Jbarrax

A biblical examination might conclude that evil does exist and that it is the product or effect of the Devil. John's gospel says that Jesus told the Pharisees that they were of the Father the devil and that therefore, they did the works of their father. You know, lies and murder. That argument puts Jesus in opposition to your witty student. Genesis however, presents the matter in a slightly different light. According to a literal reading of Genesis (not a VP "literal according to usage, but reading it without the Way's interpretive overlay), the serpent didn't lie to Eve. His evil was in enticing her to disobedience. Adam and Eve were not changed, or corrupted by the original sin. They didn't lose holy spirit, and they didn't become inherently wicked. They simply lost their innocence. They had their eyes opened. So whatever is in man now, was already there. They were simply blissfully ignorant of their true natual state: their nakedness. So in essence, the serpent told the truth. Eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil did make them like gods. But it was not the blessing the Serpent presented it as. They learned that they were naked. The $60,000 question is, 'what is nakedness?' Is it merely the absence of clothing, or is it inherent immorality? Is it mortality, as Paul implied in a double metaphor of II Corinthians 5:1-3? Genesis doesn't really answer any of these questions, which is why somebody had to write Exodus, Leviticus, Romans, etc. :-) Peace JerryB

I think it's a great idea, and should be copied everywhere.

Her passing is very sad, but it's also good to see that she lived a long and healthy life. She was indeed very courageous. And even forty plus years later, the effects of the segregation of the Jim Crow south continue in the lives of people who were raised in these conditions. My mother was born in Bessemer Alabama in 1933. She said that when she enlisted in the Air Force in the early 50's there was a white woman on her base in Louisiana who was shocked to find that Mom didn't have a tail! It's hard for us to fathom the depths of the ignorance that persisted in the South. Segregation reinforced many myths and lies about blacks that supported the bigotry that had been born in the slave trade. I remember growing up in northern West Virginia, if one of us had to use the bathroom when we were out and about, my mother would always ask the store owner with uncharacteristic timidity if it was all right. It didn't occur to me until years later that this was an after effect of the Jim Crow South. She never assumed that we had equal access to anything, even in a northern state in the 70's. As a matter of fact, we didn't have equal access to everything we should have. When we moved to Wheeling, WV in 1974, she was unable to buy a house in the neighborhood she wanted to move to. It was a great neighborhood in close proximity to two private schools, one of which she wanted us to attend. After much stalling and many hollow excuses, the realtor finally broke down and told my mother that the residents of the area had warned her that if she sold us a house in that area (near Linsly Military Institute), they would burn it to the ground. So as we salute and remember Rosa Parks, we should also remember that not all of the bigots where in Alabama, and not all of them changed their ways. Racial bigotry cuts both ways, affecting both the hated and the haters. Thanks to civil rights pioneers like Rosa Parks, Matin Luther king, and many others like them, most of whom remain virtually unknown (including my wife's paternal grandmother) racism is a diminishing force in American life, but it's not dead yet. Peace JerryB

I just think we should not automatically accept the dogma that homosexuals are born that way. In my opinion, it doesn't fit the facts. If some people have never felt that they had normal heterosexual urges and feelings, then they may feel that they were born different, or born homosexuals. That doesn't axiomatically mean that all homosexuals are born that way and that, therefore, it's a completely natural condition. That's all I'm saying. There are both spiritual, hereditary, and natural causes that affect people in different degrees. There's not a simple one size fits all explanation. It is possible that both the gay rights movement's assertion that homosexuality is an inherent natural state, and the biblical position that it's an abomination are both simplistic and both inadequate to cover the entire gamut of homosexuality. They could both be partially right, completely wrong or some combination of the two. The bottom line is, God's love is unconditional so we should not withhold it from anyone regardless of their sexuality. On a somewhat unrelated note: It seems to me though, based on personal experience, and media exposure, that there are more lesbians than homosexual men. Is that because women are more likely to have homosexual feelings and attitudes, or just less uncomfortable about coming out? Peace JerryB

Well, speaking of Waybrain, I think I have come to the end of a long road. I was reading Romans a few weeks ago, pursuing a topic that arose during ye Olde PFAL Review. What I tried to do with that project was to examine what was in PFAL, see if it made sense, see if if fit the Bible, and come to a verdict of some kind. When the project came to an end onWaydale, we were discussing apects of salvation and eternal life. I made a preliminary statement about the fact that the Orange book says there was no eternal life available to anyone during OT times. That's an easy thing to disprove. But then we got into trying to decide what the "new Birth" is, and whether that's even a genuine biblical term. Raf, Evan, Steve Lortz and others were involved. Aaaanyway. to make a very long story not quite as long, I've been working on that ever since, and have basically given up on arriving at a biblical understanding of what eternal life is. Raf had pointed out that the terms "kingdon of heaven", "kingdom of God", eternal life" and "saved" are all used synonymously in Matthew chapter 19. I started from there. The more I read, the less I felt I knew. Questions mounted as I perused all these verses from Matthew to Revelation: How is eternal life received? How do we get into the Kingdom? Is entrance permanent, or conditional? WHEN is this supposed to happen? Are we saved by grace, by works, or some combination thereof? I know this is a very controversial subject and I've posted some of what I've studied from time to time as related topics arose. Just a few weeks ago, I felt like I had put it all together, bringing elements from the James debate together with contradictions about eternal life in the four gospels. (There are traces of David Anderson's Two Ways of the First Century Church throughout the NT, the four gospels included.) Then I delved back into the Church epistles to corroborate my theory, thinking that the contradictions in the Gospels could be traced to the split in the Church and the revelation of the mystery. I only made it to Romans chapter 8 and closed the book. (Actually some of my posts about Paul a couple of weeks ago were written during that time, and to some extent, I feel like I should post a retraction) The bottom line for me is this. The reason we have so much confusion about salvation, sonship, and grace vs. works is because the Apostles never agreed on what it was that Jesus taught or accomplished. Peter makes a reference to things in Paul's epistles that are hard to understand. I think he was being diplomatic. Paul's epistles have an annoying habit of making a statement that leads you to a logical conclusion, then immediately contradicting that conclusion. (See Romans 6:13-23, 8:6-9, and I Corinthians 6:9-11 and I Thessalonians 5:6-9.) The more I read Romans for clarification of the confusion in the Gospels, the more confused and disappointed I became. The end result was the final dashing of any hope I had of finding a coherent biblical message. The salvation confusion is complicated by scattered apocalyptic pronouncements in the Pauline epistles and elsewhere in the NT (Romans 1:18, I Corinthians 4:5, Matthew 26:64, Revelation 1:7, 22:10-12) that indicate that the NT writers expected Jesus to return quickly and save the First Century Church from the coming Wrath of God. There are a few other problems with Paul I've noted but not mentioned in my studies. That aforementioned bottom line: I can no longer accept his writing as divinely inspired, inerrant truth. Inspired maybe; but certainly flawed and contradictory. The Apostles and Prophets of old may have received the Word of the Lord by revelation, but their humanity made the collected written Word a work far from the harmonious, rock solid edifice of truth Fundamentalists propound it to be. That's why I've been 'sniping' recently about the doctrine of the inerrant Word. It doesn't exist, imho. Beyond the Fundamentalists myth of the perfect Bible, The Way's appeal was to the carnal mind. PFAL tried to present spiritual matters in a logical, scientific and mathematical perspective; religion with the veneer of science. It was Christianity for the modern man so to speak. And it's great, just GREAT -- as long as you don't take too close a look at it. So what's the point? I don't know, I'm just venting I guess. This is way off topic and I guess I should start a new one about eternal life questions, but I just haven't got the heart for it right now. It would sound like somebody bitterly attacking the Bible and the foundations of the Christian faith in general and I don't want to come off like that. I still believe in God and Christ, but not so much because of what I read, but because of what I've experienced, not the least of which is the continuing ability to speak in tongues. Peace, grace, and love to all. JerryB

I don't know the lady, but if she says she wasn't born gay, I think we should take her word for it. It's somewhat arrogant of us to determine the she was gay all along, she just didn't know it. And it is possible that working in a profession where lesbians are more inclined to find themselves comfortable might make a heterosexual woman more likely to begin thinking and then acting differently. It might be completely unrelated to her profession, but the way I interpret her statements, she was a heterosexual woman and had been all her life, and, at some point, she fell in love with another woman. She tried to hide it, and eventually decided she was tired of doing so. Anyone who's ever fallen in love knows it's not the kind of thing that is easily hidden. If she was already divorced, it would be natural to want to enjoy her new relationship openly. If she was married at the time, the stress of having a clandestine affair would just be exacerbated by the fact the the affair was with another woman, perhaps a teammate. So Bramble's implication that she was a lesbian all along isn't necessarily sound, according to what Shery said. I'm not saying the WNBA made her a lesbian. In fact, if you will look at the post, you will see that I offered no interpretation whatsoever. I simply let Sheryl speak for herself. The fact that what she says contradicts the gay rights dogma isn't my fault. But it's not just "one testimony" as Garth would like to think. Anne Heche's experience is similar. And I know of a relative who had a similar experience. The point is, there is evidence to indicate that homosexuality is not necessarily something your'e born with. I'm not saying anything about the morality or immorality of Ms Swoopes statements. I just think we should take them at face value instead of trying to deny that these midlife 'conversions' happen.

yeppirs. we did. Those were the days. :-)

This just in...

Hmmm. Based on what I'm hearing in the news, the Roman Catholics prefer simply moving pedophiles to another parish where they can start over.

Nonsense Def. I got revelation last year about where to go to open a checking account. How do you back that up by Scripture? What if you get revelation not to go to work today? How are you going to check that against the Scripture? Or to refer to an incident I posted about on the revelation trhread, suppose you have a dream that your neighbor's child is in grave danger and should stay home. What chapter and verse are you going to go to for that? That whole argument about people running wild with revelation knowledge is nothing but a scare tactic designed to keep people from trusting God and walking by the spirit. It elevates head knowledge and puts people's minds and lives in little boxes and nourishes legalism. What got TWI in trouble was the intellectual and spiritual dishonesty of "V.P. Weirwille" putting together an incoherent patchwork of other people's ideas and claiming it was the "rightly divided Word". If he had had the honesty to admit that there are things in the Bible that just don't fit and that we have to learn to walk in love and walk by the spirit because the answers are found in Chist, and not in the pages of a book, the groundwork may not have been laid for the hard-hearted legalistic, cruel, Pharisaic religion The Way is today. And my goodness that last sentence was way too long. :-) Peace JerryB

I think you have too much time on your hands. :D

Def. Forgive me if Im being rude, but we've been having this argument for YEARS. I'm not going to waste an more of my time rebutting your posts or anyone else's. You want to believe Jesus is God. Great. wonderful. I don't care. I personally don't think it makes a lick of sense from a Biblical perspective. I'm not saying it's not true. Just that it doesn't make sense according to the majority of the Scripture. You can find a few verses that may be intepreted in a trinitarian fashion. I can find more than a few that contradict it. In the end, we're both resolved to believe what we already believe, so what's the point, really? Danny: Well said sir. Let's bury this argument and focus on something positive and godly that we can agree and act on. Peace JerryB

So in other words, Schweitzer studied enough to realize the basic dogma's of Christian religions were flawed. So rather than continuing to try to find a perfect dogma, he tossed them aside and dedicated himself to helping his fellow man. Sounds like a plan to me. :-) Thanks Danny

"Loud and steady howling"??? What the heck does howling have to do with praising God? Hate to sound judmental, but that's definitely not my cup of tea.

Baloney. Confusion and contradiction abound in the Scripture, like tares among the wheat, to use Dan's example (on the The Word, the Word thread). With this I must agree. If Jesus is God, this is the biggest truth of the Bible and it should say so plainly. Not only does the Bible not plainly say that Jesus is God, what it does plainly say contradicts the triune God notion. And the argument of the former Unitarian that the Tritnity must be true because there are so many nice trinitarians and so many "brilliant" theologians who support it is so intellectually and spiritually bankrupt that it almost defies description. If we are to accept widely held beliefs as inherently true then we must assert that the earth was really flat in Columbus' day, that black men have no souls, and the earth is the center of the universe. All of these statements which we have discovered to be false were once held to be true by the majority of people including the brilliant theologians of the Holy Roman Church. In my opinion, the Trinitiy survives because most pastors have been schooled in it just as dogmatically as scientists are schooled in Darwinian theory. It becomes an integral part of the individual's mindset and biases and persists beyond the blinders of indoctrination. And, just as it is in scientific and academic circles, if someone dares to peek behind those blinders, the intimidation of the established authorities steps in. Darwin and the Trinity are like the yin and yang of modern life. Two fallacious dogmas ruling opposing camps by indoctrination and intimidation and, in the process, obscuring both the spiritual and scientific paths to truth. If Mo's posts are representative of the Mormon position regarding the Triune God, it may well be that one of the reasons for the Mormons' rapid global growth (as reported by Newseek) is their presentation of a more logical and Scripturally sound Unitarian doctrine. Peace JerryB

Actually there are, imho, two problems with this topic. One is our failure to fully check out what "The Teacher" said. But the fault is not all ours. Weirwille encoraged us to accept his word. Contrary to what he said to Keith, what he told us in PFAL was "Read what's written. If it's wrong, I'll tell you." This statment, along with the 'no private interpretation' mantra conditioned us not to question the Bible or the Teacher. As a result, Way people have learned to read the bible without really reading the Bible. We read it, but the message in our minds is not what's actually on the page, but what we've been taught to think about it. Just yesterday, I was thinking about Romans 12:3 and what I recalled was not what's actually written, but Vp's literal according to usage. We were conditioned to accept Weirwille's interpretation as "The Word". That 's the first problem. The other problem is the tendency to try to live according to the limitations of Scripture. God gave us holy spirit--a living connection with Him--for a reason. We're not designed to live our lives according to a collection of writings two milennia old. We're designed to live according to what our Father tells us to do by the Spirit. I've pretty much convinced myself that the Bible is not the inerrant word of God. It is loaded with contradictions (why do you think there are so many factions among Fundamentalists?) Yet despite the fact that I know the Bible is not my "only rule for faith and practice", despite the fact that I know it was written by men who had fallacious expectations, I am still conditioned by that stupid mantra. When I can get fully past "the word, the word, and nothing but the Word", I will be fully free of the spiritual prison that we call Waybrain. Peace JerryB

That doesn't meant that they're all wrong. A lot of what TWI taught was a patchwork of half-truths and assumptions. Our readiness to condemn our Christian brethren because they worship differently is not something we should be proud of. Peace JerryB That's great news MStar. I think s.i.t. is a powerful force for good in the world. The more God's kids do it, the better off we all are.

Hi Clay, God bless! Well I guess I have some gardening to do. I've done some meditating and it's been a peaceful and helpful. But I also had a disturbing experience with 'guided' mediation that tends to reinforce the Way's warnings agains "opening" one's mind. So af far as meditation is concerned, the jury's still out. But I'm highly in favor of breathing. :-) Peace JerryB

FWIW: I think the emphasis in PFAL on having the Proof of the new birth was not on proving it to others, but to oneself. It's a comfort to know that, no matter what else may be questioned or questionable, I can rest in the knowledge that I have received the gift of holy spirit. So, to some extent the criticism in this thread leveled at VP insinuating that he taught that you aren't saved unless you speak in tongues is unfair. However, I was always a little dismayed about the omission of worship from VP's list of the benefits of speaking in tongues. He mentioned that it is worship by the spirit (an interpretation of John 4:24ff that I think fits the context). But when he listed the benefits of speaking in tongues, he omitted that. And, perhaps as a result, the focus in Wayworld has always been on the human aspects of tongues (proof of holy spirit, edifying the believer, fruit of the spirit, perfect prayer, etc). The biggest benefit, imo, is not what speaking in tongues gives us, but what it enables us to give God. Pure worship, perfect praise. In my experience (which is by no means definitive), the most rewarding times spent speaking in tongues have been those times when I did it as an offering to my heavenly Father. Re: baptism. I was raised in the A.M.E. church and was baptized when I was about 15. It didn't mean much to me, but for some reason, I fainted. I think my mother took that as some kind of omen because she seemed a little concerned, but was uncharacteristically quite about it. But I didn't get saved or born again, until a few years later. That happened in a back alley in Wheeling WV on a Saturday night. And it had nothing to do with Romans 10:9 and 10, at least not in a formal or formulaic way. I was dating a wonderful Christian girl and she kept trying to get me saved. I already believed in God and considered myself devout, so I asked her what I needed Jesus for. (even back then, I was a stubborn unitarian. I didn't like all the emphasis on Jesus because I thought he was stealing God's glory). She said it's like a little child who goes out to play and gets all dirty. He comes home and his mother cleans him up. That's what Jesus Christ does. He cleans us up spiritually. Somehow that made sense to me, and we prayed together and voila! I got saved. So I agree that the Way's overemphasis on Romans 10:9 was a narrowminded, somewhat carnal approach to the question of how people receive the new birth. I think people receive it simply by accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. Denominations and ministers get all bent out of shape about what salvation is and what's required, but God looks on the heart. Peace JerryB

I guess that depends on how many of them were secretly involved in adultery. John Lynn has publicly said that he and most of the leaders were screwing around. So if he had been chosen, we might be in the same mess today. I think I've read that Ralph was not in on the adultery thing. And he did have a wonderful ministry and a great heart. Maybe if he had been chosen, he could have cleaned house. But with ego's like Craig's around, it would have been tough on him to lead a unified ministry. It reminds me of Jesus apostles (James and John?) arguing over who would be greatest in the Kingdom of heaven. And, as great a leader as Paul was, his acolytes in Ephesus didn't stay true to hm and his ministry either. All of Asia turned away from him before he died. I suppose it's human nature for charismatic leaders to compete and vy for power. Wretched critters, arent we? Peace JerryB

I remember our BC telling us that the Corps had been told at a meeting that VP was getting old and starting to lose his mental faculties. He says a hush fell over the room, and then the speaker added forcefully, "But he's still a lot sharper than any of YOU!" The BC was clearly shaken by the idea of our "Father in the Word" going senile. That was a weird time, even for us "leaves". Peace JerryB

Yes, that very day. I came back to the office that afternoon and Robin was still stunned by the whole thing and told me about it. It shook the whole staff, especially me, since I, being a PFAL grad naturally thought myself to be the most spiritually "tuned-in" person on the premises. I wasn't, the GM was. She was just a regular Church going Christian, but she was--is--gifted with unshakable faith in God and herself and does at times have prophetic dreams. This one saved Robin's kids. Peace JerryB

Speaking of Mormons, Catholics, and JW's, the current issue of Newsweek has a cover story about "The Making of the MORMONS"Looks like an interesting read. Perhaps Mo can score the article for accuracy and fairness. :-)PeaceJerryB

I'm sorry I had forgotten about this, but I have witnessed an incident that fits LG's criteria. Back in 1996, I was working in outside sales at WTCR, a country radio station located in Cattlettsburg, KY. One summer afternoon, word reached us that there had been a tragic fire across the river in South Point at a popular fireworks retailer. Everyone was shocked, but noone more so than our sedretary, Robin. The station's general manager had called her early that morning and told her she had dreamt that there would be a terrible fire at that particular fireworks store that and made her promise not to let her children go. Robin's kids had been planning to do that that very day. She didn't believe the story, but had worked with her for years, and yielded to her impassioned plea to forbid the kids from going. Just as the GM had predicted, the place caught fire that afternoon, and several people were killed. If not for the prophetic warning form her boss, Robin's kids would have been among the victims. The fire is a matter of public recorod. Anyone who worked at WTCR at the time can attest to the truth of what happened. Here's a follow-up article about the incident. and here's a raw newsfeed posted the day of the fire. Peace JerryB

LOL