geisha779

I like to believe he did not get away with it all. See, those "beliefs" come in handy!

Okay, serious blond moment. . . . I still don't get it? Is it saying God CAN speak directly to the mind or cannot speak directly to the mind? Totally lost. . . no joke. . . . I really don't get it.

I do love this stuff, and more and more it becomes clear to me, at least, that it is not a myth or fairy tale. I say this in part, because of the way Jesus interacted with people and the way He understood human nature. There are times I am astounded by the perfect responses He gives. The people writing about Him, were not those kind of people. . . . His understanding is fairly unique and the product of an amazing heart. They couldn't make this stuff up. . . . :) They were not cut from the same cloth! But, I did not say, He didn't say anything new . . . I said, He didn't say too much that was new . . . .but, it was how He revealed the things He did say. Similar to what you are saying really. When that lawyer or expert in Mosaic law stood up to challenge Jesus. . . . Jesus had just said. . . .Thou didst hide these things from the wise and intelligent and didst reveal them to babes" Next thing you get is an "expert" with a hypocritical posture . . . . questioning the Lord. Jesus asked him. . . . well, how do you read it? Implying there is a right way and a wrong way to read it. In fact, He told the guy . . . he was right. I imagine the guy was taken aback.. . . and looking for an argument. . . . that he got so flustered . . . . He blurted out. . . . . . who the heck is my neighbor. Jesus even had to rephrase his question a bit . . . . because the question revealed the man's heart. Jesus answered more along the lines of "Who am I to show myself a neighbor to" . . . . . . Everyone, even your enemies. I think instead of getting worked up about inerrancy and personality. . . .we just read it and see if these things don't come together. It never hurts to read it with a little humbleness and always prayerfully seeking.. . . . but, there are as many ways to read into scripture as there are hearts that read it . Getting back to Paul, he is a fairly big deal because as you noted . . . . the time for the gentiles had not come while Jesus ministered. Paul, was called to be a light to the gentiles. So, he was kind of fulfilling the second half of Jesus' ministry. Paul's compassion was for Israel. . . .of all people Paul, would not be first to run to the gentile. . . . ________________________________________________________________ If we are going to be mindful of things . . . . we really should consider when basing some of our assumptions on the workings of cult which poorly tried to mimic(with THEIR understanding of) the first century church. It doesn't make any sense at all to use VP's vision of Paul or VP's counterfeit church to evaluate anything, but another counterfeit. Paul, at least in the epistles, was not micromanaging the churches. . . . he was correcting gross error. But, if one does not believe there is a standard or right vs wrong. . . . true vs false. . . . . concerning the church or God. . . . than I can see where these assumptions might come in. . . . What did Jesus say?. . . . How do you read it? No one comes to the Father . . . I am this, I am that, I am, I am,, I am. Scripture is filled with declarative statements. This is this. . . that is that. . . . and that is the reality. As humans. . . . life is lived in the gray. . . . therein lies the challenge.

This one is my favorite. . . . he doesn't even try to hide crazy. http://www.michaelroodministries.com/

Sounds like a whole bunch of gobbledy-gook. . . .I don't even know what it means. I don't remember if I ever did. . . . but, I am pretty sure I probably nodded in awe of such insight. I remember they served kool-aid that night.

Not sure I understand your question about King James. He really is a fascinating historical figure and a real mess in terms of psychology. The cannon is not infalliable IMO. . . .and it was definitely meant to reflect a theology. That is why the books were chosen. Also, Jude references a non cannon book . . . Enoch?. I am not looking at my bible. . . . LOL :) We have access to non cannon books. I like to read certain things. Others not so much. But . . . yeah . . . of course it does reflect a theology. Theology is not a dirty word . . . . it is simply man's attempt at explaining God. Scripture gives an explanation for God from men . . . . a history of God's movement within human kind. . . it portrays a God who stepped into time . . . . and it reveals our response to the creator God. Doesn't it seem somewhat logical that if true. . . .such a revelation could be inspired by God to communicate Himself to us? Just a thought. We have the option of believing this is the correct or true explanation or it is not . . . . and we are free to accept another explanation. I just think a good question to ask ourselves is why we don't accept it. . . . and what is the test and reality of what we accept about God instead.

Amazing posts Sunesis. . . . I truly appreciate you dealing with the content of the message. Please continue! I am really enjoying it. Other than a few cartoons of dogs chasing their tails and the argument that Paul said all scripture was inspired and he wrote scripture "so" . . .. . . .also an assumption that is why we believe it .. . . . . . and our shared relationship to an actual con-man. . . . I am still confused by the premise of the thread. Dealing in terms of culture, with the reaction to Paul's message, both positive(which is evidenced by the church today) and negative. . . . which is laid out in some detail by Luke and by Paul's defense of his apostleship . . . . . the gravity of Paul's conversion in light of culture . . . . the content of the message. . . . . the result if he were a conman . . . meaning if he was not sent directly to the gentiles.. . . you and I will have to convert to convert. . . . . . and explored theology. . . . I think your insight is awesome. I get that we had an unhealthy relationship with scripture in TWI . . . . could not agree more. . . . but, dismissing huge parts of the cannonized text as not authoritative based on simplistic reasoning doesn't seem all that sound to me either. At the very least, consider the merit of the message. . .. in light of all contributing factors and THEN dismiss it. . . . . no? Dismissing all or most scripture seems short-sighted too . . . . it is a reality. . . . we have a bible . . . . and we are confronted with many options in dealing with it.

If it is God who "blesses" us with all this money . . . than why does He need it back to "move the word"? Can't He just budget better?

I want to live where $90,000 gets someone a house! :) Remember the Chalet? Not too shabby for a dwelling place. . . . came with free labor . . a bunch of peons as nanny's, cooks, gardeners and maids. Guess someone knew how to scam believe for abundance. To think. . . . poor Jesus. . . . hanging with the sinners, washing feet and no place to lay His head. He should have believed God better.

LOL True. . . . good point! I should actually look at my bible sometimes. . . . . and of course. . . . . Paul and his credibility problem just blows that out of the water. :) Made me laugh out loud. . . . thanks. . . . I corrected it. I am done here. . . . . it is way too contentious for me. . . . . and I am fairly contentious.

Or.. . . there are two distinct animals. . .. as I believe Paul was pointing out. Maybe the answer to why it predates Christ is in the epistles.

Waysider, In all sincerity. . . . what if . . . you are simply reading Paul's words wrong here. . . . . you are saying Paul said we should all speak in tongues . . . . because that is what VP told you Paul meant. What if, Paul is saying to the Corinthians. . . . who were coveting gifts . . . especially tongues . . . . Yeah, sure it would be great if everyone spoke in tongues, but even better if everyone could prophesy . . . . . but, I don't want you coveting gifts . . . . .not everyone has the same gift. . . . hey, it would be great if we all had miracles and healing too. . . . but, the better thing for you to be coveting is love. Seems to me that here you are still taking VP's word that Paul meant we SHOULD all SIT. Seems it is VP's credibility you are still relying on for your understanding . . . .and a jumping off point for questioning Paul's words. What if Paul never meant it the way it was taught to us. Put's Paul's credibility in a new light on this issue. Especially if Paul was being sarcastic in reproving a covetous church.

This is where considering what they and the gospels say. . . . comes in handy. Sunesis laid it out beautifully for you. Grace for the believing Jew and who? I don't know Waysider, do people love their neighbors? Was that love when they crucified Jesus after He told them that? Didn't they see the miracles? Didn't they already have the ten commandments . . . .psalms and proverbs and can anyone keep the law? What was the whole point of the resurrection? Do all sin and come short of the glory of God? According to the Paul(Corrected) over 500 witnesses saw the resurrected Christ. . . . were any of those hostile witnesses? What about Herod himself? He paid off the guards so they would not say anything. . . . he knew what happened. Sure a person could believe the resurrection . . . . or simply look at a waterfall . . . what did Jesus say would be sent so we could believe it? But, again . . . . Jesus came for who? The gentile? What did Jesus Himself say? "I come for the gentile??" How did it work before Paul's revelation? What was Peter's issue? Why was Peter still withdrawing himself from the gentiles? Why did the Judiazers oppose Paul. On what grounds? What was changing after the resurrection? But, we do have Paul's epistles . . . it did unfold like it did . . . . and they do lay out the plan for the church. . . . and all that Robert mentioned . . . . . the same church Jesus said He would build. So, "what if" is just a game. I knew when I wrote that line. . . . that would be the one honed in on, . . . . did you read the rest of my post? It lays out exactly what I meant by it. I am now just repeating myself.

Does what has been communicated to us through the Apostle Paul have any authority . . . . not just what is the Apostle Paul's authority. If you look at who, how, and when yet fail to include what is said. . . . I think you are shaky ground when speaking of twisted logic.

I believe the message Waysider. . . . it could have been written in crayon on the back of a donkey . . . I would believe it . . . it is the message not the means of transport of the message.

If they can hear God in a waterfall ... . can't they hear the gospel and believe? Isn't God big enough to let them hear about His Son? If He went to all that trouble of sending Jesus to die for our sins. . . I wonder why He bothered when we have access to so many newborns and waterfalls?

I believe it comes back to the message . . . this is where you and I differ . . . . I believe the message. I see Paul's credibility and the way God works in His choosing of Paul, but I hear the message. Now, if YOU believe Paul is wrong. . . I have to seriously question what you are basing this on. . . . you must base it on more than simply. . . it came from a man named Paul who said he was called and inspired by God. You must have a handle on the way it actually should be . . . . to say Paul is wrong. How do you know? What is the message? Is Paul giving us a recipe for chocolate cake? Are we saying a cake recipe came from Paul by way of God? No, it is a revelation about the church and the things of God. A shocker of a revelation concerning the gentiles. No one was saying what Paul was at the time. . . . it was being alluded to. . . . but, he lived it out. He was believed too. . . . How do I know? I go to church. No one is saying it was not Paul who said these things. . . . it WAS Paul . . . who I believe was INSPIRED by God. Have you ever been inspired Waysider? You do believe there is such a thing as inspiration don't you? It is in our vernacular . . . we actually have a word to describe this event. Inspiration. IN SPIRIT. . . . You believe in God right? So, God inspiring someone to reveal His plan or purpose with a group of people by way of communicating through language . . . something we can relate to. . . is what? Difficult to believe? Or . . . is it that it was Paul? Paul is difficult to believe? Is it the message? Is it inspiration? The Holy Spirit? What is the real issue? No guarantee? Not much in life does come with a guarantee . . . except. . . death. . . . and that is in part what Paul's message is about, that and eternity. . . . God's eternal nature is fairly evident in creation as you remind us . . . so, Paul's message should make some sense to us. Death and eternity . . . or do you have the correct info on this?

Con men tell the truth now? Wow. . . who knew? " A confidence trick or confidence game (also known as a bunko, con, flim flam, gaffle, grift, hustle, scam, scheme, swindle or bamboozle) is an attempt to defraud a person or group by gaining their confidence. The victim is known as the mark, the trickster is called a confidence man, con man, or con artist, and any accomplices are known as shills. Confidence men exploit human characteristics such as greed and dishonesty, and have victimized individuals from all walks of life." http://en.wikipedia....onfidence_trick And we know he was wrong given our what? . . . . Great insight into God's revelation to the church which is different from Paul's. . . how?

excathedra.. . . you are correct that she did not say it was more important.. . . but, I just wanted to mention that as Christians we put our faith in Christ.. . people can believe Jesus and intellectually ascent to what was accomplished on the cross. . . and still not have faith in the Lord. I know that sounds funny, and I am not saying that is what you do . . . I just think coming out of TWI it is a relevant point. Some of us put plenty of faith in the scriptures, MOG's, research, and name tags . . . and not in the person of Jesus Christ. That would actually be me BTW. I truly do not believe I became a Christian until after I left TWI. . . I know that is just my personal experience. . . .and others differ. . . . but, I am of the mind that unless one went in a Christian. . . it is not likely one came out of TWI a Christian. That also explains why some now easily seem to repudiate Christ. But, that is just my opinion. As for Paul . .. he had a really specific calling. . . . to bring the light to the gentiles. He kind of completed the second half of Jesus ministry. Although one can kind of piece together some things from the gospels about gentiles . . . Jesus said He came for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. "I was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel." Remember the crumbs and dogs under the table? That would be us. Things had already shifted to a new reality with the resurrection . . . .everything was changing. . . . . and it was Paul who received the calling from the Lord to take the gospel directly to the gentiles. . . . Jesus didn't do this while here on earth. So, if Paul was lying. . . . we are not saved. I, like Sunesis and others believe Paul. For a myriad of reasons. It is perfect the way God accomplished this. . . . He took the biggest enemy of the church. . . . zealous, zealous Jew. . . . . . . a man with stature in his culture and everything to lose and struck him blind. . . . then sent him to the people he would have called dogs. There is more to it, but I believe Paul's defense of his Apostleship is very powerful. Paul swore to God . . . and that may not mean much today. . . . but, it did to Paul. One has to at the very least put some cultural context on his epistles. There is no gain for Paul in terms of profit in a sense we could see. . . . only loss in a tangible sense. He lost his stature, beloved faith, his entire identity, and eventually his life. But, the bottom line is. . . . if Paul lied. . . . . we got nothing.

I "get" Jeter love. . . . and if he didn't put a world of hurt on us. . . . there wouldn't be any Jeter hate. . . . he is so good he causes both strong reactions LOL. . . .you have GOT to respect that guy! World class ball player. . . .

Just curious if TWI was ever classified as subversive in anyway by gov't? Probably too small time to matter, but still. . . . . it would be interesting to know. That is a good one for the old resume. "Former Subversive."

Well said. . . me too. . . . . . I can STILL remember exactly where I was when I heard he was being traded. . . . the shock and punch in the tummy icky feeling. . . .and . . . ayep. . . . the heartbreak of no more Nomar in Boston! That news really did rock the "Nation" quite a bit. . . . and please. . . anyone. . . . don't make me clarify "Nation". But. . . but. . . but . . . we got Dave Roberts. . . . among others . . . and that seemed a waste. . . . until. . . . he stole that base and put us in contention. . . . that eased the pain quite a bit! <object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value=" name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src=" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>And yes Mstar. . . . it would be GREAT to see him come back. . . and go out on top!

One motor coach associated with TWI is enough for 10 lifetimes. . ...we don't need the spin-off version too. . . . .let him walk like Jesus did.

2 For he who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God, for no one understands him; however, in the spirit he speaks mysteries. 3 But he who prophesies speaks edification and exhortation and comfort to men. 4 He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church. 5 I wish you all spoke with tongues, but even more that you prophesied; for he who prophesies is greater than he who speaks with tongues, unless indeed he interprets, that the church may receive edification. Where in the bible is it recorded that anyone ever spoke to the God of scripture in any other than a normal known language? Because, the way I, me, moi, read what Paul is saying is a bit different than what we learned in PFAL. When Paul is using the singular for tongue it means one thing, and when he is using the plural it means another. The King James version even puts unknown before the singular to differentiate. I believe this chapter is about genuine and counterfeit. In verse 2 when he says. . . . does not speak to men but to God.. . . . . it is a similar translation to Acts 17:23 and the unknown god. Little "g" because the article A is not supplied but implied. It goes on to say. . . . in the spirit he speaks mysteries. Paul was associating some of this stuff with the Pagan mystery religions. A mystery in scripture is always something that has been hidden, but is now revealed. Paul was being sarcastic. It was a big dramatic display that only drew attention to them as the initiated ones. The whole chapter is talking about drawing attention to oneself INSTEAD of building up the church. At least that is the way I read it. In verse 4 Paul is again being sarcastic when he says. . . . he who speaks in a tongue edifies himself . . . .selfishly. . . ego. Remember, they were ecstatic at times when Pagans. He keeps drawing a contrast between edifying the church and edifying ones own self. They had fallen back into these pagan practices. Seems, by the first use of tongues that it was never intended for a bunch of gibberish, but a human language to be translated. How can anyone say Amen to nonsense? When Paul quotes Isaiah 28 that says to me that the gift of tongues comes from God to some. . . . and is not connected to the baptism of the Holy Spirit. But IS connected to Israel. Paul was quoting Isaiah's words of warning . . . . . Isaiah 28, I believe is a cursing, blessing and warning. . . . after God having men speaking to them unknown tongues. . . . languages. . . . .they STILL would not listen. . . . . and because the blessing was a new church with Jews and gentiles. . . . the sign was repeated. Acts. .. neat and orderly. . . .Corinth. ...Pentecostal chaos. Lots of ways to read scripture.