socks

That's probably true Lindy, I'm making a general statement as to the simple fact that nearly no one reads the entire bible, from start to finish or spends any great degree of time learning what's in the whole book. If you don't you won't have questions about something you don't even know exists. If all you know is what someone else has told you about it in their interpretation and you only have that one opinion, you're limited. That's probably why it's impossible to have a coherent discussion with someone who doesn't know what you're talking about and isn't interested in understanding. If they've been taught to view questions and different opinions as dangerous, they'll steer clear or pop off a knee jerk answer.

Hi I. Whether it be Peter or Pater , the "prophecy of the scripture" spoken about if from the vantage point of the first generation of followers of Jesus Christ - woulda hadda be the "OT"...? What they had. The prophecy part - what was foretold - as to the coming of the Messiah, the people of Israel, the world, etc. And stuff. That verse sticks out - someone's being reminded, told, that the prophecies aren't open to interpretation. Yet, interpretation, understanding, was inevitable. So there's limits to be observed, but what are they? Clarity has to be achieved, and I suspect the topic of Jesus Christ would be a hot one. From another viewpoint it could even be used to refer to Paul - he claimed to receive by revelation of Jesus Christ, and offers interpretation of the OT in relation to Jesus and who He was. Who's zoomin' who? :) I've tried to take it from a more general view of allowing God to open the understanding.

"I believe the bible" almost always means "I believe in God who I believe is responsible for the bible". Truth to tell, most people have never read the bible - all of it, to the end they could say they believe it. If a person's never bothered to read the whole thing, why bother making high claims as it's authenticity? Smaller still the number who have read it more than once or studied much of it. Most believe what they've taken from it by choice or what's inspired them. Which is fine, but no cause to pound a lectern or take up a collection. :) I like Armstrong, too by the way. Finished "The History of God" last year and have another of her's on the barbey for the summer.

penworks, I could see two interpretations of Tim. 3:16 - 1.) all scripture, writing/graphe, refers to the "Old Testament". We could use Jesus's breakdown of "scripture" in Luke:24:44, 45 And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and the Prophets and the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, This works with Paul's statement to Timothy - "and how from childhood you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus." Timothy being a young man, younger than Paul anyway, he would have been reading and studying those "OT" writings that were in existence at that time. I could also see a broader interpretation of it, one that Paul may have inferred - that the understanding that he had by "revelation of Jesus Christ" that he wrote could be included within that - in other words, less the actual letter that he was writing and more the writings that he did that carried that information. "Logos" is a big part of this, as most Christians use it synonymously for the bible, meaning "the Word of God", the bible. Today people tend to view logos as a word or words of expression, communication. There's more to logos though, than a word for a word. And communication isn't the thing being communicated and a word isn't the only way to communicate. What's more important - how something is communicated or the thing being communicated? I guess an argument can be made that if we only had one means of knowing something - only one form of communication possible or used, then that form would be essential, since it's the only one. But we know that words, language, writing, isn't the only form that God uses to communicate with people and the words of the bible aren't the sole means God has to communicate with us. Still, if we accept upfront that the bible - the collection of "old" and "new" testament writings we have collected today - are words that God has inspired others to write, then other forms of communication should explain, confirm, corroborate, expand and increase on what we have. I guess... Your question is one that I've spent time on too - it's a reasonable one. :)

Dot, the OT laws, codes - often attempt to cover a lot of ground morally - do thus and such, but if such and so occurs, do this. Unless there's this or that in which case do this. Jesus interpreted that the greatest, first commandment of OT law was to love and place God first He confirms that and a second one, "like" it, to love others as you love yourself. In these "hang" all the other laws. He also taught not to make vows - in the sense that the integrity of what we do shouldn't require a contract or vow, but we should simply do what we say or promise to do and that's that. On the other hand - compare that to the incident where a man comes to Jesus and asks him to settle a matter of an inheritance within a family and how it was being divided. Jesus responded "who made me a judge over you?" That little reference has always intrigued me - that Jesus wouldn't get wrapped up in a legal dispute amongst siblings, but worked with full authority in spiritual laws. I can see your questions and thoughts are the same kinds we all deal with and mankind has always dealt with. Whether we apply specific codes to them or broader codes, we have to work with them and try to come to the "best" decisions and outcomes that we can, given the circumstances. Like Solomon with the women and the baby - wisdom is where we find it and it can flow from the basic core values we hold. But we shouldn't always try for a cut-paste answer, based on verses that we try to obey. The verses in these sections you quoted can give direction for our own decisions and "justice" but will require work to get there.

shfit, you just reminded me of something - I think that example you gave it a very goodone. I saw a comic strip in last Sunday's paper that made me think of this topic. In it one of the characters mused on what if - life counted "down" instead of out? Started counting down from the end. We'd know exactly how much time was left. Would it make a difference in how I lived? It gave me chills for a second. Because I realized that yes, it would. My perspective would be entirely different. Or would it? If I knew my lifetime that way, I might just try to do more of what I woud have anyway. But however we'd live the reality of a fixed amount of time would be more constant. In a sense, that's the way a lifetime is counted now - we just don't know the final end moment. If - God knows that final moment, sees the expanse of time from an eternal perspective where all the factors are knowable, does it effect how He interacts with us? I think it could within certain parameters. It couldn't be total, otherwise we'd all be ending up in very similar states. I guess...it's hard to tell. :) Again I think of the example of the potters wheel and the interaction between God and us.

The comparison of adultery towards God, by worshipping other gods, and adultery towards a spouse is a valid one. God commanded against both, in the Old Testament. "No cheating". The marriage relationship can help us to define the relationship God wants between His people and Himself. It brings it into high relief, clear viewing. Contributing to the breakdown of the one can clearly effect the way we uphold the other. Promoting strong solid marital relationships promotes the vision of a strong relationship wth God. Ephesians speaks to it in the church's relationship to Christ. It's really really strange - that in a ministry that spent so much time and effort on promoting Ephesians that this stuff would be in question at all amongst any of it's "leaders".

I don't know Brit, but would have to say that's admirable, given the circumstances of those times and the turmoil. It was difficult for many people in many different ways. Shovelling through this stuff wasn't easy, and much less so for anyone in the middle of it. Any effort to "do the right thing" - that's good. Especially that in the midst of a lot of anger and hurt, many people responded vigorously and still with some restraint.

You're mighty welcome penworks! Exillary, I suspect that the most genuine side of my earliness is my age. Early in means old out. :) Seniority does have it's benefits though. I remember less and less of what I really used to be like, and more and more of what I think I used to be like. We just picked up one of our cars today from a local shop, getting the air conditioning recharged. That's a serious environmental proposition today, requiring specialized equipment, certification, disposal methods. The service manager at this place was about my age and we got to talking and I told him how I remembered the time when I could go buy a little recharge kit and a couple cans of Freon and recharge the car's system myself, hopefully not blowing myself up in the process. We laughed, we cried, we remembered. Those days are gone - way gone, and we both know they won't be coming back this way again, ever. That's the way the past works, y'know? Once spent, it's like a good meal - remembered but tomorrow - you're gonna need another one, good or bad, you gotta eat. What you see is what you get, y'know? Fog, be gone!

The timing for information, facts and "truth"? Interesting question. What would be a bad time? Figure - this stuff is over 20 years old. If not now, hopefully it would be pretty soon then, while some of us can still see and hear and sit up without dribbling. Anyhoo - Der R-ster's been around this board for a long time, probably had to re-register after a long absence. See? Age sets in. I doubt it was planned with ulterior motive... Or... ...Was it....? Sorry, couldn't resist. Actually I think this was timed to coincide with the annual Spring Volksmarch in New Knoxville, and a major leaflet drop over Shelby County.

Far be it from me to put the brakes on a good ho'down, but I heard the teaching about David and the women and his being King, but never heard it in a context where VPW compared that to himself. I never got any subliminal vibe that he was even talking about himself. I know it's been discussed here and on Waydale (and no doubt other places) in that light and the comparison's been drawn. Did Martindale speak about this as something he'd picked up from VPW and others heard of it that way? I'm curious - when and how the connection was made. Is it after-the-fact - as in "it's obvious what he meant by this teaching based on what he did personally" or are there some points in time where it's known to have been taught in connection to Way Lederz and traced back to VPW's presentation of it? Whatever someone named "David" did 1000's of years ago along these lines is of little interest to me, and it shouldn't have any connection to anyone today, if that was actually the arrangement. Kings, rulers with power, do all kinds of weird shi-t. From a practical standpoint it's ridiculous. Why would one man have any right to "all" the available women in a kingdom for any reason that would be even remotely worthwhile to the kingdom? Rule by force - anything can be lawful but we know that doesn't make it right. So anyway I'm still curious about any concrete details that can document where this connection between the David storee and a "man of God" today came into play. :blink: Are "we" making the connection or is it based on something known to have been passed around by VPW directly, or LCM, or who exactly?

Anyone who thinks in any way, even for a minute, that VPW would be proud of and supportive of anyone changing anything he taught in the PFAL series - is nuts. Bona fide, certifiably out of their mind. Crazy. Whack-o. One bun shy of a weinie roast. Light in the pockets. Look up "no-brainer" in the dictionary and you'll see their photo for the example labelled "No Brains". Doing so reinvents VPW's known history and virtually every known encounter he ever had with anyone who wanted to change or correct what he'd researched. His mind was made up - and I can gawr-antee he'd be chewing shortie Kools and spitting them out sideways over anything resembling "Personal Prophecy". Unless of course it was ray-vuhlation. Cus then he'd know for sure - it was from the wrong gawd. In John L's case, he knows better than to say something like that. That's his way of saying "VPW isn't here to argue so hey, this sounds good, makes me feel good and will feel good for others so yeah, sure. Whatever I say." Yeah, nice goin' penworks. Who's got that kind of time?

Well, maybe it was like tithing. Next to nothing about tithing taught in the New Testament. Howza come the o-nay ention-may? Easy, sez the Wayfer - because they already knew all about it and didn't need to be taught it. It was a universal principle, a law of 'bundance that spans all time and space and everything inbetween. Doesn't need to be taught Beavis, get a grip. Normally when something isn't taught or mentioned, there's a reason and now we have one so you just stop your yakkin'. Maybe adultery fell into the same category. Marriage being what God intended, the topic may have been so obvious there was no need to teach about it. It was obvious - when you make a vow for something serious, like say to take care of a neighbor's sheep while they're away, you keep the vow, or at least are expected to try to. Same with marriage, except there should definitely NOT be any sheep involved and your neighbors spouse doesn't require any care while the other's away. It's so simple really. Marriage - no sheep, leave the sheeps out of it, and keep to your own and your neighbor do likewise. I'm sure that's why the commandment in the O.T. addresses both adultery and "coveting" so simply. And remember - the laws governing sheep and other livestock never mention anything about marital vows either. But vows are vows and apply to both spouses and marriage, and of course arrangements for livestock care. Come to think of it, there's not much teaching about sheep in the CF and S class either...this may be a subject worth looking in to. We may have missed something, something obvious and universal, and essential to living a fully 'bundant life. Something only a few that were really big enough spiritually could handle.

They begged me to stay. Called 10, 12 times to see if I was sure about what I'd decided. Sent leters, and more letters, even after I'd said my decision was final. They wanted some stuff back, but I'd paid for it so I refused. There was a lot of hurtful things said, then apologies when they realized they'd been said out of sheer grief at the idea of me leaving. For months I cried a lot. I'd hear some of the same things I'd said and heard for so many years and it would bring back floods of memories and it would start all over again. Then they finally stopped calling, although I continued to get newsletters once every few months, with little notes saying "Miss you!" and "Hope you're doing well, keep in touch, we miss you!" It was kind of touching really, and even sometimes today I....I....Oh. Wait a minute. Wait. That was my Amway group. Never mind. Sorry, wrong thread.

Chuck, I dunno what to tell you, but I do speak in tongues, or something or other, not all that differently than I did 20-30 years ago. Almost 40 now, going back to the first time. I haven't learned that much more about what I'm actually doing than I ever knew. Some, but the true essence of it is about the same. More natural, normal to me now. Evan's use of the word "mechanic" rings true to me. The Way approached "s.i.t.'s" in a very mechanical way. Lots of people will say even today "well, it worked, so it must be right". But a lot of things appear to "work" and aren't right or even close to it. In my mind the mechanical approach used in the last session of the "old" PFAL class was about as awkward as a blind date, or like going to the Big Prom Night and being unable to get the corsage pinned on right to save your life. It ends up where it's supposed to, more or less, but there's a lot of sweat stains getting there. Some people say it just sailed through like water off a duck. Many others would say it was more like getting a root canal without anesthetics. In short, the "one size fits all" approach was and I believe is false, it's not something to be done in a setting equal to a Moonie Mass Wedding Day where a 1,000 people say "I do" in the warmth of a football stadium. It's personal, and needs to be handled within a person's life carefully and with love. That being said, many of us did make it through the Big Night and were fortunate enough to get a second date, so to speak. It sounds to me like your current situation requires some prayerful time between you and God, where you can come to peace with who and where you are today. That's not a bad thing. Life goes on and as it does, it will change. Keep in mind that God is always there, with you and in you. Christ knows the way, the truth and the life you aspire to. Stay tight.

The Way prided itself on it's "like mindedness" in regards to the Word, the teaching on the bible. Well, you can't be if you don't know what it is. Can you? Knowing "what is available" is a cornerstone of the Way's doctrines. It's also a Key Kommon Sense thingie too. What are my options? Choices? Can't believe if I don't know, 1st session PFAL. People are destroyed for lack of knowledge, right? The PFAL series and associated classes gave an ample forum for progressive growth in the participants. Yet, we do see a vacuum of open dialogue let along teaching, in the Way, when it comes to this threads topic - a veritable desert. Dry tumbleweeds on a dirt road would look like a forest by comparison. Nada. Zipski. Zero. Less than zero, minus. Deafening silence. One big long Timeout on the topic. No scripture, no Greek, no Aramaic, no word studies, no new work, no old work, no appropriated text from others writings, no seminars, workshops, classes, home study courses, summer camps, Advances, Corps Research Projects, Sunday Night Service tapes, no Way Magazine articles, no Advanced Class Specials, no Certificates of Completion to hang proudly. No nothing. Diddly and Squat on this, for public consumption. The only knowledge of it, imparted one-on-one, and only amongst certain people at certain times and then never to be openly discussed.

It is big! One of the most biblical N.T. statements regarding the whole matter is in Romans 13: For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love [is] the fulfilling of the law. Retooling the Old Testament and the 4 Gospels out of our "New Testament" understanding is a huge mistake, as we've seen. If reduced to the statement- "for our learning" - that statement carries a question - "what are we actually learning?" or :) ? Everything isn't cast out in lieu of Christ's redemptive work. Christ fulfilled the law - so it follows plainly that the lessons learned previously have fulfillment in "new life" in Christ. Finished work indeed, but work still to be done in response, as well. We "Gentiles", and all members of this new "church of Christ", don't replace the moral laws with a new morality, we have a new source of reference though in Christ, specifically, for fulfillment of what morality is and has always been. For a Christian anyway. And nearly all Christian sects, societies and organizations and churches, fraternal or formal, recognize that.

I think you got the goods on the one, though! Audio's good, no complaints here. Good job.

Thanks Paw and Ralph. This would appear to serve the purpose of laying a groundwork for anyone wanting to know some of "what happened" in the final year or so of VPW's life and the basics of how Geer came to arriving on the Way's doorstep with the "Passing of the Patriach". Couple things came to mind listening - one is that not everyone in the Way Corps or Way Staff ever heard of or knew anything about any kind of doctrinally accepted stance on extra-marital sex, aka "adultery". In fact I don't think the vast majority knew about it or ever had it presented to them. When Ralph says he didn't, I believe him, because he and I were in the same Corps together and I certainly never did, nor my wife. People did what they did and sometimes "mistakes" were made but I personally never heard it handled that way. So I could imagine his surprise and resistance to the idea. Another is that Ralph has covered this period before, the information isn't new at all, and it's definitely not as if he's reinventing the past to somehow make himself appear better than he was or that he did anything he didn't. If memory serves, this is a pretty straightforward rendering of that period, for Ralph. Lastly, RD IMO does not come across as a savior to the Way ministry, if anything he contributed to the demise of it's formal power structure by putting knowledge and information in the hands of people who otherwise wouldn't have had it. At the time it was messy and difficult, there was a lot of controversy as to how this information was getting out, meetings on the field, how things were being handled, or more correctly mishandled - but Ralph speaks truth about the immense need once things got moving past the initial stages to take stock and take some action on any number of things that were accumulating and being allowed to run rampant without any clear leadership from the Way Nash. "Yak" twig? More like "Hak" twig. I respect the people that were there, but it was near impossible to get any kind of answers - even communications - from the leadership at the Way druing the late 80's. So this is if not "the other side of the story", then definitely "another side of the story". Anyone who challenges or disagrees is, I would assume, free to pony up with their own, if they have it. Otherwise it stands as stated. Good audio by the way! was this a face to face, or done on the phone, or...?

P-salm, I understand. I wanted to mention his Dad, but wasn't sure if that was appropriate. I also agree, help is good - help you, help the family. Part of the whole equation is what your husband is doing and how that effects the whole situation. This may not be the place to open that up, but seems like by the sounds of it there's some groundwork that needs to be laid there.

Maybe your friend can help you, Psalmie, while you go the route you choose. Sounds like they do know some things about educating, are there practical things that would help? IMO the school system supports the child. What's good for the child? It's difficult to make one school work for everyone. You might try a mix of things, to make it work. Another thing - he has a long life ahead, as do you. :) Make the goal to get him what he needs and at the same time to get the boxes checked, ie through high school and looking at the next step of education, that's right for him. That's the point in the long run, I think. When he's 30, he'll be in a different world, mixing with people - who knows how and where? At this point, get 'er done and get him going in the right direction. For 4 years - I would think that's gotta be there, at home, with his family. Anyhoo....kids are all so different, we're all so different at that young age. What's "different" today will be something else a year older, y'know? He may develop in ways you can't see yet, in a year or two.

I'd say no, he stays with you and your family, at home. Public school, and do additional stuff to help him. Work on your financial situation, get some outside help if you can to help with your situation. Easy to give advice - but that would be the long and short of it, based on what you wrote. My son spelled "phonetic" in middle and most of high school. He'd study, pass tests, do okay, then write "the kat wus big an flufy" in a sentence. He's very intelligent, creative, and has graduated college. We were told phonetic spelling was something he'd deal with as time went on and he did. He's still not the greatest speller, and when he's in a hurry, he uses short hand - which is how we learned his mind works in that regard. Interestingly, he's very good at math.

Amazing Sea Monkeys!, disguised as "musicians" and "dancers", filmed in this never before seen Secret Rite of the Sea - never - until now!!! and here!!!

Unusual auditory stimulation.

Filtered flavor.