another spot

It seems to me we’ve covered Jesus’ origins, talked about his upbringing and the logical thing might be to talk about him. I personally would like to take a second look at some of the “difficult” verses, such as the one about Godhead mentioned earlier. I was wondering if we could examine them from neither a non-Trinitarian nor Trinitarian view, but simply with an open mind and fresh thinking. Anyone into it? I agree eggs and nuts don’t belong in the same sentence. Speaking of disgusting food, my son’s fiancée is a picky eater but really likes canned corned beef hash. They are coming to visit, and I volunteered to make some from scratch for her. He said she wouldn’t eat it unless it looked like cat food…

Now dooj, here’s what I want to know. Did you send letters to your sponsors about the incredible spiritual learning you got from sewing? I used to get letters from people I sponsored about the great spiritual things that could be gleaned from cleaning windows and bathrooms. Now here’s the thing. I’ve cleaned bathrooms and windows for years, and not once have I ever learned even a small, minor spiritual thing from doing it. No amazing revelation. No nothing. I cleaned and I waited. Never happened. Does this mean I am just not spiritually heavy? Below par?

I have three grown sons. The oldest believes in God. The two youngest don’t and wouldn’t touch any form of religion with a ten foot pole, thanks to lcm. It is hard for me to assess long term affects. My sons and I don’t talk about this much. I can observe that they are successful and stable. They are kind and gentle. They have great ethics. Since they are grown I feel it’s necessary for them to make their own choices. I tell them about my choices and why I make them. We live and let live with each other. If you are feeling guilt about raising them in twi, I understand how you feel. I feel that sometimes too. We do our best as parents. Whether in or out of twi, we would have made at least a few mistakes anyway. We don’t want to be responsible for causing damage to our children because of our choices. We can’t rewrite history. I remember the time my youngest was being emotionally abused by his teacher. He was twelve and came home from school one day. He sat in my lap and bawled. I was absolutely furious. All my efforts to do something about this were of no avail except that she did back off some. What I did do was teach him coping skills. I knew I could not shelter him from pain all his life. I could teach him how to deal with it when it came and give him my absolute support. This same son maintained a 4.0 all through school and into college. He completed enough college hours while still in high school to enter as a junior. He was named student of the month his first semester (this is a large college). He is now vice president of the second largest student organization. He plans to go to law school. (OK so I’m proud of him). But better than these accomplishments, he is just a great human being. My point is, the circumstances (no matter how difficult or painful) of a person’s life don’t necessarily frame the person. “Is it too late to undo the damage?” Since that isn’t real specific I would just say, believe in them, let them know you believe in them, and say what you can to help empower them in what ever manner is needed. They will still make their own choices.

Good point, Mark.

“However, the laws that were given to the Levites concerning the "forms" that needed to be observed for example when they prepared an animal sacrifice. I am not certain that breaking any of those would have been considered a "sin" in the same manner that sleeping with your neighbors wife is considered a sin.” – Eyesopen. I agree with that. I was more thinking about the ethics and morals of the law. Twi was sure a really strange blend of license and legalism. I think this one area has been the most difficult for me to sort out. I haven’t really gotten into the higher standards of the NT just yet. I have read some good posts on the subject. But by logic, a higher standard doesn’t discard the lower.

I was just thinking that by the time Jesus was 12, he knew who he was. That would be a lot to absorb. He already knew enough Scripture to astound church leaders. I would think his parents must have taught him a lot. How would you even go about explaining to a child he is the Messiah? Luk 2:47And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. Luk 2:48And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. Luk 2:49And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business? Luk 2:50And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. Luk 2:51¶And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. Luk 2:52And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.

I'm too lazy for all that, dooj. I just spin my head.

I personally like cashews. I really, really like them. Seriously. I can devour a whole can in short order. Now what was this thread about? Oh yeah. UFO’s. Unified Facsimiles of Obfuscating information. Or was it egg yolks? I dunno. I am confused.

The sin is in the yoke, Dr. WW.

T-bone. I simply inserted the X-mas decorations you threw away into my left ear. They work just fine and I am glad you got the blinking kind. I find they enhance my mall witnessing experiences greatly. Most people readily believe I am confusing and barbaric, especially when I start screaming in tongues. Ever since I read your statement on another thread, “for this purpose I am scared” (which I still think is both hilarious and informative) I have been growing by leaps and bounds from the sheer inspiration of it. No doubt the lights help too.

Larry, right now I’m not impressed. Now if you rightly divided the yoke and did an extensive Greek word study on it, maybe. But really, you need to write a post complete with convincing proof before I can even consider it. How fast did you eat? Did anyone besides your mother see you? Can you really say with any authority that you ate fast? How do you connect that to yoke on your face? Did you always eat eggs? I'm not following your logic.

Keys to Anger Management 101 (Learning is an exciting adventure). 1. The MOG came that he might yell more abundantly and to lie, steal and commit adultery. 2. Rightly divide the anger (spread it evenly). (a). Get to whom correct (everyone). 3. Formed, made and created for one’s own personal use. 4. Crucify as many as you want. 5. Not under law, but grace. (no special rules). 6. Fall of man (failure to respond to your will). 7. Born again (more people to yell at). 8. S.I.T. much while yelling (it will confuse people and they will think you are a barbarian). 9. Prophesy is more mature (make up your own stuff and say it came from God. See number 8). 10. Operate all 9 all the time (improves versatility and impresses others). 11. Declare you have a gift ministry (improved control). 12. If they want to be ignorant, let them be ignorant (do your own thing). Congratulations! You get a piece of paper and a name tag. Now go out and teach others this detailed knowledge no one else has. It works best if you do it with a superior attitude. Malls are popular places for spreading the word. If you get any strange looks, just start screaming in tongues and walk away knowing that not every one is meek to receive. That will bolster your morale.

When I took the Univ. of Life Ephesians class, vp made a big deal about living on only grapes for a week to write the RHST book. He lied outright to all the wc on telephone hookup, the live wc (is that opposed to dead?) and to everyone who took that class. (It only took a week?). Stealing someone else’s work is bad enough. Lying about it to so many for so many years is even worse. In case you didn’t know, he wasn’t a man of God. He was a man of grapes…it’s important to be right about the details.

The yoke's on Larry. (I don't get paid for my jokes...you get what you pay for.)

T-bone: Wisecracks is not only hilarious, it is a great piece of creative writing!!!

I am hoping this thread doesn’t become a trinity debate, mainly because those tend to get long. On the other hand (I have different fingers.). We’ve established to my satisfaction, anyway, it was a virgin birth, took a PART as in flesh but not blood is false, sin isn’t in the blood, and doubt in my mind about the genealogies as taught by twi. If memory serves, we haven’t come to complete agreement on all these issues, but this is where I’m at. Rom 1:3Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; Rom 1:4And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead: To me, this establishes Mary was the genetic mother. “If he had had Mary's DNA - he would have been inheriting corruptible, fallen, flesh.” (Sunesis). I can see why you would say that, but the only thing is the tree of life was withdrawn (eternal life). Is death in the DNA? Worth looking into. Meanwhile… Act 13:33God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Act 13:34And as concerning that he raised him up from the dead, [now] no more to return to corruption, he said on this wise, I will give you the sure mercies of David. Act 13:35Wherefore he saith also in another [psalm], Thou shalt not suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Act 13:36For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption: Act 13:37But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption. Wordwolf: Thank you for taking the time to answer my question. It is a good explanation.

The law was weak because no law can produce righteousness. The Galatians were trying to get righteousness by performance of the law (their own righteousness, not the righteousness of God through faith). The law was slavery in the sense that no amount of obedience would produce righteousness and it only provided temporary atonement. We were freed from this slavery. That is the liberty. Paul goes on to say that that doesn’t mean freedom to sin.

“Without father, without mother: There is nothing said about the genealogy of Melchizedek in the Genesis 14 passage or anywhere else. As far as the Biblical record is concerned, he has no father or mother, no beginning of days nor end of life.” Guzik. Is this how you understand it, Wordwolf? If so, then as I was….if not, would you please explain? The thinking thing: after spending so many years in twi not thinking at all, it is rather important to me now to think, and to do my own thinking as much as possible. Then I need you guys who have spent more time at sorting out the chaff from the wheat than I have. It is quite a large task to do alone. (I sometimes wonder if there was any wheat in twi).

I hate to do this to you….but here it is: Hbr 7:1For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God, who met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him; Hbr 7:2To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Hbr 7:3Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. Hbr 7:4Now consider how great this man [was], unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils. Do you understand the implications of this? I have a feeling this thread is going to get lengthy…

2Ti 2:8Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: Hbr 2:14Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Hbr 2:15And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. Hbr 2:16For verily he took not on [him the nature of] angels; but he took on [him] the seed of Abraham. Gal 3:16Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. With regard to whether Mary was the genetic mother, perhaps the answer can be found with different questions. Are the above verses literally true and can those promises have been fulfilled if they are not?

ek. It reminds of out from the circle of twi.

Larry, re: this is my thread. I understand your heart. However, from my point of view all I did was start this thing. It’s just as much your thread as anyone’s. We work together, we figure it out together. I have no concern about “staying on topic.” We may swing wide left and wide right before it’s all over. I basically feel it’s necessary to understand sin and law before going much further. How can you evaluate sin nature if you don’t understand sin? Further, without this understanding how can you really put the new birth into perspective? So, to my way of thinking, this is a rather important topic.

The first step for me was coming to GS. I did a massive amount of reading but the two threads that helped me the most were: VP and me in Wonderland The Way: living in Wonderland The 2nd one was quite long, however I read every word of it. I found GS Radio helpful also. These two threads put my twi experience into perspective, answered some questions, and for the first time I could put to rest any doubt I had about twi. I really had to do this before I could do anything at all. The second step was dealing with feeling stupid. I understand how I fell for it and how I was deceived and I accept that this happened. The third step was to begin to address twi doctrine. I have been doing this in the doctrinal section. I like doing this because I can think for myself but I have the safety net of the opinions of others, so I feel a little more secure than I would tackling it on my own. I’ve got support and I’ve got people to tell me if I added 2 and 2 and got 5. In the course of doing this, when I find I actually added 2 and 2 and got 4, my confidence that I can actually think has increased. I’m not beyond repair. But in a nutshell, GS has been the most important thing I could have done. Thanks, Pawtucket!!! Thanks fellow GS’ers!!!

Sin and the Law: Part II Mat 22:37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. Mat 22:38This is the first and great commandment. Mat 22:39And the second [is] like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Mat 22:40On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets. Mar 12:30And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this [is] the first commandment. Mar 12:31And the second [is] like, [namely] this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. Mar 12:32And the scribe said unto him, Well, Master, thou hast said the truth: for there is one God; and there is none other but he: Mar 12:33And to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love [his] neighbour as himself, is more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices. Mar 12:34And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him [any question]. Luk 10:25¶And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? Luk 10:26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? Luk 10:27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. Luk 10:28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live. Jhn 13:34A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. Jhn 13:35By this shall all [men] know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. The assertion that the greatest sin is not to love God and your neighbor seems logical unless you think about it very much. If I commit adultery, then I have violated both love God and love my neighbor. If I gossip, I have done the same. Based on what is the “greatest sin” then anything I do that violates those is the greatest sin. I had done a search on “death” + “sin” and encountered this: Deu 21:22¶And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: I hadn’t thought about it before, but obviously from this verse, some sins are worse than others. (Eyesopen, this is it) I’m sure you guys remember different sins had different consequences. That by itself is proof enough that no degree of sin is not right. Returning to “the greatest sin” it would be more accurate to say some things reflect a greater lack of love for God and one’s neighbor than others.

Larry, I’d be glad to get into Romans, (and I think it’d be a great idea to) but there is more ground I would like to discuss first. Sin and the Law Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the Law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not know lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. This verse is saying the law defines sin. I only understood this a few days ago, and that puts the law in a very different light than I used to think of it (as opposed to rules and regs). Romans 6:15 What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. What this is saying is we are not under the law but still responsible to avoid the sin that is described in the law. To take the phrase “not under the law” out of context as a blanket statement is misleading. Further, to understand the 7 administrations as compartmentalized where one section is addressed to us and to be taken literally and the rest is “for our learning” is a direct contradiction of this verse. For our learning implies we should learn it…At no time were we ever released from responsibility of avoiding the sin described in the law. I Cor. 5:1 It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife. This is being confronted. I recently read the section in the law describing sexual sin. It is specific that one should not have sex with one’s mother. Paul isn’t confronting it because it is a weird thing to do, but on the basis that it is sin as described in the law. I Cor. 5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Verse 10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the coveteous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. Verse 11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or coveteous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. All the sins listed above are described in the law. Paul is clearly expecting obedience to it. Galatians 5:14 For all the law is fulfilled (pleroo) in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. What the verse IS saying: we fulfill obedience to the law with regard to sin as we do the above. What the verse is NOT saying: that it is up to us to assess what is or is not sin in light of the above. There were three things that gave me trouble understanding Romans 5-7. I thought I was too dense to understand. 1. Sin being in my blood stream overriding my mind. (Mental meltdown for me.) 2. The seven administrations. 3. Not understanding that the law defines sin. I don’t recall in 21 yrs in twi ever being taught the law defines sin. I can’t state unequivocally I wasn’t, but I sure don’t remember it. I surely never understood it that way. Certainly the phrase “not under the law” was bandied about almost as often as “speak in tongues” (at the twig level at least). Taken out of context as a stand alone, blanket phrase, it sounds like I can disregard the law in it’s entirety as not relevant. For me personally, I don’t mind the 7 administrations as marking time. But, to understand it as chopping up the Bible into 7 pieces where one piece applies to me and the rest doesn’t, makes it a bit hard to understand some things and leads me to false conclusions. Now I look at it as one continuous thing, with some things starting at times, some things changing at times, and others remaining the same. I don’t have much trouble understanding why it would be necessary to do a research paper on adultery to give to the top leadership at twi. Well that’s my thoughts on this subject. What do you guys think?