T-Bone

Happy Anniversary and Congrats to both of you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wow - that's how bad my observation skills are - I didn't even notice that until you pointed it out Tom! And I guess you telling about it would make you a stool pigeon.

Tom, that WAS you I saw at the airport last week handing out flowers and pamphlets!!!!!!!!!! And what's with the shaved head and robes?!?!?!

The Way: Living in Wonderland www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=7363&st=0# vp and me in Wonderland, a different book, a different look www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.php?showtopic=8019&st=0# I would also like to suggest making My Story a protected forum.

I dunno - I think it's either a UFO or the Good Year Blimp.

What did the period say to the sentence? "End of the line, Buster." What did one vulture say to the other vulture? "I've got a bone to pick with you."

I don't think we should fault anyone who wants to stop a bad habit and turn over a new leaf...[i should get a point for each pun - and one for the nun ]...

I don't see any reason for Eve to have lied about her age :) - it is obvious from the text she was made/created as an adult. God was not trying to deceive Adam or us...I was trying to make the point by quoting Ross that there is indeed a harmony of science and scripture - the works of God and the words of God. In my opinion since both have the same Creator there would be no contradiction between the two - in terms of scientific evidence indicating an older universe and the Genesis "day" being a much longer time period... ...I personally tend to lean towards the old earth theory - an old earth in an old universe. In the same book Ross mentions on page 101 some methods of measurements for dating the age of the universe: relaxation times of star clusters, erosion on Mercury, Mars, and the moon, star stream interactions in galaxies, expansion of the universe, color-luminosity fitting, nucleochronology, deuterium abundance and mass density, and anthropic principles. All these measurements indicating the mean age of the universe at 17 billion years, plus or minus 3 billion years... ...I think the astronomical evidence supports an older universe. Again quoting from Ross' book page 101, "In testimony sent to the Supreme Court on the certainty of this date relative to the dates promoted by young-universe creationists, Caltech physicist and Nobel Laureate Murray Gell-Mann said it would be easier to believe in a flat earth than to believe the universe is 6,000 years old, or anything other than about 15 billion years old."

Markomalley: "There are many, many people who interpret the time sequence outlined in the creation account of Genesis 1-2 to be six literal days (144 hours).Many of the same exegetes will apply very loose figurative rules to the interpretation of times given in various prophecies, such as Daniel's 70 weeks (Dan 9:24ff). What I'm curious about here is what are the exegetical rules that require time to be accounted for in one passage quite literally and in another passage very figuratively?...If anybody who considers themselves to be a exegete or a "Bible only source for faith and practice" type of person would do me the courtesy of explaining the above question, I'd appreciate it." Mark, thanks for a very interesting and thought provoking post! I don't consider myself an exegete but do place myself in the category of a Christian with the Bible as my only source for faith and practice. I apologize for my brief post earlier [this is considered my wind up pitch for a major dissertation – LOL ] – there were two reasons for that. I didn't thoroughly [or throughly :blink: ] consider your question and I was out of town at the time and did not have access to my library [oh boy – you know that means there's a heap of text coming!]. In my opinion, your post touches upon two challenging issues the Bible student faces: awareness of our own point of view and distinguishing between literal and non literal references. From Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture, 2nd Edition, 2002, Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, Grant Lovejoy, page 216: "Be conscious of Your Presuppositions. Because the Bible is inspired in such a way that it is just what God wanted to convey, it is important to examine carefully the meaning in the original setting before attempting to relate it to our present time and situation. This requires that we carefully endeavor to understand our own perspectives and understandings that we bring to the biblical text, and seek to filter them out so that the Word of God is truly heard." That's why I'm interested in developing good critical thinking skills - to examine my own thinking, look at other people's perspectives, etc. That being said – I will mention my own viewpoint on the Bible and science which I think has relevance here. I have always been fascinated with science and technology and so - besides being raised in a Christian family, some of what has contributed to my faith has been [imho] the amazing beauty, orderliness, and intelligence displayed in the physical world. As you can probably tell by now I love reading books. Books usually have a specific purpose – a book on Windows XP, a history of the world, a medical dictionary, a romance novel, etc. I don't consider The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions and the Quest for the Ultimate Theory by Brian Greene a source for knowledge of God. However, I enjoyed reading The Elegant Universe – gaining some understanding of the physical world from the viewpoint of a professor of physics and mathematics. Nor do I think the Bible is a science reference book. It may refer to the physical world in unscientific terms. For instance, Harry Rimmer in The Harmony of Science and Scripture suggests the invisible gravitational forces of the universe are alluded to in the latter part of Job 26:7 "He stretches out the north over empty space, And hangs the earth on nothing." [NASV] The Bible is a book about God – with His message of redemption for mankind. Concerning exegetical rules for interpreting passages literal or not – there's this from Let the Reader Understand: A Guide to Interpreting and Applying the Bible, 2nd Edition, Dan McCartney and Charles Clayton, pages 127, 128: "Language is considered literal when the referent in view is an instance of the ordinary meaning of the words and sentences used. That is, the usual or common meaning, or sense, directly points to the intended referent. A nonliteral reference occurs when the referent is connected to the sense of a word or sentence solely by context, not by the usual sense of the word or sentence by itself. "Literalness" does not indicate the truth or falsity, nor the precision, of the statement. A literal statement can be false, or even fantastic ["There is a ghost in my closet"], and a nonliteral statement can be true ["There is a skeleton in my closet"]. Further, literal does not mean "expressed with scientific or mathematical precision." If the almanac reports that "The sun rises tomorrow at 6:08 a.m.," the statement is not scientifically precise [the sun does not "rise" from the astronomical point of view], but is nevertheless literal within the understood context." In regards to whether or not Genesis 1 "day" is a literal 24 hour day I am of the opinion it refers to a much longer period of time after considering context, grammar and relevant occurrences. Arguing for a much longer time period of the Genesis 1 "day" is Hugh Ross in Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy, offers the following on pages 45 to 53: "1. The length of God's days. The same author of Genesis [Moses] wrote in Psalm 90:4, "For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or a watch [four hours] in the night." Moses seems to state that just as God's ways are not our ways [isaiah 55:9], God's days are not our days. 2. The Hebrew words yom, ereb, and boqer. The Hebrew word yom, translated day, may be used [and is] in biblical Hebrew, as it is in modern English, to indicate any of three time periods: (a) sunrise to sunset, (b) sunset to sunset, © a segment of time without any reference to solar days [anywhere from weeks to a year to several years to an age or epoch]. This does not mean, that yom can be interpreted as referring to an indefinite time or infinite time…Even in English – which includes many more words than Hebrew for describing time periods – such expressions as "my grandfather's day" or "the day of the dinosaurs" are common. Biblical examples would be Genesis 4:3 [yom = process of time]; Genesis 30:14 [yom = wheat harvest time]; Joshua 24:7 [yom = a long season]; Proverbs 25:13 [yom = harvest time]; Isaiah 4:2 [yom = a future era]; Zechariah 14:8 [yom = summer + winter]; and many references to the day of the Lord [yom = forty-two months or more, depending on one's interpretation of certain end-time prophecies]. In other words, evening and morning refer to the beginning and ending components of "day," however it is used. For example, "in my grandfather's day" refers to my grandfather's lifetime. So the morning and evening of his day would be his youth and old age. 3. The Function of Chronology. A study of other chronologies in the Bible reveals a common characteristic: They record sequences that are both significant and discernible to the reader.The timing and order are important because they show the careful unfolding of God's plans and affirm His control. 4. The unusual syntax of the sentences enumerating specific creation days. Looking at the word-for-word translation of the Hebrew text, one finds this phraseology "and was evening and was morning day X." …The word arrangement is clearly a departure from simple and expression. It creates ambiguity. If "day X" were intended as the noun complement for the one evening and morning together, the linking verb should appear just once, in plural form [as in the KJV renders it]; "And the evening and the morning were the Xth day."…This syntactic ambiguity does not constitute a proof. However, it does suggest that "day" here is to be taken in some unusual manner… 5. The uniqueness of the seventh day. Of the first six creation days Moses wrote: "There was evening, and there was morning – the Xth day." This wording indicates that each of the first six creation days had a beginning and an ending. However, no such wording is attached to the seventh creation day, neither in Genesis 1-2 nor anywhere else in the Bible. Given the parallel structure marking the creation days, this distinct change in form for the seventh day strongly suggests that this day has [or had] not yet ended. Furher information about the seventh day is given in Psalm 95 and Hebrews 4. In these passages we learn that God's day of rest continues… 6. The events of the sixth day. Genesis 1 tells us that the land mammals and both Adam and Eve were created on the sixth day. Genesis 2 provides further amplification, listing events between Adam's creation and Eve's…God planted a garden in Eden… Adam receiving instructions from God, worked and cared for the Garden…he carried out his assignment from God to name all the animals…discovered that none of these creatures was a suitable helper and companion for him…God put Adam into a deep sleep, performed an operation and, after Adam awoke, introduced him to the newly created Eve…Still later on the sixthe day Adam and Eve received instructions from God concerning their responsibilities in mamanging the plants, animals, and resources of the earth, a lengthy communication, one can imagine. Altogether, many weeks', months', or even years' worth of activities took place in this latter portion of the sixth day… 7. The wording of Genesis 2:4. This verse, a summary statement for the creation account, in the Hebrew reads, "These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created in the day of their making." Here the word day refers to all six creation days…Obviously, then, this is a period longer than twenty-four hours. Hebrew lexicons verify that the word for generation [toledah] refers to the time between a person's birth and parenthood or to an arbitrarily longer time span. In Genesis 2:4 the plural form, generations, is used, indicating that multiple generations have passed. 8. Biblical figures of speech for the earth's age. In describibg the eternity of God's exiatence, several Bible writers often compare it to the longevity of the mountains or the "foundations of the earth." The figures of speech used in Psalm 90:2-6, Proverbs 8:22-31, Ecclesiastes 1:3-11, and Micah 6:2 all depict the immeasurable antiquity of God's presence and plans…The fact that the Bible does consider the antiquity of the founding of the earth a suitable metaphor for God's eternality suggests the biblical view of a very ancient earth. 9. Explicit statements of earth's antiquity. Habakkuk 3:6 directly declares that the mountains are "ancient" and the hills are "age-old." In II Peter 3:5, the heavens [the stars and the universe] are said to have existed "long ago."… …God is truthful and desires to reveal truth, both in the creation and in the written Word. He does not trick or deceive…[see, for example, Psalm 119:160; Isaiah 45:19; John 8:31,32; 10:35; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18; 11:6; I John 5:6]. Our view of creation must take God's character into account. Whatever objects of His creation we subject to scientific analysis will reveal their true age – provided the analysis is theoretically valid, correctly applied, and accurately interpreted. For created things to show a deceptive appearance of age would seem a direct violation of God's own stated character and purpose."

Mark, in regards to whether or not the period of time in Genesis is a literal 24 hour period or not – is associated with the young earth/old earth debate among some scholars. I've referred to Hugh Ross on another thread – who believes the Genesis 1 "day" may refer to a much longer time period than 24 hours: http://www.greasespotcafe.com/ipb/index.ph...ndpost&p=234344 I feel the same as Goey does on the issue - it doesn't have any bearing on my faith.

Welcome to Grease Spot, Friscoguy05 - that was a great post...And you are right we need others. It helps to get another person's perspective on things. Speaking from my own experience - I had problems with depression before TWI, never dealt with it while in TWI. After leaving TWI I sought professional counseling - helped get me back on my feet. But there comes a point where I think you've got to work things out for yourself - in terms of nailing down the core issues and what you need to do - that you can't just take someone else's word for it - or adopt their perspective of your "problem." I'm into self-help books - a couple of good ones: Feeling Good: the New Mood Therapy by David Burns - gets into cognitive therapy...And another good book, More Than Redemption: A Theology of Christian Counseling by Jay E. Adams. In my opinion, a lot of critical thinking/reflective thinking is very therapeutic...And like Igotout - I too find a lot of great counseling/therapy here at Grease Spot!

So nice to hear from you, TempleLady - glad you're having a wonderful time. And no need to fret over them Permit Clerks - I've been nullifying their fun-killing power by the sheer force of my renewed mind magnificence of believing images of Viceroy - eh - mmmm - victory - or something.

The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament editors Walton, Matthews & Chavalas offers this on Genesis 24: 1-9, swearing oaths: "An oath is always sworn in the name of a god…Sometimes, as in this case, a gesture is added to the oath. The gesture is usually symbolic of the task to be performed by the oath taker. For instance, by placing his hands inside Abraham's thigh [in the vicinity of or on the genitals], the servant ties his oath of obedience to the acquisition of a wife for Isaac and thus the perpetuation of Abraham's line." The New International Commentary on the Old Testament: The Book of Genesis Chapters 18-50 by Victor Hamilton comments on Genesis 24: 2: "…Abraham instructs his servant: Put your hand under my thigh, a prelude to the servant's act of swearing. thigh is undoubtedly a euphemism for genitalia, in the light of passages such as Gen.46:26 and Exod.1:5, where a man's children are said to come from his thigh. Holding Abraham's membrum in his hand, the servant promises to carry out Abraham's wishes. The significance of this procedure is uncertain. It is unlikely that this act should be read as a self-imprecation by the servant, calling down sterility on himself or extirpation for his children…R.D. Freedman has suggested that taking the membrum – now circumcised as a covenant sign – into the hand is a way of invoking the presence of God at this moment between master and servant. Or it may simply be a way in which the servant reassures Abraham that he will honestly and truthfully carry out his master's wish. One may discover some clue as to the significance of this act by comparing the only two episodes in the OT that connect oath taking with placing the hand under another's thigh: Gen.24:2 and 47:29. In both cases the one who asks another to place his hand under his thigh is elderly…In both cases the real concern of Abraham and Jacob is with family matters. Abraham desires the right woman for his son, and Jacob wishes to be buried with his ancestors…In touching the genitalia of Abraham and Jacob, the servant and Joseph are placing themselves under oath faithfully to expedite the last wishes of two elderly patriarchs on family matters." And from The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament editors Walvoord & Zuck on Genesis 24: 1-9 a little variation on the meaning of the gesture: "...Eliezer's putting his hand under the patriarch's thigh [cf. 47:29] was a solemn sign that if the oath were not carried out, the children who would be born to Abraham would avenge the servant's unfaithfulness." [edited by T-Bone - no one under 17 permitted to read this post]

Real small world, Oakspear - I played bass with him ages ago before either one of us took the class.

“Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds.” II Corinthians 12:12 NKJV From The MacArthur Study Bible notes on II Corinthians 12:12: the signs of an apostle. Including, but not limited to, “signs and wonders and mighty deeds” [the miracle of the Corinthians’ salvation was also a mark of Paul’s apostleship, I Cor. 9:2]. The purpose of miraculous signs was to authenticate the apostles as God’s messengers [cf. Acts 2:22,43; 4:30; 5:12; 14:3; Rom.15:18; Heb.2:3,4]. And from The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: “APOSTLE [ Gk. Apostolos < apostello – ‘send’ (with stress on the commission and authorization of the sender)]. A missionary, envoy, ambassador; in the NT, one of those who, having seen the risen Christ, is a witness of His resurrection, and commissioned by Him, preaches the gospel to all the nations…NT Usage. – Jesus Christ is the Apostle and High Priest of our profession [Heb. 3:1]…In most of the approximately eighty cases in which the word “apostle” occurs in the NT, it refers to the Twelve or to Paul. Their unique place is based upon the resurrected Jesus’ having appeared to them and having commissioned them to proclaim the gospel as the eschatological action of God in Christ…The apostles are regarded as setting the norms of doctrine and fellowship [Acts 2: 42], the marking posts [Gal. 2: 9], the rule by which one must measure his preaching [Gal.2:2], the foundation [Eph. 2: 20; Rev. 21: 14; I Cor. 3: 11], so that there is no way to Christ that detours around them. Their importance is due to their function of presenting the authentic interpretation of their Lord… …Paul. – Unlike the Twelve, Paul had not accompanied Jesus during His preaching ministry…In its three accounts of the Lord’s initial encounter with Paul as well as in the apostle’s own writing [e.g. Gal. 1: 16; II Cor. 4: 6], his apostleship is presented as the direct action of the risen Lord Jesus… …Apostolic Authority. – In the NT there is always a decisive distinction between the Lord Jesus and His apostles. While He has full authority in Himself, their power is only in His Name and in the Spirit given by Him [Acts 3: 6, 12; 9: 34; John 15: 5]…As His witnesses, ambassadors, and vicars [Matt. 10:40; Luke 10:16], they hold the first and most significant place in the primitive Church . Accordingly, they exercise great authority in matters of discipline [Acts 5:1-11; I Cor. 5:1-7; II Cor. 2:1-10; John 20:23; Matt. 16:19; 18:15-22] and other problems facing the churches [iI Cor. 13:2,10: I Thess. 4:2: II Thess. 3:4,6]. Yet they treasure the precept, “you have one teacher, and you are all brethren” [Matt. 23:8; cf. 10:44]. Paul sought to increase the joy of others, not to lord it over their faith [iI Cor. 1:24].” In my humble opinion, about the only way VPW could be associated with the role of an apostle is the same way that Robert Duvall was – as an actor.

I think GrouchoMarx nailed a big deal here - TWI with their infamous group think worked on homogenizing everyone. Group think is a very "safe" place to hang out - everyone thinking alike - so no one is thinking! I also like Bliss' "I don't think less of me, I just think of me less.."...I've experienced the same thing Nolongerlurking...Imho I think it's a problem from our fallen nature. Thinking about Adam & Eve - when they sinned they became alienated from God - and each other. We were made to be social creatures and sin screwed up that aspect as well. I think sometimes that's why we feel alienation or we can't connect with people... Another thing I wonder about - since it mentions that they would become like gods knowing good and evil - if that meant we were prone to being judgmental towards others...And so people became self-centered and ego-centric. That's why I like Bliss' words of wisdom - instead of thinking less of myself or some kind of false humility - I should spend less time thinking about me and more time thinking about the other person - in a good way - not being judgmental - but to learn more about them, how I can serve them, bless their life. And that goes along the lines of what Pond was talking about - loving people - not trying to fix them - or thinking something needs to be fixed - we'll let our Lord worry about that.

Thanks, Mark for sharing the great pictures and information...I was raised Roman Catholic but haven't had any interest in learning about this stuff until I began reading your posts - always very sharp and informative. Thanks again.

M.D. Vaden, perhaps you're a little confused over the issue on this thread. I agree with your general statement of sin being sin. No matter what the sin is – it is wrong in God's eyes. However, your disjointed logic of different sins deserving different consequences yet having no bearing on what church leaders have done – is puzzling and to that I firmly disagree. Execution for murder is punishment to fit the crime – as "eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth" – and I think a lot of our own code of justice has come from the Bible. There's laws in our country that address rape, stealing , lying, etc. I am amazed that you do not understand the enormity of evil not only perpetrated but also inculcated by certain church leaders. I thought referring to II Peter 2:1-22 and Matthew 18:15-17 in my previous post was sufficient grounds for supporting what goes on here at Grease Spot. Consider Matthew 18:6, 7 "but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it is better for him that a heavy millstone be hung around his neck, and that he be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!" Do you think it's important to Jesus that leaders are to help believers avoid anything or anyone that could cause them to stumble in their faith or lead them to sin? What makes you think it's okay to minimize what certain infamous TWI leaders have done? Why do you insist on diverting our attention from the real issue [their erroneous doctrines and practices] or manipulating us with some guilt-trip smokescreen?

In reference to the crowns it is interesting to read Revelation 4:10,11 the twenty-four elders will fall down before Him who sits on the throne, and will worship Him who lives forever and ever, and will cast their crowns before the throne, saying, "Worthy art Thou, our Lord and our God, To receive glory and honor and power; For Thou didst create all things, And because of Thy will they existed, and were created." [New American Standard Version] John MacArthur in The MacArthur New Testament Commentary: Revelation 1-11 speaking on these verses says, "Amazingly, after prostrating themselves the twenty-four elders cast their crowns before the throne. They are not preoccupied with their own excellence. They are not concerned about their own holiness, honor, or reward. All those things pale into insignificance and become meaningless in light of the glory of God…Axios [worthy] was used of the Roman emperor when he marched in a triumphal procession. The focus of the elders' song is on God's glory manifested in creation…Their song anticipates paradise lost becoming paradise regained." In a slightly different vein, Hugh Ross in Beyond the Cosmos makes some suggestions about life and rewards in the New Creation: God will place our spirits in indestructible bodies fit for existence in dimensions beyond earth's four, no longer bound by the laws and limits of earthly existence. In regards to rewards commensurate with each person's work done on earth – what if God did something to dramatically increase our capacity to receive and enjoy His blessings – something internal to each of us – there would be no way for any of us to compare what others have received or become an occasion for envy or disappointment.

Congrats, Cowgirl - they look great...I'm excited for your business !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! M. R. Clucks Crow Magnum

Well, Sirguessalot - you've nailed the crux of the matter for this thread! Congratulations !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's a very simple - yet profound point!!!!! Thanks !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Very funny SafariVista - is this something you wrote? It's great !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Happy Berfday Rascal !!!!!!

I think it's interesting that Sirguessalot, CM and Bagpipes all talk about the reflective - or self-examining ability of our minds. It's quite challenging - yet exciting: trying to take an honest look at myself. I like Bagpipes' quote From Cry of the Soul, "Constructive Fear: The Process of Change": "To allow God to transform our fearfulness, we must first acknowledge our fears. This means resisting the impulse to act as if they weren't there, deadening our strong feelings through busyness in distraction activities...." I think I carry two pictures of myself in my head. One is what I THINK I'm like - how I want others to see me - and the other image is what I ACTUALLY am...Self-deception is such a mean trick we play on ourselves. Honesty and an accurate view of self takes courage, humility - and forgiveness.

M.D.Vaden - I echo the sentiment of Oakspear. There's a BIG difference between what VPW, LCM and TWI have done and stuff about you and I. If I wronged you in some way - the offense should be dealt with as soon as possible between you and me - since it involves ONLY YOU and ME...But take it further - if we can't resolve our differences - as in Matthew 18: 15-17 - the matter escalates to involving more and more of the church. Another thing to think about is because of their level of influence and responsibilities - the impact of their malfeasance is on a massive scale - furthermore, because of their erroneous doctrine and practices something has to be said in that regard - as II Peter 2: 1-22 boldly does - and I see GSC serving that very purpose - a warning to others!