexuality issue. (imho) if you intend to address the issue of sin, make it inclusive, and don't single out one above the other.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
You could say the same if he quoted Romans 10:9. So what?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Well if Loy was right, at least we know it wasn't "Adam and Steve."
:D-->
But when one is really determined to one can read all kinds of things in and the Bible has been used to support many prejudices.
One wonders how VP could possibly have missed this in the "five steps Satan used to deceive Eve" which he used to get ad nauseum in Piffle?
On wonder how none of the learned Jewish Rabbis who were responsible for the Talmud and the Midrash also failed to notice it.
For Loy to ask people if they could see it too is like the Hans Christian Anserson's story The Emperor's New Clothes. The people were afraid to be seen as fools because they could not see the gorgeous apparel the swindler claimed.
And a great song by Danny Kaye!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Trefor,
That's easy. Because he assembled the vast well-qualified research team at his disposal including ... uh ... uh ... hmmmm .... wait... (scratches head)
Ok, never mind. He made it up. ;-)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hooner
I don't know the facts enough -- but it doesn't seem to make sense. If all sins are equal -- how is homosexuality the lowest sin a person can go? I've never understood that.As for Eve being a lesbian -- sounds like a played out fantasy in martindale's eyes. (Why do you guys call him Loy?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Hooner,
Martindale's first name is Loy. He went by his middle name, Craig.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
With Craig being the big star of stage and screen that he was... (ok, I'm trying to keep a straight face) ... perhaps he meant to say "thespian?"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I suspect this played out one of lcm's little fantasies, also.
I can't PROVE it because I never overheard him say he was into 3-somes or
watching women or whatever.
(Perhaps someone else here, or several someones, HAVE heard this.)
I can speculate, based on his ultra-macho jock image that he strove to maintain.
(Anybody here see him exercise daily when he was on the twi dole?)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
Oh Wolf of the Word, (another fine example that furry is better!) You are onto something that is well documented on the *net*. If I recall correctly there is a posting over on the Judas site of the well known WayDale court case that testimony of a threesome started the misrepresented *affair* that lead to WayDale and the case. I have also heard of a woman that *alleges* she was told directly she could either do him alone or in a threesome or get out! Evidently married big-foreheads were not her type as she took the *best* choice, number 3!
But, during the homo purges it was not that uncommon to hear references concerning women of beauty that could”have any man they wanted”, they always “hung out in groups together” and were lesbians! Could these have been women of beauty inside and out, whose *sin* was saying NO to the MOG??? In retrospect I lean towards this school of thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mister P-Mosh
I've been reading about the Sumerian and Babylonian religions that are the precursors to Judaism and it's pretty interesting. Adam is Adapa, and created as the first man by the gods (I forgot if it was Enki or Enlil who created man in them) but Eve appears to be a modified version of the goddess Ananna. From my understanding, what she did was to bring Adapa to the place where the gods lived (think of Mt. Olympus for the greeks) and gave him the fruit of the tree of life, which is one of the ingredients that seperate the gods from man. This angered Anu and so Adapa was sent back to Earth, and Ananna was sent to the underworld as a punishment.
So, according to the stories that the biblical events were based on, it was not sexual at all, but rather that man had tried to become a god, sort of.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Hm.
That would be SO typical, wouldn't it?
As well as fit in with the zero-sensitivity for which he's famed.
Who ISN'T familiar with the famous rejoinder?
Guy goes up to a chick in a bar or someplace,
makes a crude suggestion or proposition,
and receives her drink in his face (or her right hook.)
When he returns to the knot of guys laughing hysterically at him,
he "explains" that she was not interested in him, because
she was a lesbian.
After all, what other POSSIBLE explanation could there be for her to
refuse Tony Testosterone, stud that he is?
This "explanation" was originally made famous in Aesop's Fable of the
Fox and the "sour grapes"...the fox announced they were sour right after
he realized he couldn't reach them...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sadie
Looking forward to seeing God's take on this teaching. Maybe they can explain their teaching to him better than they did to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
Martinpuke's ego led up to this doctrine I'm sure. When I was on staff I heard him say that the reason vpw's theory on man's origial sin didn't take off because it wasn't completely clear. After spending a few years listening to martinpuke at lunch every day, I know he likes the spotlight. I'm surprised he didn't call himself an apostle for shedding new light on this area of the Bible.....ok i'm gagging here.
Anyway, I never understood why veepee said masturbation was man's original sin, and then turns around later IN THE SAME CLASS and says masturbation is something we should do if we are single. I alway scratched my head on that one. But as a good little wayfer, I "held it in abeyance" until I became more spiritual...whatever.
When martinpuke let the grads see his foundational class, the response of people in my class on the eve being a lesbian thing was shocking to say the least. It raised all kinds of questions in my brain. It was confusing, and I never understood how he got to that answer. I know now: HE WAS/IS FULL OF ....!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cherished Child
I'm still waiting to hear the official explaination for the doctrinal descrepancy that I pointed out to my spouse a number of months ago. I reminded out to him that we had always been taught that spirit is spirit and flesh is flesh---this was taught in reference to the eroneous idea that God could have "had sex" with Mary in order for the conception of Christ to have occured. God is "Spirit", and cannot "have sex" with a human being, they said. But I pointed out that Angels are also spirit beings and that we were never taught that Angels and Man(kind) ever engaged in sexual relations. The Devil, of course, was once the "Head Angel in Charge".
There is supposedly some Christian sect or other that believes that Men and Angels (demons, actually) did indeed engage in sexual relations with one another, and even produced offspring. These liasons resulted in the race of men referred to in the Bible as, "Giants of the Earth".
However, The Way never taught any such thing. However, if they persist in promoting the Devil/Eve/Lesbian connection, they may need to present the concept as "new light", in order to make the Eve/Devil sexual encounter doctrine hold together somewhat better.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trefor Heywood
Just another quick thought:
If Loy thought that homosexuality was the lowest thing you could do sexually then he must have had a higher opinion of bestiality.
I will avoid references to Hamsters and Sellotape!
;)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Trefor,
I guess murder and pedophilia are better too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Cherished Child
This is taught by John Schoenheit of CES. Not sure if he taught it (or believed it) during his stint with TWI.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kevlar2000
Wasn't this also a belief of Bullenger? I thought I had read this in one of his appendices in the Companion Bible.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Yes Kevlar, Bullinger did believe it. Recently there was a thread on demonology that talked about this as well.
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.