Eagle

GSG: If one can look at "Tree" differently in the Bible, one can look at "seed" just as differently. It is to be looked at just as figuratively.

Tumbleweed is correct about the Noah and Ham incident. Wierwille taught that the sin of Ham was that Ham castrated Noah. Wierwille got that translation of that story from Ernest L. Martin's book, "101 Secrets That Christians Do Not Know", Chapter 57 (or the 57th Question), on page 87, entitled "The Castration of Ham". Not a good interpretation but apparently Wierwille believed it. The rest of the book looks okay, though. Sometime early in the 1980s, John Schoenheit wrote in a Way Magazine an article called, The "Sin of Ham", in which he states that the sin was not castration but that Ham raped his own mother, giving way to the birth of Canaan. Schoenheit gives great scripture to back this up. I believe the article came out after Wierwille died and was before the Advanced Class of 1986. When I attended the Advanced Class in 1986, we saw the video of Wierwille bringing up the Sin of Ham as castration. At lunch and after lunch, I mentioned that the Way Magazine had since gone away from that and said it was Ham raping his mother. Many fellow classmates, obviously Wierwille worshippers, panicked and went to the head of the class at that time, Michael Fort (this happened at Emporia) to turn me in pretty much, and question whether I was telling the truth or disrupting the class. Fort advised them the story was true and I was not captured or handcuffed but rather Fort came out and tried to calm those down that further research had been done on the subject and that it sometimes is necessary to move on and correct any past errors and that we should be grateful to belong to a ministry that does that. Actually, that summer, Michael Fort was a class act. I don't know him personally and maybe others do not agree, but he did pretty good.

GSG: You said "seed" was translated literally "seed" or "progeny". Therefore the devil had actual seed. If we translate every word in the Bible like that, was the "Tree" of Life a real tree? How about the "Tree" of the Knowledge of Good and Evil?

The book of Hebrews in the NT mentions tithing, but the idea is that it pretty much was useless to give the tithe to the temple or high priest because Jesus Christ became our high priest. It pretty much says that tithing is useless because the temple is in the body of the born again believer and Jesus is the high priest. If tithing at all, the tithes would go to the church, but Hebrews does not go that far to say that. The idea here is that the Hebrew believers were still under the law giving a tithe to the temple and high priest. There is no tithe for the New Testament believers. There is only giving, and giving as your heart purposes, mentioned in another epistle.

Really? I remember in my Advanced Class 1986 that I discovered I was supposed to stay on the campus and never leave. Screw 'em. I violated parole and left to go to town just for the hell of it. Wafers saw me leave and come back. Nobody squealed. But I assume that if Way Corpse had caught me, I would have been kicked out of the Advanced Class. It wasn't until the 1990s that almost anyone began to turn you in for almost anything. That's when I left...and did not come back.

Way To Go, The Evan!

GSG: You missed the point entirely. I did not say the devil had children. You did. I am saying I disagree with the fact that he can other than to have children as a figure of speech. I believe you know what I explained. You certainly put a spin on it. Fact still remains, the devil is not God, cannot get people born of him or born again of him, and cannot possess a born again spirit-filled Christian, and is not omnicient and not omnipresent. Oh well, at least I know how people feel about this. That was the object of the thread.

What the Hay: Hardly a jump in logic. It IS logic. To think these ways about the devil makes you think higher about the devil than he really is. I am informing people here, that this TWI doctrine must go. It is like hanging on to a rotting trash heap. But those that want to believe it will believe it. You may find excuses in the Word for it, but no sound doctrinal backup. If you give up anything from TWI, it is the devil spirit field they taught about. The doctrine was and is completely and utterly bogus and fake.

GSG: Yes, you have to substantiate that the devil has to be omnicient and omnipresent in order to give "seed", of which he cannot create or give. He can only take seed. This means he steals from within the creation itself. The Bible does substantiate God's omnicient and omnipresent power, the fact he gives seed, and the fact that by this spritual seed people are born again of him and are children of him. To believe that the devil can get people "born again" of him makes the devil equal with God. To believe that the devil or devil spirits can possess a born again Christian with holy spirit within puts the holy spirit as well as the believer in subjection to the devil, making the devil more powerful than God. Only TWI and some offshoots believes both of these doctrines and only a few or a handful of fringe charismatic Christian groups believes Christians can be possessed. This is an important and critical part of Christian doctrine that TWI has most certainly perverted. If people want to believe this, then believe it. Those that put that kind of thinking behind them will have an easier time growing spiritually and have less paranoia in their spiritual lives.

To be a child of the devil or to say that "you are of your father the devil" does not mean you literally were "born of" or "born again" of the devil. There are no scriptures alluding to the devil having this kind of power. You can say that one is a literal child of God or that God is your father because the scriptures do tell you that you are "born of" or "born again" of God. This means spiritual seed was involved for God. The devil had the rights to the human race prior to the fall and therefore was the god of this world in practice by those living on earth. A god that has followers is a "father" and the follower is a "child" regardless of any seed. No one can substantiate from scripture that the devil is omnicient or omnipresent enough to be at all places at once where people accept the devil as lord and get "seed" from him, who was a limited being, an angel, a fallen angel at that. The devil cannot keep handing out spirit from himself less he completely disappear. For Jesus to tell the religious leaders that they were of their "father" the devil was to tell them that they did not follow Abraham as Abraham was their ancestral father, and was in fact, a father to these religious leaders. What Jesus refers to here is that they were not following Abraham and what he spoke of, because if they had been doing that and had the committment to God that Abraham had, then they would be followers of Christ, who would lead them to the new birth. I believe a lot of people here still cannot get over TWI teachings. They were not as "logical" as they appeared to be.

What the Hay: Good point on "children of the devil". But that phrase is most certainly a figure of speech which means that you do not take part of the phrase and break it down into a literal meaning. The Hebrews used "children of" in a lot of things. "Children of light", "children of darkness", "children of the devil". These mean that if you are "children" of it, you follow it like children. If you follow the devil, you are a follower of the devil. If you are a child of darkness, you live in darkness, and if you are a child of light, you follow and live in light. However, I am going to study that one further just to be sure. I appreciate that coming up.

The Seed of the Serpent idea is just bogus. Wierwille says it is the "unforgivable sin". Wierwille and Wierwille alone, and not even Bullinger, made up the idea of a person being able to be "born again of the devil's seed" (exact quote from PFAL collaterals) thus TWI was unique to that doctrine and TWI was alone in all the world in that doctrine among Christians. Now offshoots share this bogus idea. The unforgivable sin has nothing to do with the devil getting people "born again" of him. The unforgivable sin is the rejection of the holy spirit, which when Christ said it, holy spirit was soon to become available. Briefly, you are given the choice of getting born again of God and reject that, that is a sin. It stays a sin unless you later accept Christ and become born again, then you have remission of all sins (not forgiveness as forgiveness of sins comes after remission. Remission is your slate wiped clean, a pardon. To me, it is a form of forgiveness, but it means God drops all charges, so to speak and the sins are gone and you will not hear or see of them again. Since God says you are a new creation, God is stating that old creation did that sin and all other sins and that man is dead. You are a new man or woman at the new birth.) If you are born again of God's holy spirit, then you cannot commit the sin of rejecting it anymore, therefore for a Christian, this sin is impossible. Please note that Mark 3:29 states that if you commit this sin, you are in danger of eternal damnation (death in the grave after the judgment)and the case of your salvation or damnation is not yet known when you commit it. If you keep denying the chance of God's holy spirit through Christ, or even do it once and never accept Jesus Christ, God sees this as a sin against Him and unless that sin is overturned by taking the new birth. You die committing this sin, you are held accountable to God. Furthermore, if you committed sins in the Old Testament, God could "forgive" sins with sacrifices and things of this sort, but what kind of sacrifice do you bring to God to get THIS sin forgiven? That person rejected the real life sacrifice of Jesus Christ anyway, and even if you asked God to forgive you for rejecting Christ, and one still refused to accept Christ, the sin remains out there. God can't forgive that. The only way out of rejecting Christ and God's holy spirit and new birth is to later accept it and get remission of the sin and your sin is taken away. You are saved from eternal damnation or judgment because of it. If this is not done, the sin sticks and you never get rid of it. As far as the devil and his seed, after the fall, man's physical seed went under his dominion, therefore mankind was called his "seed". They weren't "born of" the devil, the devil just pretty much had dominion of man and his seed as if he owned it. Note that in the Old Testament God called all the prophets "servants". Like it or not, the devil's dominion over man's body and soul was horrendous. Yet men still had free will and could talk to God just as Christians who have free will today and like to listen to the devil from time to time. Christians going off half-cocked does not make them "un-born" again nor possessed. It just makes them stupid Christians and out of fellowship. They need to return to God's Word. Some do, some don't. Those that don't still maintain their salvation but do not have what we would call a very good life in the flesh. I hope all this helps.

Goey has the exact right idea on the "dictation theory" being somewhat off. Yes, God does inspire the scriptures, written in the writer's own dialect and what that writer sees as a witness, and God does inspire them to write it in a way that makes the gospel records reflect King, Servant, Man, and Son of God. But God makes sure, that while the writers write in their own language and dialect, that no scripture record contradicts the others. I have found that while the gospel records are different, they do not contradict, but in fact, compliment each other.

The Red Sox finally have avenged the 1967 series in style. A four game sweep. The Babe turns in his grave. It has happened. Springtime has come to Camelot after years of having lost Excaliber. The Red Sox found and drank from the Holy Grail, wielding the sword once more. After 86 years, they have been resurrected. And now the Cubs need the same.

For those who don't remember 1967, that was the Impossible Dream year. I can remember the entire lineup. Dick Williams was a rookie manager that year leading the Red Sox to the pennant. Jim Lonborg was 22-9 and the star pitcher. Russ Gibson and Elston Howard were the catchers. First base was George Scott, who hit 19 homers that year and batted over .300. Mike Andrews was at second, Rico Petrocelli was at shortstop, Joe Foy was famous for grand slam home runs and played third. Tony Conigliaro played right field until he was beaned and was replaced by Ken Harrelson, also called the "Hawk". Reggie Smith played center field and Carl Yazstremski played the wall, the green monster in left field. Yaz won the triple crown that year. Also a rookie pitcher named Billy Rohr almost pitched a no-hit game in his first major league start. I know the season by heart. We lost to the St. Louis Cardinals that year in seven games. Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, and Curt Flood dominated the Cardinals in the World Series.

There are some very good lines of argument on this thread. Would like to say one thing, though. In the New Testament, the record does not say or show that the people vexed with spirits were believers first, but believers afterward, if they became believers at all.

Thanks for the input, guys. Lots of good talk here. I was asked to elaborate on a couple of things. The Seed of the Serpent concept that VPW brought forth is known only to the Way and the off-shoots of it that still propound it. The rest of Christianity does not even think of that never mind go along with it. The reason? The devil would have to be a being everywhere at once and know everybody who is confessing him as Lord in order for him to impart unholy spirit, and since he is a fallen angel, a limited being, how much of himself can he impart? The idea that born-again Christians can be possessed means that the devil spirits have to take control and operate a physical body that already has God's holy spirit within. If they are doing that, they are pretty much controlling what the Bible has called "the tabernacle" or "the temple" of the holy spirit. This Seed of the Serpent concept VPW brought forth made the devil equal with God. The idea that the devil or devil spirits can take over the temple of the holy spirit made the devil superior to God. Remember, the Bible made it clear light and darkness do not cohabitate and that the clean and unclean had to be separated, especially in the temple. Then remember the weird darkness that fell upon TWI after they began to propound heavily these doctrines. As far as the four crucified, only two crucified with Christ were in each gospel and only three denials of Peter were in each gospel. I do not believe God had us wanting to read that far into the gospel records and leave a mystery as to how many were crucified and how many denials we could guess at.

Did you ever, when walking into a church after leaving TWI, look at the chairs and want to string them together? Did you ever, after being invited to someone's house for dinner, want to re-arrange the silverware? Did you ever, after getting into a new house or apartment, feel devil spirits were present and had to cast them out? Did you ever, when hearing a sermon by a preacher in a church, start counting his "errors"? Any of these things happen, and more?

Just need to know. How many still believe the following: 1: There were "four" others crucified with Christ. 2: Peter denied Jesus "Six" times. 3: The devil can really "get people born again" of him (seed of the serpent). 4. That Christians, with holy spirit within, can get possessed and taken over by devil spirits, including taking over the holy spirit within. I'd be interested in your thoughts on these topics.

Exie' God must have heard me. Terrific! Now it is the St. Louis Cardinals. We are heading back for a re-do of 1967. Go Red Sox! You MUST win it this time!

That Purple Heart looks great on PJ's site. He earned it. I hope the rest post theirs on their sites. Eagle

Thanks, PAW!!! Yup, they did it!!!! The Red Sox after being down 0-3, came back to win 4-3 in 7 games. I hope they play the St. Louis Cardinals. That would be a replay of 1967 at least. So tomorrow I am rooting for the Cardinals over the Astros. This is going to be one incredibile World Series.

Wow. Best article I've read on the Red Sox since 1967.

PJ: Have you picked up your Ex-TWI Purple Heart yet? Eagle

Incredible. A-Rod on tape actually batting that ball away on the tag in the baseline. Incredibly illegal move. He got caught. The Yankees manager should have chewed out A-Rod rather than defend him. The other guy would have at least, in my opinion, made it to second. Instead, the umps took it all away and called that other guy back to first. Red Sox look like they are beating the curse. Tonight will be the test. Then the Series will be the answer. Sox have to be in top form tonight and fight the hardest they ever have and not back down. They are unbelievable. First team in a playoffs to go from 0-3 to 3-3. Make history tonight, Red Sox.