I could use another one of your anphibious historical specialties, about a question that I have always had.
ITim 3:2 A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife , etc.
Do you know if in Greek culture polygamy was common pratice? Did the Greek's of which this scripture pertains have marital law?
Sky4it - This is a fascinating question which I'll have to explore further than is possible at the moment. Offhand: polygamy was a practice of the peoples of the so-called "Bible Lands", yes? At least so far as the kings and the well-to-do are concerned.
King Solomon was reputed to have over 700 wives,
and King Herod the Great 10 wives (9 at one time). To what extent it was a practice amongst the common folk, I don't know offhand. I suspect much had to with one's economic situation.
As to Greek culture ( or "Roman") it would be interesting to see what issues regarding marriage were circulating around the time the Pastoral epistles were penned. This becomes quite illuminating when considering the social debates and controversies that went on in Roman society concerning notions of masculinity (i.e, cf. "The Satires of Juvenal", satire II) of which the seeming homophobic section of Rom.1:19ff is an obvious product.
quote:I will probably not spend much time reading or answering a bunch of posts, but will give you my email address (jalces@aol.com) and home (317-849-5707) and office (317-255-6189) phone numbers in case you really want to communicate with me. I'm not much for communicating with those unwilling to identify themselves, although I have often done so when I felt it would serve them. I prefer the personal touch of the phone over email, so as to better experience one another's hearts.
Too many "I's" for my liking.
I think I spent more time in JAL's office than I ever did on Top Floor Wierwille.
I think JAL pretty much shook his head in disbelief when he met me. I was shoowed off campus pretty quick!
Well Raf, it`s a good thing you love me in SPITE of myself...lol thanks :-).
I guess I am still smarting from John Lynns disparaging remarks made about those of us who participate on exway sites.....he doesn`t seem to recognise God`s work or healing from any other source than twi/ces ...because we here at grease spot don`t fit in his formula...our healing and blessings aren`t genuine...we appear to be unimportant....certainly not of value enough to actually read or respond to our posts....sheeshe..............
Like I said....he doesn`t HAVE to be here....but don`t post once, never bother to check back and read our responses....and try to indicate that you give a damn...
Genuine caring imo, involves an investment of time and emotion.... .
There are REAL people behind these *posts* that he can`t be bothered to take the time to read.......fine no problem...no complaints....Go do your own thing...God`s speed....but don`t think for a miniute you have done anybody any favors by a single post....and then not even granting us the respect of carefully reading and considering our responses....THAT is what you do if you respect or care for an individual....Shoot, we here have afforded HIM that courtesy.........
Don't overwork yourself on my account Dan. I have always wondered how to apply that scripture, and when you offered an answer on my original post, it got me thinking historically about how that might offer an explanation. Babtists , of course, take the narrow view that any divorced person should hold no position in the church. If polygomy was common practice at the time, one could probably rule out that view. It really doesnt make any difference to me, I am niether a leader in a church niether have I ever been divorced. While the Babtist view would certainly seem constraining, it certainly would have helped if it was applied at a Assemblies church where i once attended, when a formerly divorced Pastor committed fornication and the whole stinkin place fell apart.
At any rate, I thought it an interesting topic. :)-->
quote:I will probably not spend much time reading or answering a bunch of posts, but will give you my email address (jalces@aol.com) and home (317-849-5707) and office (317-255-6189) phone numbers in case you really want to communicate with me. I'm not much for communicating with those unwilling to identify themselves, although I have often done so when I felt it would serve them. I prefer the personal touch of the phone over email, so as to better experience one another's hearts.
I really didnt like (Galen's A CES member?) remarks to me. (It reminds me of the same tactics of other groups, you = devil me = saint) Accusing me of projecting anger fear and hatred. Certainly I will admit I could have used a few less adjectives, but that also makes you look less concerned about the topic than you really are. So then what happens? You get ignored.
Why is it Raf, that when you disagree in principle with the obvious, that you get accused of degrading remarks (anger fear and hatred) in bountiful excess far greater than what you intended?
Why does the paranoia (for lack of a better word) run so deep?
"Generally, when one cannot see the great good that is being accomplished here, or underestimates the value of participation....it is because they are still completely blinded by adherance to the doctrines of a man who participated in and promoted viley evil practices...may I offer your exway friends some q tips and lens cleaner in order to apreciate the beauty to be enjoyed here Galen?"
I certainly see beauty here, what I also see is people giving this poor man a load a greif for his beleifs.
"Rascal it is what happenes to someone that is still hung up on pfal. they show their kind of love not Gods."
I see, G-d would not want us to be loving to one another?
G-d would not want us to give this guy a chance to explain what he does, Without ridicule?
I was not aware that G-d ridicules his faithful followers so much, could you please, Dannny give us an example of where G-d ridicules a follower as a sign of love.
"I really didnt like (Galen's A CES member?) remarks to me."
No I am not a member of CES.
"(It reminds me of the same tactics of other groups, you = devil me = saint)"
I did not do that either.
"Accusing me of projecting anger fear and hatred."
It did certainly sound that way, from giving JAL such greif for poking his head into GS.
". . .Certainly I will admit I could have used a few less adjectives, but that also makes you look less concerned about the topic than you really are."
Thank you.
"Why is it Raf, that when you disagree in principle with the obvious, that you get accused of degrading remarks (anger fear and hatred) in bountiful excess far greater than what you intended?
Why does the paranoia (for lack of a better word) run so deep?"
Perhaps it has to do with the degrading way in which you do it.
You called us a cess pool here Galen....that does not denote beauty or respect....
I do not intend to offer grief to John Lynn...however, neither will I accept his one time drive by post as an indication of him giving a damn about his brothers and sisters here.......as it is ...he is much to busy to be bothered with the likes of us....like I said nooo problem....but don`t break your arm patting yourself on the back thinking that you have done us any favors.
Its been years and years since I got in any doctrinal disputes with one exception. I did jump the local Lutheran pastor for not telling others not to gossip and giving the local adulters front row seats. He didnt seem to take it personally tho, I think he had bigger fish to fry.
I think you have to seperate the arguement from the person. The fish swims both ways Galen. I thought the remark was rather demeaning to the centuries of Christians who trusted in Christ. Therefore I really dont percieve my remarks as degrading.
I do think that doctrinal disputes can always end with hard feelings. I told MJ and Satori that I thought they maybe outta chill a little. With respect to the future, I agree that things should be on a more positive note and I will pray for John and CES. OK?
I was not aware that G-d ridicules his faithful followers so much, could you please, Dannny give us an example of where G-d ridicules a follower as a sign of love.
After reading John Lynn's opening post, did anyone really expect that he would actually entertain dialog here at GS?
It seems pretty clear to me that he will only entertain dialog on his terms.
I would be surprised if he showed back up here with anything more than a canned response that does not specifically address any of the qestions/comments in this thread. But hey, I could be wrong.
If I were John Lynn, I would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was a mistake to post here at Greasepot. I would know that there is absolutely nothing I could ever say that could justify my existence or my work in the eyes of most posters. I would realize what an incredible waste of time it would be to even try.
Oh course, if he'd been paying attention, he'd have realized that the ranks of glassy-eyed, fawning, a$$-kissing, star-struck lackies was in short supply as well.
Which would be closer to my guess as to why he isn't spending an excessive amount of time here.
Of course he does have his "work" to do. Hooo, boy, all that heavy lifting really takes it out of a guy...
Cherished child, absolutely, I agree with you... he WOULD see us as such ...
We don`t fit into the prescribed formula anymore... therefor, are deemed worthless and dismissable....Not complaining mind you, apparently there are many exway that feel that way ;-).....lol.. I am just thankfull that God doesn`t view us as a waste of time.
"If I were John Lynn, I would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was a mistake to post here at Greasepot. I would know that there is absolutely nothing I could ever say that could justify my existence or my work in the eyes of most posters. I would realize what an incredible waste of time it would be to even try."
True.
Since returning stateside, we have spoken with a number of friends and it has amazed me that even though most do not fellowship together anymore, their response regarding GS is exactly what you have said above.
Too many angry bitter people.
I would have to imagine that a few [including JEFF] have been urging JAL to get envolved with GS, and that he eventually was convinced that there might be some small usefullness and agreed to though on a limited basis. After the initial responses he got, I would very much doubt whether he will return. I dont blame him.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
28
25
23
19
Popular Days
Jul 30
50
Aug 10
37
Sep 9
30
Jul 31
28
Top Posters In This Topic
sky4it 28 posts
oldiesman 25 posts
satori001 23 posts
TheSongRemainsTheSame 19 posts
Popular Days
Jul 30 2004
50 posts
Aug 10 2004
37 posts
Sep 9 2004
30 posts
Jul 31 2004
28 posts
sky4it
Invisible Dan:
I could use another one of your anphibious historical specialties, about a question that I have always had.
ITim 3:2 A bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife , etc.
Do you know if in Greek culture polygamy was common pratice? Did the Greek's of which this scripture pertains have marital law?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Sky4it - This is a fascinating question which I'll have to explore further than is possible at the moment. Offhand: polygamy was a practice of the peoples of the so-called "Bible Lands", yes? At least so far as the kings and the well-to-do are concerned.
King Solomon was reputed to have over 700 wives,
and King Herod the Great 10 wives (9 at one time). To what extent it was a practice amongst the common folk, I don't know offhand. I suspect much had to with one's economic situation.
As to Greek culture ( or "Roman") it would be interesting to see what issues regarding marriage were circulating around the time the Pastoral epistles were penned. This becomes quite illuminating when considering the social debates and controversies that went on in Roman society concerning notions of masculinity (i.e, cf. "The Satires of Juvenal", satire II) of which the seeming homophobic section of Rom.1:19ff is an obvious product.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
A la prochaine
Too many "I's" for my liking.
I think I spent more time in JAL's office than I ever did on Top Floor Wierwille.
I think JAL pretty much shook his head in disbelief when he met me. I was shoowed off campus pretty quick!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Well Raf, it`s a good thing you love me in SPITE of myself...lol thanks :-).
I guess I am still smarting from John Lynns disparaging remarks made about those of us who participate on exway sites.....he doesn`t seem to recognise God`s work or healing from any other source than twi/ces ...because we here at grease spot don`t fit in his formula...our healing and blessings aren`t genuine...we appear to be unimportant....certainly not of value enough to actually read or respond to our posts....sheeshe..............
Like I said....he doesn`t HAVE to be here....but don`t post once, never bother to check back and read our responses....and try to indicate that you give a damn...
Genuine caring imo, involves an investment of time and emotion.... .
There are REAL people behind these *posts* that he can`t be bothered to take the time to read.......fine no problem...no complaints....Go do your own thing...God`s speed....but don`t think for a miniute you have done anybody any favors by a single post....and then not even granting us the respect of carefully reading and considering our responses....THAT is what you do if you respect or care for an individual....Shoot, we here have afforded HIM that courtesy.........
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Invisible Dan:
Don't overwork yourself on my account Dan. I have always wondered how to apply that scripture, and when you offered an answer on my original post, it got me thinking historically about how that might offer an explanation. Babtists , of course, take the narrow view that any divorced person should hold no position in the church. If polygomy was common practice at the time, one could probably rule out that view. It really doesnt make any difference to me, I am niether a leader in a church niether have I ever been divorced. While the Babtist view would certainly seem constraining, it certainly would have helped if it was applied at a Assemblies church where i once attended, when a formerly divorced Pastor committed fornication and the whole stinkin place fell apart.
At any rate, I thought it an interesting topic.
:)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Better?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Raf:
I really didnt like (Galen's A CES member?) remarks to me. (It reminds me of the same tactics of other groups, you = devil me = saint) Accusing me of projecting anger fear and hatred. Certainly I will admit I could have used a few less adjectives, but that also makes you look less concerned about the topic than you really are. So then what happens? You get ignored.
Why is it Raf, that when you disagree in principle with the obvious, that you get accused of degrading remarks (anger fear and hatred) in bountiful excess far greater than what you intended?
Why does the paranoia (for lack of a better word) run so deep?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pjroberge
Have any momentus grads posted on this thread? Perhaps JAL only responds to his own "kind" of Christian....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
rascal:
"Generally, when one cannot see the great good that is being accomplished here, or underestimates the value of participation....it is because they are still completely blinded by adherance to the doctrines of a man who participated in and promoted viley evil practices...may I offer your exway friends some q tips and lens cleaner in order to apreciate the beauty to be enjoyed here Galen?"
I certainly see beauty here, what I also see is people giving this poor man a load a greif for his beleifs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Danny:
"Rascal it is what happenes to someone that is still hung up on pfal. they show their kind of love not Gods."
I see, G-d would not want us to be loving to one another?
G-d would not want us to give this guy a chance to explain what he does, Without ridicule?
I was not aware that G-d ridicules his faithful followers so much, could you please, Dannny give us an example of where G-d ridicules a follower as a sign of love.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
sky4it:
"I really didnt like (Galen's A CES member?) remarks to me."
No I am not a member of CES.
"(It reminds me of the same tactics of other groups, you = devil me = saint)"
I did not do that either.
"Accusing me of projecting anger fear and hatred."
It did certainly sound that way, from giving JAL such greif for poking his head into GS.
". . .Certainly I will admit I could have used a few less adjectives, but that also makes you look less concerned about the topic than you really are."
Thank you.
"Why is it Raf, that when you disagree in principle with the obvious, that you get accused of degrading remarks (anger fear and hatred) in bountiful excess far greater than what you intended?
Why does the paranoia (for lack of a better word) run so deep?"
Perhaps it has to do with the degrading way in which you do it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Galen:
All critizism is not bad critisism.
All critizism is not ridicule.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
You called us a cess pool here Galen....that does not denote beauty or respect....
I do not intend to offer grief to John Lynn...however, neither will I accept his one time drive by post as an indication of him giving a damn about his brothers and sisters here.......as it is ...he is much to busy to be bothered with the likes of us....like I said nooo problem....but don`t break your arm patting yourself on the back thinking that you have done us any favors.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Galen:
Its been years and years since I got in any doctrinal disputes with one exception. I did jump the local Lutheran pastor for not telling others not to gossip and giving the local adulters front row seats. He didnt seem to take it personally tho, I think he had bigger fish to fry.
I think you have to seperate the arguement from the person. The fish swims both ways Galen. I thought the remark was rather demeaning to the centuries of Christians who trusted in Christ. Therefore I really dont percieve my remarks as degrading.
I do think that doctrinal disputes can always end with hard feelings. I told MJ and Satori that I thought they maybe outta chill a little. With respect to the future, I agree that things should be on a more positive note and I will pray for John and CES. OK?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Danny
Galen perhaps you are te one with the mioptic view.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sky4it
Galen:
your comment:
I was not aware that G-d ridicules his faithful followers so much, could you please, Dannny give us an example of where G-d ridicules a follower as a sign of love.
answer: Baalim (son of Besor) i forget
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
After reading John Lynn's opening post, did anyone really expect that he would actually entertain dialog here at GS?
It seems pretty clear to me that he will only entertain dialog on his terms.
I would be surprised if he showed back up here with anything more than a canned response that does not specifically address any of the qestions/comments in this thread. But hey, I could be wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alfakat
Goey-- if I was a bettin' man, my money would be ridin' on a JAL return--no show...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cherished Child
If I were John Lynn, I would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was a mistake to post here at Greasepot. I would know that there is absolutely nothing I could ever say that could justify my existence or my work in the eyes of most posters. I would realize what an incredible waste of time it would be to even try.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TOMMYZ
Well John, if you do check in again, I'd just like to say "Hi". I'm that former New Yorker who sent you the stuff on Servetus back in the early 90's.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Oh course, if he'd been paying attention, he'd have realized that the ranks of glassy-eyed, fawning, a$$-kissing, star-struck lackies was in short supply as well.
Which would be closer to my guess as to why he isn't spending an excessive amount of time here.
Of course he does have his "work" to do. Hooo, boy, all that heavy lifting really takes it out of a guy...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Cherished child, absolutely, I agree with you... he WOULD see us as such ...
We don`t fit into the prescribed formula anymore... therefor, are deemed worthless and dismissable....Not complaining mind you, apparently there are many exway that feel that way ;-).....lol.. I am just thankfull that God doesn`t view us as a waste of time.
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
Cherished Child:
"If I were John Lynn, I would know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was a mistake to post here at Greasepot. I would know that there is absolutely nothing I could ever say that could justify my existence or my work in the eyes of most posters. I would realize what an incredible waste of time it would be to even try."
True.
Since returning stateside, we have spoken with a number of friends and it has amazed me that even though most do not fellowship together anymore, their response regarding GS is exactly what you have said above.
Too many angry bitter people.
I would have to imagine that a few [including JEFF] have been urging JAL to get envolved with GS, and that he eventually was convinced that there might be some small usefullness and agreed to though on a limited basis. After the initial responses he got, I would very much doubt whether he will return. I dont blame him.
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.