Sunesis

Def, did you read Mark's article at all? It sounds like you're the one covering your ears. At least take the time and courtesy to read it. Mark, great article.

I've been thinking about this in a slightly different context lately. We all know through history, the woman was always considered "property" of the man - father, brother, husband when she married. It wasn't until this century that woman even got the right to vote. It seems most of the people avidly defending her "right" to be put to death are men. Its the old, hey, he's the husband, he has the right argument. I have wondered, what would have happened if this case had appeared before women judges. If MS, 7 years after the fact, had gone before a woman judge and said, your honor, I remember she told me once she'd want to die, and my brother here will back it up. I think a woman would have said, where's the proof? Why should I take your word over the word of people and nurses you were with whom you told the opposite? Whom you told, I have no idea what to do, I don't know what she wanted, we never discussed it? Why should I just take your say-so? But a male judge just said, ok guy, no problem, I believe you. I wonder how much of the male mentality came into play here on a subconscious level. What if it were a woman who wanted her husband put to death in this manner? She says, judge, its seven years later, my lover and I are happy and I've had two of his kids, and I remember my husband told me, he would want to die and my sister here will back me up. Would a male judge have just gone along with it? I think he would have found some doubt. I think we would have seen a much different ending with a female judge or a role reversal. Just another perspective.

If we're going to talk about, well, Michael is the husband, his word should be obeyed - please, that doesn't wash - not in this situation. In this case, I do not think Michael lived up to his wedding vows at all. He forgot the "in sickness" and in health part, the until death do us part section. He would bring his girlfriend along with him to visit Terri. He has a common law wife and two children. He's not great principled guy. He forfeited any right to decide she should die. As for everyone talking about how great the "law" is, and the "judges" are. America's dirty little secret is that every judge who is elected, almost all of his contributions come from lawyers. The lawyers own the judges in this country - not the people. Come election time, we have every single judge running for something or other traipsing through our offices, and the lawyers are told to give (of course, the firm reimburses them). If people knew this, they'd be up in arms. This makes for very partial judgment, when the lawyer standing in front of the Judge gave him $10,000 to be there. Most of you were telling a different story when the Supreme Court gave Bush the election. Where was all your respect, reverance and awe for the law then? Don't be such hypocrites. I think the reason this case has drawn so much attention is one word: doubt. I have great doubt about Michael, 7 years later, suddenly remembering, he had this conversation with his wife, when others who knew her, even discussing a similar situation, said she disapproved. I think Michael lied. I think Michael decided it was time for her to go so he could "move on" - with a little extra money in his pocket, of course. Just because he was the husband, so what! How many husbands have never erred. He abdicated his rights to her when he broke his wedding vows, entered into another relationship with a woman and had her children. Now people are defending polygamy? ok, whatever. If a woman decided to take on another husband while married to you men here, I bet you'd be up in arms. There was just too much doubt in this case.

Welcome to the new era of state sponsored excution of innocent people. Of law masquerading as justice. Of a husband manipulating the state into killing an innocent person for him. Anyone who is not repelled and appalled by what has happened and the implications - well, if you don't "get it" now you never will. If it doesn't bother you in the least, somewhere, way deep down, you have no conscience. As a nation, our love has waxed cold.

1search, why don't you go to the doctrinal section and read the thread on universalism. Many Christians believe ALL men will be saved - believer and unbeliever. God will not be throwing unbelievers into "hell" (a pagan concept). You might find it interesting.

My problem with this is the manner in which she is dying. I perfectly understand letting people go. But on a human level, I have moral problems with the manner or this woman's death. Misinformed people assumed she would be getting morphine for the pain, or maybe an injection. Working around health care lawyers, no doctor in his right mind will give her anything, lest they be tried as a criminal for murder - and you know someone would bring charges. Its a hot potato - no med malpractice charges for them. What gets me, is that we humanely put our animals to sleep. A convicted death row inmate, if there's any tiny teensy bit of doubt or a question, or new evidence, has his case appealed, reviewed, appealed, reviewed for years. He is given the benefit of the doubt, new facts are investigated. A federal court was ordered to do the same thing for this woman, a de novo review of new facts and information, to put to rest any lingering doubts, and refused to do so, refused to at least look at new information that has come out, but will do so for a convicted murderer without having to be prompted. Yet an innocent american citizen is denied this basic right. If the convicted murderer is still found guilty he is put to sleep - the "humane" way by lethal injection. Giving Schiavo a drink of water is now grounds for imprisonment. Taking her off of her "life support" and starving her to death is now considered humane. Well, all of us are on "life support" - take away any of our food and water and we die. Starving a person to death is not humane or kind - it is barbaric. Under our laws, starving a human being to death is not murder - it is "natural," wiping her lips with water, or putting a wafer on her tongue for her last rites is now illegal. The real humane thing would be to inject her, or shoot her even - but we cannot show the same mercy on her, a human being, as we do an animal or a heinous murderer. Is it just me, or is there something wrong with this picture? I know, its the law, its the law. Well, we all know what law and legalism can do when taken to its extreme. Law, without mercy or compassion is bondage. We are on a slippery slope I fear now. This case is bigger I think than what we realize.

I just wanted to say, I too was a "groovy" Christian of Rye with the Heefners (wonderful people) and my3cents. My3cents was an adorable cutie!

Ex Cath, I really like your comment - prolonging death. I hadn't thought of it in that light before, but it makes sense.

HCW - LOL! TWI II; Revenge of the Jock! good one. Jerry, great to see you posting here again. I realize Paul is talking about law and bondage in those verses. However, one day years ago I was reading those passages and it struck me like a thunderbolt out of the blue, its also, I guess I'll use the word "spiritually" talking about our inner struggle with the old and the new man - our two natures so to speak. I can't explain it, I just deeply understood, that Christ's love for us is so big, the old, sin nature is not held against us. Does this mean we rest on our laurels? Of course not, it gives us greater impetus to try and walk as Christ walked and follow the still small voice within.

It was great - you are a great story teller. I was looking forward to each installment. Great articulation on what the single corps women went through!

I guess I'd think about it in this way. Can they still live if all of the life support paraphenalia was gone? If they would die, then they are artificially being kept alive. In that case, make them comfortable, but let them go. I hate the thought of starving this woman - it is barbaric. The feeding tube should stay. But I'd remove the other machinery keeping her going. 50-60 years ago, people died. It bothers me the medical profession keeping people alive and making billions off of it.

Sorry Raf - I should have clarified. I was with him when I was in NYC for 9 years. I watched him get quite hard and almost illogical. I am speaking '80s and '90s here. I can't speak for recent years. From people who know people who follow him now, he's gotten very into the O.T., law, etc. I guess Ga*y G**lin leads the way with VF in this type of teaching. There are other groups who for some reason think we now need to be living under the law. To me, its a repudiation of everything Christ came to do and did for us.

There are several ex-way groups that have now gone back and put themselves under O.T. law - including VF's group. I think it is a logical extension of legalism. Under CG, VF became extremely legalistic for years. If you have repudiated God's grace and Christ's redemption in the here and now, the only place left is to go back to the law. Mankind is a fallen race. Its that simple. Mankind needed a Savior. We will not lose our new birth if we sin. Paul explained this when in Romans he talks about - who shall deliver me from this dead body? He then sums it up by saying, there is therefore now NO condemnation to them who are in Christ Jesus. If you read the context, he is contrasting our old "natural man" with the spiritual man. Paul is saying that even though we have a sin nature and it continues to sin, that because of God's grace and Christ's sacrifice - there is therefore now no condemnation to us because we are fallen and have a sin nature. I.e., we are not condemned because we have this sin nature. Why? because it is our nature. It cannot be changed until Christ changes us. Its like, my cat. He is the essence of Cat. His nature is cat. For me to train him and try and get him to become more like me, human, is an exercise in futility. His NATURE is cat. Our nature is human - not just human, but fallen human. We can no more become like Christ by following law, renewing our minds, or whatever else you would like to do to ensure your salvation. Salvation is a gift - it is by grace - period. We were washed by Christ's sacrified blood when nothing - absolutely nothing - could cleanse us. For those who have tasted the grace of God, to turn back leads to bondage. As Paul so eloquently wrote, the veil is over their eyes again. They cannot see. To negate Christ's sacrifice, which is what they are doing, to cause people doubt about their salvation, and teach this to others is, well, I don't know what word to use - it is tragic.

Fabulous sharing outandabout! You articulated so much better than I could about what we all went through in the corps, and deciding to leave. I too felt a great weight leave when I left - freedom - finally! I don't think most people will understand the corps "commitment" we had - that you would rather die than not fulfill your assignment, thus, the stuff we went through and did "for God." Thanks again!

Still loving your story - so many things I can relate to. What a long, strange trip its been...

Well Def, I agree with most of what you said here. I believe John, when he is the logos, the Word made flesh. He was with the father before, came here, and went again to him. You could call me a trinitarian.

See Def, that's where you and I disagree about the Book of Life. Christ said we live in a world of wheat and tares, the tares will be winnowed out. I believe those not in the Book of Life are those who are not truly human - those are the tares, those are those who the Bible says are dead, they are also those who the Bible says have NO resurrection. Thus, they are not to be found in the Book of Life. They are the Nephilim. You may want to research them. I believe all humans will be found in the Book of Life. Those not quite "human" will not be.

Aw shucks (blushes) - thanks guys. Glad you didn't think I was off the deep end!

I think most of us here confess Christ as Lord. I do not believe Christ was two different people, but, he was a chip off the old block so to speak - he was/has the same essence of the Father. I think TWI did us a grave disservice denying us Christ's divinity and just concentrating on his humanity.

I've also been following your story - there are so many things I can relate to being 7th corps, the same experiences, similar feelings. Thanks for sharing! Waiting eagerly for the next installment!

About 6 months ago, for some reason I became fascinated with Nephilim. There are some great sites on the web about them, and giants. There's a lot of oddball stuff too. But there's a lot of good information to learn about it if one wants to. It answered so many questions. I think I started studying it when I stumbled across and read, the Book of Enoch. A lot of Christians are starting to see it. To me, it is so obvious now that I see it and I wonder why not before. I think God is showing this topic to us Christians now for a reason. I always used to wonder things like, who were those spirits in prison Jesus preached to? What could they have possibly done so wrong so as to be chained up? Why was Isreal always being told to wipe out certain segments of the population they came across (that was so genocidal - I had a huge problem with that - until I understood Nephilim)? Why are there those, even today, who's evil is so far beyond "devil spirit" possession, that us "normal" humans cannot comprehend the evil they do - or as one FBI profiler said, the only way to describe some serial killers, is to think of them as aliens - we can't comprehend them. Also, the Hitlers, Stalins, Pol Pots, etc. Those who seem so utterly normal, but whose thoughts are so alien, who's deeds are so utterly evil, mankind cannot comprehend - though they try. Why are the pyramids and sphinx, so similar to the pyramids on Mars? If they were made by the same beings created by God, before the rebellion and fall, it makes sense, they would make similar altars and signs - no matter where they went. We know from the Word, that Satan walked among the stones (planets). How did the huge megolithic pyramids and other signs around the world, how were they built by puny humans? Why are the pictures of the Sumarian Kings and gods, so gigantic? - who or what was really ruling those people? Why did God forbid worhipping them or partaking in their bloody, death cult rituals? Why was Cain so afraid to go out into the land - which they dominated most of? Why do we take the Bible literally, yet, the pictures and drawings from the same time periods, we ignore and say, that can't possibly be? Why was Noah spared? We know he was perfect, but in what way? Morally? No. His was the only genetic bloodline/DNA flesh from the ine of Adam that had not been corrupted - thus, he was the only "righteous" man left. If Satan had totally corrupted the human line, Christ could never have come - think about it. The Redeemer had to come from the Adamic bloodline - no pure Adamic/human bloodline left, no redeemer. Why the need for a flood? Everything had been corrupted - including animals with the Nephilim hybrid gene pool. Why did Adam and Eve want to have the knowledge of the Gods (fallen angels)? What did they see roaming outside of the Garden (and in) that was so attractive and beautiful? So beautiful, they willingly forfeited their reign over the earth and returned it to the god who now rules? In TWI we were taught to take the Bible literally, what if we do? Now think about it, they wanted to be as the gods they saw. Who were these beings who were so fascinated with man they willingly left their natural "habitation" to come down and corrupt mankind? Why did Christ say, in the last days, it shall be as the times of Noah? Who were the cause of the dreadful times Noah lived in? Something to think about. Excuse my ramblings - I'm really not crazy - still very stable and sane. Just interesting stuff to think about. I will have to read his book.

A lot of it was political - what got inserted and what didn't. I find the book of Enoch fasciniating - first because God says himself Enoch walked with him and later translated him that he should not see death. Second, the Book of Enoch is quoted in both the old and new testament. It seems the Book of Enoch was widely read, accepted and known to all, just like our Bible is today. Third, when you read Enoch, he corraborates and enhances. I think the Nephilim weren't gone into in detail in Gen. 6 because it was assumed everyone knew the account in Enoch. It was later, totally destroyed by the religious leaders. Two copies remained hidden and that is where we have our translations from now. I like Enoch because it makes so much sense and to me anyway, was a large piece of a puzzle finally being put into place. For instance - who are the beings in chains, why are they being held and why did Christ preach to them. the authors didn't elaborate because it was common knowledge and pretty much known to everyone who and why. Of course, to us, without the Book of Enoch, its not obvious. I think of all the ones I've read, Enoch is a glaring omission and should have been in there. Likewise with the Book of Revelation. That was added by the Catholic church 400 years after the fact. It was not considered part of the original cannon. Why did the Catholic church 400 hundred years later, decide it should be put in? I think Martin Luther may have had the right idea. Some of the other books obviously don't belong. But again, much of the cannon we have now, and don't have, but maybe should, was political, power struggles and dominance.

I'm sure we all have thoughts and differing opinions. But from reading your posts, you don't ask questions because you really want to know what others think, or think about other possibilities. You ask questions to argue. You seem still pretty much glued to VP's doctrine. When you decide you really want to learn, even if it goes against VP's doctrine, I think God will show you wonderful stuff.

I had the exact same thing happen to me at a firm in NYC. The office manager had it out for me. She had been there 15 years. I never gave her or anyone at work anything to say about me. I said good morning and good night. Made sure my boss and I had a good relationship. I did point out to my boss in casual conversation how this woman did not work but gossiped with the other young ladies all the time. He started watching. She would go to the managing partner and say, she wanted me fired. They'd say, well what has she done? Well, nothing. There was no incident or anything I'd said she could use. Meanwhile, I was an excellent worker and my bosses loved me. Finally, she went to her boss - the top managing partner, and gave the ultimatum - either I go, or she goes. They told her goodbye. She was shocked. I was thrilled. She went. Ignore the glares - just remember - she's outta there! I have watched so many people in the work force hang themselves with their own rope. Just give them time. Its the work place. Do your job, never get involved in office politics, gossip, etc. - keep a professional attitude at all times - even if that means people think you are "cold." The office is not my social life. Do I care if someone gets an attitude - no. Its their problem, not mine. Don't take the office too personally.

From what I was told by DM herself, she had her sights set for LCM for a long time. He was in love with someone else. But, DM mentioned it to VP. I think it finally dawned on VP it would be a good match. So LCM and DM started spending time together. Theirs was not a marriage based on love I don't think, but expediency, power and getting to the "top" for DM. And for LCM, probably because VP suggested it. It was DM who used to tell corps women that you didn't have to be in love to marry. As we renew our minds to each other, love will grow over time. I never believed that, but I think she needed to believe that. I saw some of the most pathetic marriages in the corps weddings while I was a corps grad on staff at Emporia. As graduation time came, people started panicking and began asking people they barely knew to get married. I was on staff, one guy I really liked but didn't know well - I had admired him from afar, out of the blue asked me to get married a week before the corps weddings. I said, hey, lets spend some time for a year, get to know each other, then, if we work we can. He literally begged to do it now. I said no. Two days later, he asked this woman he barely knew to get married. She said yes. It did end in divorce, maybe he should have waited a year... I would watch these couples and it was so obvious some of these matches weren't right. Then, a couple weeks later at corps week, I saw some of the new brides were absolutely miserable. One woman left her new hubby after two weeks - she never should have married. Looked miserable during the ceremony and after. Several women had their marriages annulled after a few days or weeks. One woman married this man who was, everything she did not want in a man. She was a dear 8th corps friend who was graduated on staff at H.Q. Her greatest desire was to get married. I saw her in her hometown a year later. It was sad. I asked her, why did you marry him? She said DM thought it was a good match and you didn't have to be in love, that would come with time. How many people's lives were ruined with this bull? After POP and the TWI exodus, so many people divorced over the years - most of them were, as my one friend puts it, a "minstry marriage." Very sad.