TheEvan

Interestingly, it is covenant theology (certainly not Wierwille's bag) that uses the term "administration" to describes the differences between old and new covenants. They are usually limited to two or sometimes three administrations. In reading this book it has become apparent, like many points of doctrinal argument, the warring parties are closer together than it seems at first blush. (Mind you, I'm not including Wierwille's, or Bullinger's extreme ultra-dispensationalism in the following) (Mark, it is my understanding that Darby is considered the 'founder' of dispensationalism, not Bullinger, who was somewhat later) To describe the differences in the widest possible terms, covenant theology argues that, throughout all time, the *means of salvation has always been grace, and the *content of faith has always been in Jesus Christ. Mainstream dispensationalists agree that the *means of salvation has always been grace alone, but that the *content of faith has differed in different dispensations. (ie, by faith in Christ's sacrifice in the church age; by faith in God's covenant promises to Israel in the Old covenant). Obviously, Wierwille's teachings fall outside of that argument, as he had the means of salvation differing accoring to which "administration". Jeez. He actually taught that "Old Testament 'believers' were saved by keeping the law". Didn't he stop to think that by that statement, he was condemning EVERYBODY of that era to hell? Quoted from my current book: "He (Allis, a well-known Covenant theologian) again misconstrues what Dispensationalists believe. He states that the "difference between the law and the promise does not, therefore, consist in this, that under the promise men were saved without obedience and under the law they are saved because of disobedience." This is not the teaching of mainstream Dispensationalism which holds to the belief that salvation in every dispensation was by grace through faith, and the difference is only in the content of faith." Mark, I'd have to say your characterization of Dispensationalism is true of the extreme Wierwillian variety, but not of the mainstream...as expounded by Ryrie, for instance. EDIT: Another important difference between covenant & dispensational teachings is that covenentalist teach that the elect of all time have always been the church, expressed in the Old Covenant as national Israel and in the New as the Church, whereas dispensationalists teach that the church began at (usually) Pentecost. This is where covenant theology meets its strongest criticism of reading its theology back into the old testament...

Sorry, wrong title...and spelling. Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology by Arnold g. Fruchtenbaum It appears to be self-published by "Ariel Ministries" but it does have an ISBN # 0-914863-05-3 It was given to me by a friend and I don't know how he got it. I found an address for Ariel: PO Box 3723, Tustin CA 92781 Be forewarned, this is adapted from his doctoral thesis. It can be tedious. But you may find it enlightening...

No, he's dead

I am incredibly happy to hear this. Major lemonade! Here it comes....BEEP...BEEEP...BEEP

That's my take, def. I really don't think it was deliberate, unless he just being deliberately obtuse so it might seem "new". Of all of Wierwille's doctrines, I think his peculiar & extreme take on dispensationalism could be his most harmful...

Icidentally, the area of Uganda from which I just returned is home to the Bugisu tribe which practices male circumcision as a rite of passage into adulthood. the subject is spread head to toe with a gray paste, adorned with dead banana leaves, and is circumcised. Then he and his procession, made up of family and other clan memebers, sort of 'slow-jog" up and down the roads. They wear something like sleighbells on their ankles, so it sounds a bit like Christmas in August to hear them coming. The subject has blood all down his legs, and besides the banana leaves is naked. Quite a sight. Incidentally, the Bugisu are known for marital fidelity and an extremely low incidence of AIDS and other STD's, especially given their African context. Hmmm

I'm not normally given to theological study (it not being my model or interest in Christianity), but on the recommendation of a friend I've been reading a theological tome called "Isrealology: The Missing Link In Dispensational Theology". I've been learning a great deal about the disctinctions between Covenant (Reformed) vs. Dispensational theologies and it has caused be to reflect back on some of the teachings of the Coach Elvis, our own MOGFODOT. Remember, Hose MOG said he didn't like the term "dispensation" and preferred instead "administration". Curious that. "Administration" is a distinctly and exclusively Covenant term used to describe the two or three different administrations of one overarching covenant. Whereas "dispensation" describes the different periods held to by Dispensationalists. Yet Wierwille's theology was beyond dispensational...it has been described by Ryrie as 'Ultra-dispensationalist" and quite rightly. It strips the Gospels and Jesus' teachings of their power for Christian living. Curious that he insisted on using Covenant terminology for quite an extremely opposite belief. So, what was it? 1. He unwittingly used terminology from his background (the very Calvinist Evangelical & Reformed) and applied it to Bullinger's mess. 2. He was sharp enough to include terminology from both theologies in an attempt to appeal to both backgrounds...

at this site: http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/br-chabadritual/ "The fact that circumcision is performed on the sexual organ is significant. This organ is representative of the body’s urges and this procedure indicates that we must control and sublimate these urges and conform them to the Will of God." So, that adds some weight to what sky4it posited. Whaddaya think? Rachel, with all due respect, don't you think your comments sound a bit condescending and stifling of open discussion? I do. I find it interesting that people who ardently hold to the infallibility of the scriptures and "hold it forth without any P.I." can easily disagree on many matters. My interpretation of that problem is that many doctrines are bigger than human understanding allows. We'll always know "incompletely" and that includes you and me. That's where charity is supposed to rule...

"They were just there as Wallace's bobble-heads." Now that's pretty funny!

Thanks everybody! I nearly missed all this great stroking.

Sam Bush has a twin? Well, I'm coming!

I intend to see it. it was actually in the theaters here. Incidentally, there was a movie based on the Gospel of Luke. It's commonly known as "The Jesus Film". I heard much hubbub about it and its use in evangelism, witnessed the same in Africa (it seemed really effective), but I thought the movie was very weak. Very weak. I can't imagine topping The Passion. Brilliant. Next favorite would be Zefferelli's Jesus of Nazareth.

SHort in absolute terms? Or merely in comparison with Atlas Shrugged & The Fountainhead? I'm tempted, so long as I don't totally fall off in total Rand-ism again...

Yeah, doesn't seem to fit with Der Veg's cartoonish rose-garden tiptoe through the tulips take on Christianity. Does it?

Incidentally, some years ago I became friends with a young man (and his sister) who was a budding biblical scholar of real greatness and a phenomenal intellect. And a genuinely humble guy. I was somewhat amused when he ran into Schoenheit at a conference of some kind. It resulted in a relationship. I'm pretty sure it was my friend that led the ces guys to Anthony Buzzard (whom I also know). To my further surprise, he later left his church and began attending a ces fellowship. Eerie feeling, that. According to him, he found that 'the boys' were not interested in "Dialog" after all (though I think they may have published a few short articles by him) and he was rudely and harshly told to get lost, in so many words. Even without hearing the other side of the story, I had to know, based on my friend's steady character, that teh CES boys had walked down a very dark path. Research, my ***. BTW, welcome to this place, John.

Having heard John had made an appearance I nosed around and found this. John, hi. Um, John? HELLO?? Shessh, I run off to Africa for a while and return to this. Where do I enlist in the Invisible Dan's Official Religion?

Where did JAL make an appearance? Still clearing my head after returning from the Darke Continente last night...

Yeah, Mr. B's is good stuff. We've eaten there 3-4x. Not nearly as pricy as their sister estaurant a few blocks down Ryal: Brennan's. Last I checked, "prix fixee" breakfast was $37+ p.p., dinner 67.50. That was years ago. Don't even think about a la carte! Friends took us to NoLa. Yeah, big disappointment. Nancy & I ate at Emeril's, his original, and it was fantastic. But that was just months after it opened and years before he was a star. Y'know, he visited every table, that sort of thing. Commander's Palace in the Garden district is a great place to do upscale lunch. The food and service are the best it gets. Then after lunch (or before) you can wander the Garden District and look at the great old mansions, all pre-war, and there's a great cemetary caddy-corner to Commanders. Much safer than the cemetary adjacent to the Quarter. And it's on the street where Geo & suz's son lives. Right?

Oh man. 1. Walk the French Quarter. Be sure and do coffe & beignets at Cafe du Monde. Avoid Bourbon st. Stupid tourist stuff there. Don't miss the French Market. Good eats include Muffaletta at Central Grocery, Palace Cafe, Acme Oyster House, Mona Lisa, Louisiana Pizza Kitchen. Also, plenty of 'spensive places in the Quarter. We like Bayona and Arnaud's for pricey. Cross out of the "back end" of the Quarter and walk around Faubourg Marigny, a GREAT neighborhood. The place to for cool music, poetry readings, lesbian theater, bongo conventions, you name it. 2. Ride the St. Charles streetcar line to the end and back. Excellent. Cheap. If'n you're hungry, get out at the end and eat burgers or omelets at the Camellia Grill. 3. Music. Music. Music. Some good places: The Funky Butt...mostly young & hip brass bands; Checkpoint Charlie's...combo laundromat, grill & juke joint; Tipitina's (forget House of Blues unless they have a must-see); Mid-City Bowling Lanes & Sports Palace...my all-time favorite music venue. Lots more. Lots. 4. I think the D-Day museum is one the best museums anywhere. Be prepared to be emotioanlly blitzed (especially after the Pacific War section). On the St. Charles streetcar line 5. On your way back to the airport, stop & eat at Andy Messina's Restaurant & Oyster bar (it's very near the airport on Williams Blvd.)...my wife's cousin and a fantastic Italian restaurant. Reasonable too. New Orleans has to be the best people-watching place in the US, after Manhattan. Enjoy the smells :o-->

Well, I don't resemble John Wayne either, but I can see some truth in what Geo says (as usual). Besides, I *couldn't have the swagger. I lost that, along with the hubris, in my Momentus training, rememeber? HAHAHAHAHAHA. Okay, I admit it, this is somehow fun.

Steve, you're still fixating on my as one who is here to defend Momentus. Bullcrap, double bullcrap. All I did was say that I generally dug it and found it helpful. Then you and Mark and WW piled on, demanding detailed explanations and descriptions. Sheesh. Okay, okay, I'll kiss the goat! Steve, some of your description jibes with my experience, some doesn't. The hooting and jeering were quite absent. In fact, no comments were made until the whole deal was over. Apparently our seminars were different in a number of ways...which can certainly affect one's perception. BTW, I had a different "trainer", his name was Derek.

I can't remember, Danny. I do remember I gave up my seat for my wife and one sister. (The other worthless sister I left in the water as shark bait, of course. HAHAHAHA). Steve, what you said about finances doesn't compute. If Lynn got all those people into the thing, how much of the $150 a head went to the Momentus people. None, according to you. it all went to the local sponsor. Me, I don't know, nor care. But, offhand, it doesn't quite strike me as a cash cow. But if theyr'e still around it must at elast sustain them. I do remember, though, a pretty extravagant appeal for donations at the end of the deal. We had maybe 40 in ours, Steve.

Steve, what? I guess the seminars can be different. They very clearly TOLD us what the exercise was about. Namely, showing people when they don't properly value their own lives. IE, people who didn't vote for themselves (which was quite a few) were asked to consider why they didn't value their own life. ie, implying that's not a good thing. I'm telling you in the words they told us. Bye

Now that you mention it, we were cautioned about causing problems for others by going and confessing to them. I paid no attention, as it was already common sense to me. The days were LONG, especially for an early riser like me. 10am, lunch break, dinner break (longer), end after 10pm. There were other breaks as well. But then there was the homework. Sleep deprivation may figure into it for some, though it didn't for me. BTW, I dug some of the music: Barber's Adagio, Tchaikovsky's serenade for strings, that old Italian Adagio (can't remember the composer right now. The Dylan song "what good am I" reached me. Much of the rest i merely tolerated. not a big fan of CCM here.

Danny, you are hilarious! My experience did not follow barton's. First of all, confession was private. Totally. They made an extra large point of that. You mention readings. I remember there being a good bit of Kirkegaard, pretty literate stuff for an abject brainwashing, don't you think? I don't remember signing anything on the ground rules, but my memory may be fuzzy on that one. Regardless, the point of it was agonizingly clear (as is the case in these things, some people were, well, dense) I think the first two or three days are meant to break down defenses, but I wouldn't charachterize anything I heard as verbal abuse. some of it was very 'challenging', though. The homework was ridiculous. There was so much it pretty much insured that at least SOEMBODY couldn't finish. Actually, the point of the lifeboat exercise was to show people that they don't properly value their own lives. I can't imagine anybody disagreeing with me on that. The "buddy" thing: I don't remember the 'lose one & other is out stipulation'. I don't think that was mentioned in mine. But Barton missed the better part: You're asked to choose a 'buddy' based on the person least attractive/most annoying/etc to you. Well, damn, there wasn't anybody I felt like that about yet. (don't worry mark, I would've chosen you quick! hahahahaha) i just wandered around until I found somebody else wandering around and we became buddies. I must say, it was like taking a huge emotional crap. Nothing wrong with that. I've slept better since, the tick in my face went away, and (much more importantly), I've given much more of myself to my family since then. And yeah, the LSD comaprison fits well. Mark, I didn't answer you questions because you've been such a dweeb. See, that's the Momentus training rising up in me and *making me be "honest". HAHAHAHAHA. :P-->