Jbarrax

I can fully understand your point about the mother and the child story Steve. In that particular intance, it's very gray. There may or may not have been any spiritual element to that solution. What I am saying is that there are many others that are much clearer and these do confirm the truth of the gospel of Christ. I'm going to venture a tad bit off topic here to relate one. I beg the indulgence of the thread police. I was born with a myriad of allergies and respiratory problems that plagued my youth. One was ashthma. Cold weather was one trigger. Often an onset of bitter cold weather would incite an asthma attack that would have me bedridden and wheezing, struggling to breathe for days. When I was in college my fiancee (now my wife of 19 years) took the class and went WOW. To Cleveland. I went to visit her in January and suffered an asthma attack. As I lay on her couch wheezing, she ministered to me. As she prayed, my bronchial tubes opened as if God was breathing fresh air into my lungs. In a matter of seconds the attack ended and I have not had one since. That's a clear miracle of healing and it reinforces the truth of the gospel because it was administered in the name of Jesus Christ by a believing Christian. So I can't help you with the cholicy child incident. But I do see the miracles that God has blessed me with as validation of the gospel of Christ. Before I accepted Christ and made a commitment to Him, my life was powerless. Afterward, it was blessed with healings, miracles, inspired utterance, and lots and lots of grace. The same is true of my wife. We had dated for almost two years before she got witnessed to. She had some chronic physical problems and a lot of emotional/spiritual baggage from her youth. After she took the class, she was delivered of a lot of this. Not because PFAL is the worf of God as Mike believes, but because God meets people where they are. We were seeking and piffle was as close to a Church as we were willing to go, so God met us there and blessed us. To his credit "Docvic did teach us about speaking in tongues in such a way that some of us could believe it and manifest it. I think if the heart of the ministry weren't so corrupt, a lot more people would have had genuine manifestations, rather than being pressured to fake it. I'm not saying you shouldn't question your faith. By all means do. That's how we grow. I have jettisoned lots of TWI doctrine, and some Biblical doctrine. I'm still searching and learning. But despite the loss of the neat little box of answers that piffle used to be, I remain absolutely convinced that God is true, Christ has indeed redeemed me, both of them are rather fond of us, and that they will continue to meet us where we are as long as we continue to seek them with an honest heart. Peace JerryB

Well if that's the case, I'm a devil worshipper. I like rock music and fusion jazz. Just goes to show, even "genuine" ministers and men of God have their prejudices. I don't think the Way collapsed because of the style of music thay played. I'd say it was the idolatry of following men instead of serving God. Peace JerryB

Now that's just silly. Composing a message using a concordance is not speaking by inspiration. Just because some of these fine folks faked it and were not discovered doesn't mean the manifestations are fake, as Wytduv's experience indicates. To try to convince someone that God inspired their premeditated message is absurd. Speak for yourself sir. That's a little presumptuous don't you think? JerryB

That's a beautiful story Dovie. And it makes a very important point. Juat because someone fakes speaking in tongues doesn't mean they CAN'T do it. It may be more of an indictment of the shallowness of the ministry and the depths to which it fell than of the reality of speaking in tongues. I say again, just because you faked it doesn't mean you CAN'T do it. Maybe some of you fakers should ask God to work with your heart and faith and show you how it's supposed to be done. I don't mean that to sound demeaning. I just want to encourage you to give it another shot. Peace JerryB

Don't be too trusting in the fairmindedness of "skeptics" George. Scientists are lauded as objective observers of empirical evidence, but many of them have core beliefs that color their approach to evidence. Einstein himself admitted to this. His calculations lead him to the conclusion that the universe must have had a beginning, but he refused to publish his findings because it would lend credence to the idea that God had created it. (That's why it was another physicist who is credited with the Big Bang Theory, although Albert actually thought of it first.) Gasp! What heresy! Well, to science, it is heresy and the rejection of this basic belief colors the endeavors of physicists, biologist, geneticists and other allegedly objective researchers. So to assume that skeptic's reluctance to embrace an idea means that there's not enough evidence for it, is naive. Peace JerryB

Apples and oranges Steve. The verses and examples I posted dealt with a person hearing the manifestation of speaking in tongues in the context of the preaching of the gospel; like your first example of the evangelist and the reactions of the crowd. Your experience with the child is completely different. The mother didn't hear you speaking in tongues and the benefit of intercession is not a sign to unbelievers, it's intercession. In the example you mentinoed, the benefit was that you were able to tell her what to do for the child. I have been told repeatedly that when I intercede for my friend, it works. So he always asks me to pray for specific things. I never do. I just speak in tongues for him. Is that proof that I have holy spirit, etc. No, it's intercession. The benefit of intercession is answered prayer. Peace JerryB

I would agree if that statement were pertinent. Saying something is proof of faith when you have to take the proof on faith is indeed circular logic. But that's not the case with tongues. Let's start with the Scripture and then I'll offer an example of how this "proof" works in real life. Who is the proof for? For seasoned Christians? No, it's for unbelievers. It's a sign to unbelievers, not to the faithful. The purpose of speaking in tongues is to prove that there's more to Christianity, more to the Gospel, than a good rap and a lifestyle. When someone hears the gospel he or she may be very skeptical or cynical depending on his or her cutlure, past experiences, or mindset. Hearing the gospel might not be enough to move them to take it as more than another religion. Hearing the gospel and seeing someone speak in tongues communicates that there's more to it than a good rap; that it's more than just another religion. Seeing someone healed in the name of Jesus Christ would probably have the same effect, but we can't plan on having someone miraculously healed whenever an unbeliever comes to meeting now can we? I know of two real world examples of this principle in action. The first is me. When Deb got involved with TWI, I was a cynical college student, fearful and distrustful of all fundamentalists. I attended twig and was mildly impressed with the teacher's ability to weave together Scriptures from Genesis and II Peter logically, but what really got my attention was the manifestations. I had never seen or heard anything like that and it shook me. I was looking for spiritual power and that indicated that these people had some. Fast forward a year or two. I was witnessing on campus to someone like me, hard-headed, pragmatic, intellectual skeptic who was in search of godly power. As I witnessed to him, I stoppend and began to speak in tongues out loud--one of the few times I've done that sans interpretation--He was stunned. He literally took a step back, wide-eyed and speechless. That got his attention and he ended up taking the class and becoming one of the most devout believers I've ever met. Today, he's my best friend and still bases all of his decisions on God's will. He's stil incredibly cynical and has very little tolerance for religion or most people, but he doesn't doubt the reality of God, Christ or the power of the spiritual realm. Because he saw somebody speak in tongues. That's what it's about. Speaking in tongues gets the attention of seekers and proves that there's real power behind the Gospel. It really is proof, and it works the way God intended it to. Peace JerryB

Actually George, I've not noticed any connection between intellect or eloquence and fluency in speaking in tongues. I know you've heard this before. The benefits are many. One; it does provide proof of the inner presence of the holy spirit. Two: it brings peace and joy; But the central issue, imo, is the one TWI talked about least. It's worshipping God in spirit and truth. Think of it this way. We are sinful, corrupt beings, whose works tend to end up being tainted one way or another by our greed, lust, anger, etc. Such is the nature of religion. So what better way to worship God than to do it in such as way that bypasses all of our carnal mind, our ulterior motives, our greed, etc. Speaking in tongues is a simple sacrifice of praise. It's a way of thanking and praising God with all the human bull**** taken out. The best way to enjoy speaking in tongues is not to focus on yourself, but on GOD, to whom the praise is offered. let me repeat that. Speaking in tongues is not about US, it's about GOD. If you offer it in thanksgiving, you will be blessed. If you do it as a way to Get something; (rest, energy, revelatinon, etc) you may come away empty-handed. Same principle applies in interpretation. When I first started, it was very difficult because I was self-concious. It wasn't until I focused on the othe people in the room in an effort to bless them, that the "flow" started and it worked the way it's supposed to. Like most things God designs, the manifestations work best when approached with faith, love, and a giving attitude. Isn't that why I Corinthians 13 is where it is? Peace JerryB

Not at all Lindy. Let me clarify something. When I decide to use an L" word for instance, all I control or premeditate physically is the first consonant. God supplies the rest by inspiration. If I decide to form words in the back of my mouth, I'm not premeditating whole words, or even letters. Just where the letters are coming from. The thing you have to rmember is WHO we're dealing with. God almighty can supply a sentence that begins wiht the consonant "L" at the drop of a hat. If he can create the vastness of the known universe, populate a planet with the immense wonders that are found here on Earth, I don't think inspired utterance challenges Him in the least. If we limit our understanding of the words "speak" and "utterance" to the American Heritage Dictionary, we're going about this kind of sideways aren't we? The Scripture should be the starting place, keeping in mind the context of the passages and books as well as the intent of the writers. Acts 2:4 sums it up nicely. They began to speak as the Spirit gave them utterance. As VP said, the people start the action, and God supplies the "utterance" the complete words and their meaning. It's a joint effort requiring both human and divine participation. Think of it like breathing. We can open our mouths and suck inward, but we only draw life-giving oxygen because God has provided us a pressurized atomosphere to breathe. As your lungs expand, the air flows inward. If you were placed in the vacuum of space, you could work your lungs all you want, but you wouldn't get any air would you? Would you be breathing? Technically yes. Would it do you any good. Absolutely not. Because that which God normally provides is absent. (I know it's a flawed analogy, but I hope it conveys my point). Speaking in tongues is similar in that, as I start to form a sound--just a vowel or consonant--God sends a stream of inspired utterance through me and together, we keep the steam going as long as I want to. Hope that helps. Peace JerryB

Hi Oakspear. Yeah,it does seem like a continuation of the How do we Know thread, doesn't it?:-) That section of the class is one I have yet to work through, but It always felt strained to me too. And it's at odds with the passage at the end of the same chapter that lists tongues and intepretation in the same context as gift ministries. VP covered himself on that one by talking about "longsuits". Everone, he said, can speak in tongues, but some do it much better than others. That's kind of what I was getting at in my post too. I still believe it's available for any born again Christian to do it. But some just don't have the faith or desire to do so. JerryB

Fluency and faking. Yes, I speak in tongues just about every day. And I agree,it is my rock solid connection with God. These days, it's the main reason I still believe in God and Christ. It's a physical proof of the presence of spiritual power. When I speak in tongues, it gives me peace and joy and comfort, just like VP said. I think this is one of the major benefits,if not THE major benefit of TWI. VP may have plagiarized Stiles or whomever, but I'm convinced that he did a good job of speading the news in this regard. Some have said that if you can go through the alphabet that you're faking it in some sense. I don't see it that way. If the idea is for us to speak and God to supply the words, there's nothing wrong with our deciding what letter we're going to start with. Or what part of you mouth you're going to form the words in. (Forming words in the back of the mouth brings up an Asian sounding tongue). I know there were some who faked it. There was a sweet lady in Huntington, WV who always said the same phrase. Sounded like "many, many, just as many". That was it over and over again. Her interpretations were equally brief. No one ever pressured her to do more. Maybe that wasn't her ministry. Maybe not every Christian can speak in tongues. If it requires "pure believing" and not everyone has the same level of faith, then it stands to reason that there are some children of god who just don't have the faith for it, just as there are some who can't believe for healing and some who can. That doesn't mean the manifestation is counterfeit; merely that it some do it fluently, some do it not-so-fluently and some just don't. I was going to add something about interpretation, but I've rambled enough. Peace JerryB

"I'll take reality with all its ugliness." Well said Long Gone. Truth is neither pretty nor comfortable. JerryB MERRY CHRISTMAS ALL!!

Not so George. You ignore one of the most important driving forces in the American medical industry; profit. Herbal remedies HAVE been tested and found to be effective. The most recent was an herbal treatment for breast cancer. The federal govt underwrote the study. When it was tested and found to be effective, a drug company synthesized it, PATENTED it and sold it as trimarin(?). This cause no small stink because a private company is making a fortune off of public funded medical research. (My brother has been receiving this drug for his brain tumor, along with essiac, as I posted above.) Herbs that are proven effective are turned into profitable patents for drug companies. If they became the normative approach, the drug companies would lose billion$. That aint gonna happen any time soon. Peace JerryB

I'm a "mostly natural" person. MY wife has a distributorship with an excellent company called Pure Herbs. Great stuff. It's meticulously prepared, very potent, and good for what ails you. My older brother was diagnosed with a notoriously virulent form of terminal brain cancer (blasto something or other) a year and a half ago. We sent him some essiac (not a Pure Herbs product, but a storied herbal cancer treatment). He's used it consistently, in tandem with his chemo and, according to my mother, the doctors now refer to his case as almost miraculous. Of course the drug companies will claim that it was all due to the chemo, but that's okay. By the way, his chemotherapy is a new drug that was developped based on research done with an herbal remedy that was synthesized and patented by a pharmaceutical company. So even if you trust drug companies, you're still getting herbal medicine; the watered down, syntheized, patented, overpriced version. Peace JerryB

Whaaaat? Raf is THE most objective, contributor to this hallowed forum, imho. I'm sure he would say you have the right to disagree. And you do of course. We all have our unique perspectives and opinions. But I can't think of anyone fairer to VP's work than Mr. Olmeda. Rumor has it that the inspiration for Fox News Channel's slogan came from lurkers reading Raf's posts. :-) Peace JerryB

I thought the guy who had been in prison was Starr Daily, whom VP described in PFAL as the man who loved his way out of Sing Sing. JerryB

So who was the source of that last quote Raf? Kenneth Hagin? It's pretty amazing to me that preachers who have attracted such a broad following are being exposed as dishonest intellectual thieves. Makes you kind of wonder about the spiritual depth of those kind of ministries doesn't it? Peace JerryB

I always thought that section seemed out of place in the Green Book. It seemed so disimilar in tone to the articles around it. Thanks for the thread Dot. and thanks Raf for your input. This is very interesting material, and does help put the ministry's benefits vs. its abuses into perspective. JerryB

Maybe Morpheus is their version of John the Baptist; the precursor of the Messiah whose own faith is eventually challenged. Just a thought... JerryB

Thanks for the clarification Dan. Your input is always invaluable. JerryB

Nifty new trick there, Zix. The only thing I was confused about is the relationship between the Architect and "The Source". When Neo went to the Oracle, she said something about the One getting help from or going back to The Source. Since Neo has always been a Messianic character, I assume the Source is supposed to reperesent God. Unfortunately, the role of The Architect seemed to fill that role in Reloaded; especially since he told Neo he had designed the Matrix as a human paradise, but humanity's inherent flaws ruined it. Very Genesis-like. But in Revolutions, the Oracal speaks of the Architect being limited in understanding and insight and obviously his power is trumped by that of "The Source"; the machine face with whom Neo made the deal for the preservation of mankind and the freedom of those who wanted out of the Matrix. So it seems there are two Godlike beings with whom Neo deals, one superior to the other. This may be a really long stretch, but it reminds me of Gnosticism. One of the more controversial tenets of Gnosticism is that the "God" of the Old Testament is actually Lucifer, and the Father of Jesus Christ, the Creator, is the true and Supreme God. The Gnostic version of Geneiss presents Lucifer as one who thinks he's the supreme being until confronted by the true God. I think perhaps the Architect is the Warchowski Bros. version of the Gnostic Lucifer (after all, he does have all of humanity in prison) and "The Source", who helps Neo free mankind is the True God. I think the fact that the only ones who get out of the Matrix are those who want out is also a nifty parallel to Christianity. "Whosoever will may come" or something like that. By the way Wayfer Not, I think the reason Trin died was to fire Neo up and remind him he was fighting for the survival of mankind. Despite the fact that she didn't make it, it was still a triumph of love and faith, imho. Well, I've yammered enough for now. What do you all think? Peace JerryB [This message was edited by Jbarrax on November 08, 2003 at 22:56.]

Didn't have a big cool fight scene??? Come now, Neo and Smith had a humdinger of a knock down drag-out. Not only dig they knock each other down,they knocked down buildings and made craters in the process. Personally, I thought this was one of the best parts of the movie. I saw it as the modern cinematic version of something akin to the Superman Vs. Doomsday battle in the Death of Superman comic book. Yes I said comic book. I used to read and collect comics and I've always thought of the Matrix as a cinematic adaptation of a comic book. (Hey Zix, you're a comic book fan,aren't ya? Isn't there a Matrix comic book?) The way Neo flies around the Matrix is evocative of Superman. In fact, I think there was a line in Reloaded about him doing his "Superman thing". But I digress. Suffice to say, that as a comic book fan, I thoroughly enjoyed the Neo-Smith fight scene. It's just the way It should have been portrayed. JerryB

Rafael's excellent commentary on the Blue Book is also online in its original form at THE BLUE BOOK

To bring the thread back on topic here a few quotes form CF&S Anything that has life in it stinks when it dies. So for Lord's sake next morning (after intercourse) take a bath! VP's advice to women included maintaining their "girlishness". According to Vic, here's what not to say to your husband: "See my big brests? What're you gonna do with `em?" Re: dating. VP said we've lost "the art of dating" in which the object is not to have sex, but to get to know each other. (With this I think we could all agree). To summarize his advice to young girls, he said, "It's better to come home hot and bothered, than satisfied...and worried." Anyone else have any tibdits of wisdom (or nonsense masquerading as such) from "The Teacher"? JerryB