MRAP

I am simple person and probably labeled as just plain stupid not to deny my faith. Shall I provide extensive prolog in order to defend my faith, can I be as extensive as the poster of this sub-forum to explain his reasons for non-belief - why would anyone care what I had to say. It's called belief because that's what it is - does anyone deny the right to believe? It's just a simple little verb but to exercise it, you are scrutinized. Why not just exclude the verb from our vocabulary or as a term used by the uninformed. I have enjoyed reading, over and over, this sub-forum, it strengthened my beliefs or at the least, trust in the book that supports my beliefs. I understand the belief in the Koran by numerous sects in the middle east, they don't have Hollywood TV and movies to dilute that belief and utilize it as their justification for their Jihad - no opposing opinion accepted. Now, the seeing of miracles, it does enforce my belief but as Jesus said in the 14th chapter of John: what does what, miracles support belief or belief supports miracles, either way, do you see the Father cause He is in me and I am in Him. You can believe on him for either his words alone or that the miracles support his words (during the last supper, think he's getting real down and dirty at that point in time and his life, not much more he can say to his guys given the time left). So allow us who chose to have a belief some breathing room. One can not bring you, an unbeliever, to a belief that you find discord, your choice, go with God's grace: no harm - no foul. This is an excellent sub-forum topic, to evaluate why we believe what we do and why we don't believe at all. Thanks again. Tzaia: I am a full blown lunatic - love that OT and that moon.

Tzaia, sure, religion is a problem quite often but as far as the Bible (all the texts) itself, never considered it to be a problem, only problem is working with what we have - getting past theological and philisophical transcription of it through the last two millenium. If seedy folks want to utilize the Bible for nefarious means then they have sealed their future. The efforts, as I see them, is in fact decoding the book, I don't take that as a dis on folks who are trying to give a best version of what it originally said. Yes, live right. No, it's wrong to use the written word to manipulate people,especially when you do so for personal gain and even more so when not caring what those actions do to screw up the lives of other people. As you know Tzaia, $ & Sex but you don't take it by misleading folks. It's unboubtedly easier to live the life of the world than live the life laid out in the Bible. I decided a long time ago not to let the TWI experience to quell my love of God or what he gave, via revelation, to the original writers of His word. I applaud true efforts to get it straight. It's really easy to give into emotion, especially anger and then let it pollute the rest of you against what you hold most dear - not happening here. Thanks again for posing the questions.

Appreciate your input WordWolf - I asked. From reading the past sub-forums, think I got a small but accurate feel about what Momentus is about (saw some of the same tactics in Army Officer training and how we were then told those tactics never worked out in the end - you can't really order anyone to do anything if they don't first trust you - otherwise, you just get fragged). My intent, at this time, is to keep distance until I have a feeling of trust. At this time, I find the STF's REV provides some insight (I take it all with some reservation but have no reason to dispute it as wrong) and as far as JAL's news letters, theyr'e inspirational. As far as jumping booth feet into either of the STF or TLTF, like I said, been burned once (well twice if you count the Lutheran Church but there I did see both villanous pastors and actual caring pastors). I appreciate your concern for someone not making the same mistake twice and that is good advice. Kinda like love (maybe), you don't give up cause the 1st experience turned out bad.

You gotta be kidding me Broken Arrow; I was on the field for nearly a month before we were allowed to have red meat, and sure enough, it was Big Mac (I was never much for Macdonalds person - Burger King rules) but that is where the rest of the family wanted to go. We all had digestion issues after that visit. Of course, I was a cheater since the first month on the field I worked at a HoJo's so ate scrambled eggs and ham eaach morning, for half price (good thing, that was all I could afford since the rest of the $ was for ABS and the family fund - the nearest I have experienced to living in communism). After that 1st month, went on to work as an automotive mechanic (I used to be one prior to that, could have used the scrambled eggs and ham for that job), thought that I could keep a bit more of that good $ for "my selfish self" - think again, into the family till. It may have bought us a few more nuts, dates and raisens for the familia, still no milk. Hope this is not off topic - it is, "Oh the Irony". To paraphrase Rocky, no BS in short supply, but it sure was expensive.

Tzaia and GarthP2000, you left me hanging there. What more do I need to know because I have an interest in the REV research being done by STF and enjoy reading the Fruit of D'Vine newsleter by TLTF and some of their (TLTF's) other information; at least now I have those two entities straightended out - yeh, I teed that one up. The both of those two groups have provided for some of my spiritual interests but since I have been burned before (TWI), I have a logical weariness. I have an honest appreciation for the GSC site as I am sure that all the (TWI) splinter groups monitor the site and that might help them to be more honest with their followers.

I gotta agree with Twinky's take on what such a show would want to highlight but it could be a plot take-off from newlife's post in order to personalize it: kinda of a jump back and forth between the two plots, family side and the leadership with a dramatic confrontation at the end where the two plot lines merge.I also doubt it will even mention anything that could draw it to TWI (or even the very old version of TWI) as WordWolf stated. Really waysider, Fig Pep on the familia, shoot, I was (am again back) in Wisconsin and we were not even allowed to put milk on the familia, hard core, only water: what a great breakfast for the day ahead of physical work. So, was anybody on GSC quireed as a subject matter expert for the film?

Once again, another correlation to the military: at promotion ceremonies, when congradulating the person just promoted, I frequently told them that with this new rank, came not only more responsibility but their greater need to serve. If all folks in the military could keep that forefront in their mind (including me) then their would be fewer issues of the abuse of rank.

The initial issue I had regarding the raising of Lazarus had to do with the time span of 4 days; after going back over this a few more times, I'm OK with the math though I might be thinking something closer to 3 days - the point would be moot either way you do that math so long as it was at least 3. As to the commentary by the REV as to why Christ waited - I found that enlightening. I think I posted something in the Caiaphas Prophecy forum regarding Lazarus so won't repeat that here. Raf, John 11:26 has never been an issue for me: in the KJV I had always took this to mean in the age to come. The REV's addition of that bit of info, to me, was not necessary; I have seen throughout the REV that the phrases: in the age to come and in the millenial kingdom are added. As with John 11:26, the addition of such phrases seems un-necessary for the most part, at least for me, but maybe not others (why not state the obvious to avoid confussion). As far as that not seeing death concept, I recass TWI stating that if a person had a perfectly renewed mind, then that was attainable - don't thik I need to go down that rabbit hole.

I received a response from both Dan Gallagher and John Schoenheit. I was informed that John Lynn left (STF) in 2010 to start his own ministry (TLTF). I was of the impression that STF & TLTF were the same, just different arms (research and teaching); that's not the case. I came about this realizaton after emailing Dan Gallagher regarding a question on the "Know Your Enemy" and stipulated it was noted on a lead article on the Fruit of D'Vine newsletter: Dan told me that John Lynn was no longer with them and that they (STF) have nothing to do with the Fruit of D'Vine. I had concerns about some sort of termoil (that may affect the research on the REV)and John Lynn's health - both are intact. Tzaia, I had read the stuff on the CES prophecy issue, thanks for commenting. It's that read on CES that was probably in the back of my mind when I posted on the doctinal forum about the prophecy of Caiaphas.

Dan Gallagher. just informed me via email from STF that John Lynn is no longer with STF (Dan G. and I are not old aquantenances), this was because I was asking a question and the information was inadvertant. I responded back asking for some details - anyone out there know anything else. And by the way, I hope this has nothing to do with John A. Lynns' health.

waysider and Raf, you should not post one after the other: two green dudes with arm statements. Ohh, the irony.

Mark.S, I am with you on most of what you say but gee-by-golly, Caiaphas had a good heart, I gotta question that point. Still, back to the original point, that prophesy was from Caiaphas - did he influence the cause for the death of Jesus and (as an added extra) did he get such prophesy prior to the meeting with the Sanhedrin and spin the thing to ensure the death of Christ.

Gents, Let's not let chronology get in the way of understanding history, you have all thought outside linear time. I find it fantastic that John could impose non linear thought, even within his own gospel - take for instance the alabaster box. Tzaia: With all due respect, how can you mention Dispensatialism and Calvinism in the same breath; if a Calvinist, why do anything, it's all set in life. waysider: I don't try to reference TWI anymore in my search for Biblical understanding, TWI gave me a starting point but I left (to their loss - my money is gone and I got no sexy daughters for them) but they did give me the door that I have opened. The dispensation/administration/oikianomia (yeh, my Greek sucks but I keep trying), whatever you want to call it, I still see their are administrations, it looks even more evident since the gospels were written after the epistles. If it were the other way around (chronologically - boy, that's hard to type) then, in my understanding, it would not fit as well. Like the epistles told the revealed truth and the gospels did the same without knowing what was in the epistles. Now, I know that is not totally correct but I said it in order to get my facts strait (knowledgable folks will respond) to state it more correctly at a future date. Yes, I am just a parasite. Also waysider: I have seen what twisting scripture does - I want to be honest and true like the boy scout I am, I know that I get to walk in front of the bema some day and I already got lotsa crap to account for - don't need anymore.

Mark.S, There's alot that can be said about how it all ended up and is ending up to this very day. You have made a very good point, if Caiaphas was correct, then did it save the nation of Israel: not then (because the Roman's did their deed at that time against Israel), but maybe now, since there is a state for the Jews - yet, I don't think it's about the Jews, anymore. That said, I will get back to the original question: Was the prophesy by Caiaphas correct (I see that most think, yes). But did Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin think that it was their obligation to fulfill that prophesy by planning the murder of Jesus. The issue regarding Lazarus plays volumes into what the Sanhedrin and Caiaphas feared. So, WordWolf, you said alot of good stuff, very good stuff, but still did not get to the final point. You said, in essence, that the Sanhedrin did not think they were being directed to kill Jesus but is not that what Caiapas was leading them to do and what they determined to do, eventually? (of course by the hands of the Romans, so let's not go down that road - just needed to stipulate for other readers). My question is still the same: it's the prophecy of Caiaphas (consensus is that it was from God, assumming we believe the Bible) - should the Sanhedrin have infered that it was their job to see that Jesus was killed for the sake of the nation and the gathering together of Israel. I would also like to entertain that Caiaphas got this prophecy before this meeting with the Sanhedrin and that he (Caiaphas) was only paraphrasing it to the Sanhedrin with his (Caiaphas's) personal spin.

Gee WordWolf, that was length. Honest question here: is it better to do the fast reply and reference back to a person/avitar or just do a "reply" at the end of their post.

Hey Longhunter, is that the same Donna who was at the North Carolina, HQ in Greenville?

You can get back to me via a personal note

Anyone in Wisconsin, you can send me note as I also am looking for some fellowship time (I am in the Milwaukee area but soon to be a bit northwest of the brew-town). No offense intended, I want nothing to do with The Way (TWI) - not to say I would not attend a twig (or whatever it is called now) and I for sure will not "tithe" or abundantly share to TWI, my $ go to organizations that I have researched. Alibi: Anyone out there from around the early/mid 70's (I was an International WOW in 1974/75), would like to hear from you.

Thanks, thought that the CT referene was a TWI acronym for something.

Yes, Raf, I am assumming that the Bible is true. So, starting in vs 51 John states that "he" (refering to Caiaphas) "did not say this on his own" and that assumption is that Caiaphas received the phophesy from God. The 2 points of the profecy: a. that he die for the nation and b. gather together the children of God. So, given that this prophecy was from God and was accurately voiced to the Sanhedrin (though it seems to me that Caiaphas received the prophecy prior to this meeting - debatable) that the Sanhedrin took it upon itself to kill Jesus. Should the Sanhedrin have infered from the prophecy that God was directing them to do the deed?

Well, maybe we saw so much of him because our branch was rich in babes, nah, VPW just had a thing for Wisconsin (he did his seminary there and played pro basketball there). Then again, Donny Fugit came up the year after; now there's a name I have not heard in a long time (Obi Whan Knobe).

Cancer is from ds possession, was that taught in the advanced course? I am being rehtorical. It was best then for me to have stayed on the field and been later ostrised from TWI rather than going deeper. Yeh, advanced class, met alot of grads, like military academy grads, all theory and no ability to execute a mission (don't want to generalize). I do recall that VPW stated that he wished that he would have never taught that course to people since they did nothing with it - I always thought that the AC grads wielded special spiritual capability - if that were so, why was I asked to ..... by a grad, should have been her job. Kind of a round about way to get to this about cancer and ds's but is it possible? Think of the connection of the manifestations and what was Jesus healing, many times removing ds's, just because TWI leaders could not do it, does not mean that ain't the case. This is all just food for thought and probably should be on the doctrinal forum.

Thanks Dog Lover. OMG, what if I had taken all that $ and put it into an IRA (gaf: there were no IRA's back then).