TheInvisibleDan

The first article was well done, and (I thought) addressed the subject quite open and evenhandedly. I liked the tone of this work, and the manner in which they left the question open. I also have wondered if the cessationist position gradually developed as an expediency, naturally resulting from the growing Church's (or churches) struggle to establish itself, its canon and (most importantly) its authority. I must confess a certain amount of well-deserved cynicism at the idea that any spiritual "gifts" -originally endowed to all Christians, if such indeed was the case - shifted to becoming conferred to only those in roles of authority (teachers, pastors, etc.). I can sympathize with the early churches' move toward the cessationist direction. We might try putting ourselves in the sandals of those struggling to establish their Christian franchise, in an era abounding with wandering seers and apostles and tongue-babblers and gnostics and the like, all coming out with their own revelations and prophecies... Of course "prophecies" and "gnosis" and "tongues" must be "done away". If we followed every new prophet and gnostic that came out on a weekly basis, we would never get anything accomplished... To turn the tide of this confusion, let us consolidate all the divine gifts - hence all authority - to the leaders. Since then, the Church that won out have rarely been kind nor receptive to those exhibiting divine gifts outside of the scope of their hierarchy, authority and canon. History has shown us that. Just look at twi, in their shift from the spiritual gifts of individuals to an over-emphasis on the authority of the so-called "gift ministries". If one desired real "spiritual gifts" and "authority" - one would remain unfulfilled unless and until one joined the "Way Corp." Even Wierwille, for all his zeal with tongues, saw "tongues" as nothing more than a "child's toy" - for "personal edification" only (outside of the preferred and approved "interpretations" as practiced ad infinitum, so our "interpretations" would be so banal and toothless as to be harmless and even forgettable. (i.e., "I am the lord your god. Trust me I will always be with you...zzzzzzz.") I like to think that if any cases of genuine tongues were voiced, that their interpretations would have been anything from what was normally expected, i.e., I, your Lord and God Christ, desire that you leave this corrupt organization at once! I'm only theorizing here, but I am curious to hear if anyone here had encountered such cases, of someone giving an "interpretation" or a "prophesy" with some real fire behind it! Danny

I cannot gather where the notion of Jesus' pre-existence - or Jesus being God - is in some way contrary to the system of "administrations". How explain then our main contributor to the old teaching we received - the "ultra-dispensationalist" Bullinger, or his collegue A.E. Knoch, who emphasized our Lord's pre-existence? God forbid if we should think like horses. Or resemble pears. :)-->

Matthew 27:52 (minus v.53) also appears in "The Acts of Pilate". Charles B. Waite in "Christian Religion to the Year Two Hundred") proposed that the citation in "The Acts of Pilate" (verse 52 alone) represents a reading earlier than Matthew, and that Matthew's account contributed a further embellishment (v.53) - which really doesn't appear to add (or subtract) much to the verse anyways... Paul-Louis Couchoud ("Creation of Christ") proposed that Ignatius (Magn. ix) had in mind Matt.27:52f and that the "saints" raised in Matt.27:52 were the Old Testament prophets. The notion behind these passages might have been the belief of Christ's descent into Hades following the crucifixion - whose Spirit, upon breaking open the gates of death, liberated the entombed souls within, and led them out like a train into the heavenly spheres. I would imagine a deity throwing down the gates of the "underworld" might shake up the earth a bit. Danny

Mike, are there any patristic citations (e.g.,from the Ante-Nicene Fathers) of those passages provided in this "G'mir" article, attesting to either their presence or absence? (patristic citations oft prove interesting because the writers had access to versions of NT manuscripts older than those currently available to us). Danny

Who says that what happened on the day of pentecost was anything even closely approximating what we learned (oops excuse me--were lead into..)during session 12? I have severe reservations about them being the same experience at all I also have serious reservations - that such an event even happened at all. Such an event was not shared nor believed among the various movements comprising the early Christians. While Paul writes of "tongues", he accords no explicit nor weighty attachment nor significance to "The Day of Pentecost" as the pseudonymous writer(s) of "Acts" writing in 150 AD, and those following... Danny

The question of "promises" was also one posed to Jean of Arc by her inquisitors at her trial. Have you ever seen the Criterion edition of lost silent classic, "The Passion of Joan of Arc"? (1927) - the original movie negative was lost to fire and censorship, but a pristine print of this original was rediscovered in a closet of an Oslo mental institution in 1981. It is the most profound, most beautiful, most "spiritual" movie I have ever experienced. Danny

I don't know. Roy; perhaps the guy feels like he's been slighted by both "the man" and members of his "church" (in which case, it's a good that he has a forum to air his grievances, though unfortunately misdirected toward those who more than likely had little or nothing to do with any abuses he might have personally suffered)...or ... he's just being an idiot-troll, dropping a few drive-by posts. In any event, I simply disagreed on a couple points you raised at the time. Even friends disagree. No big deal. :)-->

I strongly disagree. There is no explicit rule that the "doctrinal" section of this forum is designed only for "believers" or those who "love God" - where are you gathering this from? As distasteful and ugly as a person's opinion or outlook may appear to you or me or anyone else, they have just as much place to post here as anyone. If we're going to start segregating the forum according to whether one's a "believer" or "non-believer" (and if so - according to whose beliefs?) - we may as well be back in twi. From my personal standpoint, I do not find it difficult at all to understand why some people who had undergone the extreme bs of the old gigantic cult should feel the way that they do. Yes, some people (a number who have suffered far more than myself and others) interpret their horrendous experiences as due to failure on part of the Bible and of its deities. I can understand that. And if there's a God, I think He can too. SO why take it so personally if someone holds such a position that the Bible is worthless? I can imagine why anyone who has gone through twi feels that way. Can you? Danny

An early form of Christian dualism was the antithesis set between an Old Testament creator-deity of "justice" and a New Testament God of "goodness" (or "grace", a synonym for "good"). Early Christians -specifically the Marcionites, as well as other so-called "gnostics"- did not regard the OT and NT gods the same. The Old Testament creator - or, "the god of this world" - was regarded a harsh, petty deity driven by his form of "justice", judgment and vengeance - while the "new" God introduced by Jesus - the "Stranger" - was a deity driven by unconditional love, through his desire to befriend, rescue and adopt the abused creatures of another deity, and transfer them into his kingdom "not of this world". The entire system of the Marcionites was predicated upon the Old Testament versus the New Testament, unlike the Christian theologies which eventually won out that melded both beings into the one, mixed-up personality worshiped today. The Marcionites, incidently, compiled and published the earliest Christian canon (circ. 130 AD). Artifacts of their theology may still be seen to have survived scattered throughout even our later, more bloated Bible versions. The popular canticle on "love" in 1 Corinthians ch.13 is a supreme speciman of a Marcionite production of "antithesis" - many of the attributes contrary to "love" belong to the old testament god (e.g., "jealousy", "anger", being "easily provoked", etc.). I have a somewhat more extensive "antithesis" reconstructed at my website, http://geocities.com/Athens/Ithaca/3827 I don't propose to answer the excellent questions raised here, or that the lost faith of "Marcionism" is or was a better Christian way of seeing things. But it is a much neglected and overlooked chapter in history...

To a many sentiments here, probably not. Even the so-called "secular" music lovers seem to cherish and esteem the classic rock oldies of their youth above much of the recent stuff.

I used to like the series "Law & Order" and its various offshoots until I dealt with some real lawyers. Ruined the entire charm of the show for me. --> Damn you lawyers.

You guys can beat on your infallibility drums all you want, but Biblatry (or "Bible-worship") contributed just as much to the Way's corruption and bondage as anything else. And it's still what keeps people there. Danny

Victor's "Glass Eye of Prophecy" would work best mounted upon a "Branded" belt buckle, consecrated by salt of course, to be followed by an immersion into the Rainbow Spring of the Sirens seven times, before the nineth hour of the day. It would look okay as a medallion - cult leaders like that of the Ralians prefer medallions (that go well with their one-piece jumpsuits). But in order to tap into its overflowing power, the Glass Eye must be positioned in closest proximity to the nether-regions of the wearer.

And the corpses of the original trustees as they recline in their glaw-ry-holes are crawling with vermin, nibbling away and devouring their decaying flesh. Perhaps all that remains of Vp in his coffin is his glass eye, yet rumored to possess astounding magical properties which may endue its host with mighty authority over gods, demons and men. So grab a shovel and start digging, Mr. L*nder. C'mon, you hear that small, shrill voice ... don't you? Just follow the black crow... I think it'll know. -->

"Jazz police are looking through my folder Jazz police are talking to my niece; Jazz police have got their final order - drop your axe Jazzer - it's Jazz police!" Leonard Cohen, "Jazz Police"

No, though their writings (or such as has been attributed to them) have certainly been taken by many adherents to mean as much, e.g., "God-breathed", or, "I say to you by the word of the Lord...", or any number of places that would come to mind. Roy, the style of your meditations remind me a bit of Szelsky Bordeaux's writings (i.e., "the Essene Gospel of Peace"), supposedly translated from Aramaic manuscripts located in the secret archives of the Vatican (a very dramatic claim), with its many references to the "breath of the Holy Mother" and what not. While I don't personally buy into the supposed authenticity of the mss. or Bordeaux's claims (my sister loves that stuff), you might find this material interesting. If you do a search on the phrase "Essene Gospel of Peace" at any search engine, you should find further info on this stuff, and perhaps even texts and translations. Danny

Excie and dmiller - If I haven't posted till now, it's because I've been at a loss for words concerning your recent tragedies. I'm so sorry. You're both such sweet people. My thoughts are with you. Love, Danny

Observing that "Fish" is a new poster, I'm assuming (at least hoping) that he was unaware of the personal, terrible tragedy that recently struck the family of the poster whom he addressed -just a couple days before - when he posted. From my standpoint, it's not so much the content, but the timing of his post and to whom it was directed which was inappropriate. Again, seeing that "Fish" is a new poster, I'm assuming he quite simply didn't know, and had overlooked other, recent posts... Bad timing notwithstanding, welcome to "Greasespot" Fish. I actually related with some of the feelings and points you raised in your ill-timed post concerning the "cruel god" of the Bible, though over the years I have generally explored this issue from an ancient gnostic standpoint rather than an athiestic or agnostic position, wherein many early early Christians distinguished between a cruel "god" of the Old Testament and a new God of love revealed by Jesus in the New Testament. There are many interesting possiblilities of approaching this subject in such a manner, but alas - this would perhaps be best discussed at another time, another thread. I hope you continue to post. Danny

"He's dead, Jim."

Space and time nothwithstanding, there's nothing really going on out there in the middle of rural Nowheresville USA. Just a piddly little cult run by an old cow with a beehive on her head. And a bunch of bible-whipped farm-hands yankin' on her udder and shovelling her piles. Okay, perhaps that might give Satan a passing chuckle... As I recall, the Way seemed to take especial pleasure in the self-deluded notion that Satan took notice enough of them to try to thwart and hinder their schedules, i.e., "Oh gee. Satan is trying to stop the running of this class" or "Oh gosh. Satan turned the heart of that employer so I couldn't get a job at McDonalds to remain on the WOW field". In the sense, the Way wanted to be more "Satanists" than "Christians". To get Satan to actually notice them, so they would feel somehow validated about being jerks. After thousands (or millions?- whatever) of years walkin' to 'n fro the planet, I imagine Satan more along the lines of Lestat the vampire, having developed a exquisite taste for the power, wealth and pleasures of the jet set. Not hangin' around a bunch of losers who imagine themselves significant enough for Satan to fart in their general direction. Danny

Or the Vatican.... or even Salt Lake City...

I thought Satan had better taste. He perhaps gives no more thought to their existence than the highest God. Why would Satan waste so much a minute on a piddly loser-cult? I think Satan has better things to do. Like hang out at the White House... ;)-->

As a work of literary art which can serve to inspire and nourish our souls - but not something to be served and worshipped. No, Roy - "gray areas" are actually quite good! From these we gain the most - otherwise- wouldn't we be back to "black and white" thinking? In my personal observation and opinion, there seems too much emphasis on "righteousness" or "being [always] right" in Christianities. This unfortunately translates most often than not into the outcome of "self-righteousness" which renders Christianities such the snobby turn-off commonly perceived. But the Good God Jesus took compassion upon us and loved us in our most "imperfect" forms. Will He love us less should we fail to not do "right" - or "change"? Otherwise, His "Love" would appear vain and meaningless... It's interesting that the parallel to Matthew's "Be perfect as your Father in heaven" is clarifed by Luke's "Be compassionate..." - in short, take pity and emphathy toward others, as He did and continues to do with us. I think that's the kind of "perfection" Jesus was talking about - to simply do all we can to love others - not us to become spiritual Arnold Swarzneggars, flexing our righteous biceps. Our own flaws and imperfections can actually help us better to relate to others more than any supposed notions of perfections arising from religious self-righteousness. Such has been my personal observation. Kindness and Friendship to you- Danny

What are you feeling guilty about? He only needed one lense... ;)-->

For goodness sakes, man, how about treating the nice lady to a romantic candlelight dinner and a night out to town, before stampeding upon her with your "sword (or "thingy") of the spirit"? :)-->