jen-o

i do agree with you... i just don't know why you think that vpw has all the answers... don't you just want to go directly to Jesus, instead of going to Him via vpw's perceptions?

turning to Jesus Christ is not the same as analyzing the words in the bible... and true repentance is more than "changing your mind"... true repentance brings you to your knees, and cuts through the heart... it's a life altering event...

i'm using the terms the way the thesaurus uses them... if you want to invent your own "usages" for words (and not use words the way the rest of the english-speaking people use them), then be my guest! i will say, though, that you are gonna have a hard time communicating with people if you are using words differently than the rest of the population...

in the last days, people who warn others will be called "haters"... they will also be called "intolerant"... man's basic spiritual problem is that he does not repent of his sin, and turn toward the Savior, the Lord Jesus the Messiah...

dear mike, let me try to explain this as simply as possible... one of the synonyms for the word "exception" is difference... one of the synonyms for the word "distinction" is difference... (check out a thesaurus, roget's will do) therefore, all without exception (difference) = all without distinction (difference) let me give you an example: if i want to talk about all the rosebushes on the planet, i could refer to them as all rosebushes without exception OR all rosebushes without distinction... and i could say: all rosebushes without exception are plants... OR all rosebushes without distinction are plants... however, if i want to differentiate between rosebushes and point out the differences among them... then i might say: all wild rosebushes have thorns... now i have made a distinction... all rosebushes WITH this particular DISTINCTION (i.e. the quality of being wild, and NOT cultivated) have thorns... all rosebushes do not have thorns, but all wild rosebushes do... this is all with distinction... vpw misspoke when he said "all without distinction"... what he meant to say was "all WITH distinction" (which was what he was describing - all people within a certain category as differentiated from all people everywhere)... now, i don't have a problem with people misspeaking... i don't think it's a big deal (we all do it at some time or another)... what i do find ODD is that no one bothered to correct his mistake and this error... why was this error not caught during the editing process?!? did no one recognize it? (hard to believe) OR were people afraid to speak up and say something about it to vpw? OR did people have the attitude that whatever came out of vpw's mouth was "inspired by God"? this error was captured on film, and no one bothered to correct it... in fact, when i took the pfal class in 1981, i questioned the "twig leader" about it... and a couple of sessions later (after thinking about it, i guess), she made a statement to the "class" that vpw meant "all WITH distinction"... i'm wondering how many other "class coordinators" bothered to correct this misstatement... probably not many... anyway, about that venn diagram... the set of all items (without exception) and the set of all items (without distinction) contain the exact same items... so you would have to draw 2 circles of the exact same size, and place one on top of the other... shalom, jen-o

cff continues to teach the errors (and lies) of twi... for that reason alone, i would warn people about getting involved with cff... why would anyone want to fill their head with more false teaching? for if they accept the teachings of a false prophet like vpw, then they are still in the dark! and if the blind lead the blind, then they will both fall into a pit... [okay there... are we back on topic now?]

LOL, shell... i don't think they are talking about "forgiveness" anymore... personally, i have forgiven everybody! (a long time ago) however, that doesn't mean i am going to propagate unbiblical doctrines... btw, that orange book is scary... what's the difference between "all without exception" and "all without distinction"?? not a dang thing!

hey oak, i, too, usually open up a second window so that i can refer back to what has been said in previous posts.. i have a real hard time following posts within posts within posts... but, hey, that's just me... :~D however, now i am on webtv, and cannot open up a second window (nor do i have access to the icons)... so i'll be brief... :~) my original motivation for posting on this thread was to comment on "the message" paraphrase... (and no, i'm not picking on twinky)... but somehow i got entangled in this discussion about the hellenists... i'm trying to look at a much bigger picture... no, i do not think that culture and religion are synonyms... but i do think that they are intrinsically linked to the degree that it is difficult to separate one from the other... culture influences one's worldview... and religion (and its practices) also influences one's worldview... culture influences and shapes religion and vice versa... for example, culture has influenced peterson as he wrote his paraphrase "the message"... and those who believe that "the message" is an inspired version of God's Word (and read it with that mindset), will therefore have their religious views shaped by peterson's worldview... here is a link to an interesting article about "the message"... www.crossroad.to/Bible_studies/Message.html i do make a distinction between a biblical worldview... and a cultural and/or religious worldview... all christians live in pagan cultures - china, india, syria, america (yep, america), etc. etc. so, of course, it is possible for a christian to live in a pagan culture... in fact, we all do... so when i read about the "hellenists" in acts, it is my understanding that they were jews (of jewish lineage) who were following a mixture of hellenistic/pagan practices and jewish religious practices (with the mixture more heavily weighted towards the hellenistic culture) this does not seem so unusual to me... i see people everywhere who mix paganism with religion... indeed, who mix paganism with christianity... and there are plenty of people who call themselves "christian" who just go thru the religious motions, but their heart is far from God... anyway, my main point about the hellenists were that they were NOT christans... (not christians as described in the book of acts) but i am really more concerned with the direction "christianity" is headed in... because many false teachers and prophets have crept in and are introducing all kinds of pagan ideas and practices into christianity... hope that helps a little... btw, i don't fault you for misunderstanding my position... it kinda got a little tangled up in here... :~) shalom, jen-o p.s. well, i thought it was gonna be brief... LOL

dear oak, i have NEVER said that the hellenists were "gentiles"... (but you wouldn't know it from trying to read the color-coded thingie) i have repeatedly stated that the hellenists (in this verse) were jews!... i have always maintained that they were of jewish lineage, and that they followed the hellenist culture (and the hellenist culture was a pagan culture)... my point has always been that they were NOT christians... because once a jew accepts Jesus as Lord, then they follow Christ (and not paganism) i think that the term "greek-speaking jews" is a very poor translation... but i accused no individual on this thread of "private interpretation"... except i do accuse peterson of taking great liberties in his "paraphrase" version of "the message"... and i believe that his use of the term "greek-speaking jews" is misleading... because a culture is MORE than a language... i have explained all of this before, but maybe bride has set up a straw man argument to CONFUSE what i actually said! living in a pagan culture is not the point... we ALL (and all christians) live in a pagan culture... but following the pagan culture is the thing that i am concerned about... and, imo, the "jewish hellenists" followed the pagan/hellenist culture... (i hold this opinion because of the context of the use of the word "hellenist" in acts 9:29 and acts 11:20)... and because these "jewish hellenists" were following the hellenist culture, i submit that they were NOT christians... i agree with you that a hellenist jew who converted to christianity would NOT be considered a pagan (even though they lived in a pagan culture) this has been my basic position all along... (although bride has seen fit to twist my words, and accuse me of all kinds of things)... and i'm not sure quite why... except that she seems to enjoy picking a part every line of a post in her "systematical destruction" of anothers viewpoint (which she admits she has been trained to do, and seems quite pround of that) i'm not sure what she thinks she "systemetically destroyed", but it wasn't my viewpoint or position... since it is clear that after this many posts, she has confused what i said to the point that you (oak) think that i have said the opposite of what i actually said... anyway, oak, it sure is nice to have a normal converastion about this... :) and i hope i cleared up my postion for you... peace, jen-o p.s. now, i want to know how long am i gonna think that raf is the weatherman... i would much rather be driving around in the wow mobile (like you oak), or even examining the hairs in the soup... LOLOL :lol: btw, my post #36 was really not about the grecians/hellenists... (although i did address a little bit of the content concerning this) but the reason for my post was more due to the "tone" of bride's post to me, than anything else... as in: bride wrote: and i responded: although bride missed this... and attributed my remarkes about being condescending to a comment she picked out at random... to wit, she thought i was referring to this post of hers: because she responded that this was my response to the above "quote" she, of course went on to respond to my comment referring to her "condescending" statements as if it was attributed to this random quote... when in fact i was referring to the above multiple statements... this is but ONE example of things being "twisted"... and for this reason, i am not going to try to untangle the color-coded mess of errors, assumptions, accusations, and straw man arguements that bride posted...

hey whitedove, i understand about working and having a life outside of the message boards... :) heck, i haven't been to the forum here in probably 4 years... (2 years for the chatroom) :P and i understand how posts can sneak in there when you're not looking even... sometimes... ;) i do think that we each have a totally different perspective on what twi was about... and so we seem to be coming from very different places... (well, it seems this way to me, anyway) in any case, it is good to see you again! now tonight, we will be having the linguini with the clam sauce... :D peace, jen-o

well, i sure hope that made you feel better, bride... because i cannot follow that mixed up color-coded mess... you, are the queen of the "nits," my dear! i am NOT going to have a conversation in this manner! it is ludicrous!!! bride, i'm gonna let you have the last word... so have at it! p.s. when did i graduate to thinking raf was the weatherman... seems like only yesterday that i thought the coffee was too strong!... LOL

gee bride, i'm not here to pick nits... picking nits is just NOT my favorite pasttime... i am posting my general train of thought, and i'm not really into picking apart every line of a post... but i guess i have to respond to some of this stuff... (sigh) you wrote: "Who said it was?" bride, the tone of your posts say it... i don't live in a vacuum... (i don't know how much of this i really want to get into... let me just say that i've read some of your posts on the "vp is essential" thread) it's your comments and tone that gave me this impression... you wrote: bride i am aware of what the NASB and companion bibles are... i even own one of them; imagine that!the companion bible has MORE "commentary" on the page than it does the Word of God... (btw, the companion bible IS the king james version) so when you said that the NASB and bullinger "concurred" with you, just what were you referring to??... this is what you wrote: this is not what the bible states, so i am assuming that it is the "commentary" that "concurs" with you... "commentary" is all those comments on the side of the page that are NOT the Living Word of God... i shouldn't have to spell this out for you, bride... but you shouldn't back up your opinion with a "commentary" and then act like case closed, "thus says the Lord"... i thought you were putting a lot of weight on "commentary" since you asked me to "cite my sources" as in: i don't need to find sources that agree with me... that is not the name of my game... i read (and study) the bible to know the Truth, not to find something that agrees with me!you wrote: if this isn't condescending, i don't know what is... you rebuke me without ever addressing the content of what i say! bride, i am NOT inferior to you! i know you think you are highly educated, but i have a couple of (three) college degrees myself, having graduated with a 4.0 each time... however, i count my education but DUNG compared to what the Holy Spirit teaches me... there IS a difference between being theologically educated and being taught by the Holy Spirit! and i stand by what i said: i have need of no man to teach me because the Holy Spirit teaches me! (and that IS in context, the context of deception (and there is a lot of deception in man's commentary)... every man is a liar, but the Holy Spirit cannot lie!) now, concerning the content that you did address: first you rebuke me, and then you agree with me that hellenist jews are not christian... (scratching my head) let me just add: you make a distinction between "pagan hellenists" and "jewish hellenists"... i do NOT... in my opinion, a hellenist IS a pagan (whether they are of jewish lineage OR gentile background) my whole point is that hellenists (pagans) are NOT christians... i'm not sure what's so hard to understand about that... and again, when you write: i know they are of jewish lineage... i never disputed that!... and i never said they were "gentiles"..but they are christians of jewish lineage... if you are a jew who accepts Jesus as Lord, then you are a christian and a member of the church of God, the one Body of Christ... methinks that all of that "theological training" is getting in the way of the simplicity of the gospel! and i think there is some confusion due to your definitions of jew, gentile, christian, and hellenist (which i define as a pagan) here you say: and this was my original point... we have different defintions for what a "christian" is... i do NOT agree with you that there is such a thing as "hellenistic christians"... to me, that is like saying there are "paganistic christians" or "christian pagans"... i am of the opinion that christians do NOT follow paganism (and hellenism IS a pagan culture)... but we have been bought with a price... we are citizens of heaven, and confess that we are strangers and pilgrims on this earth... we follow the Lord Jesus Christ, and NOT some paganistic culture of the world... if you see someone that you think the label "hellenistic christian" applies to, then i would suggest to you that this is a "christian" in NAME ONLY (in other words, a non-christian)... and this is what i think is happening in the world today - that christianity is being watered down, and has become almost meaningless as people have applied the word to just about anything... in my opinion, this is part of the agenda of satan that he is using to set up a global religion which will usher in the reign of the anti-christ... this is my opinion!... and i don't think you are going to change it no matter what you say about being trained to "systematically destroy your positions on the Word" as noted in: i'm just not sure that this is such a "godly" goal... and in my case, it can't even be accomplished! shalom, jen-o

are you serious?!? i have seen people threaten this kind of thing here before... so i don't know if you are joking or not? if you are being serious, just what exactly are you gonna tell the moderators? oh, that nasty jen-o... can you believe that she posted her opinion about "the message"... not once, but twice even... the unmitigated gall... she has some nerve posting her opinion about a version of the bible in the doctrinal section... well, i just don't like it... and i want you to make her stop... stop that kind of thing right now!... we need the moderators to be involved... yep, we need to have a meeting bout this... we just can't allow people to go around posting their opinions about bible versions... i mean, just who do they think they are anyway... yep, i'm gonna threaten her... i'm gonna threaten her with the dreaded moderators... maybe that will get her to shut up.... LOLOL and if you are being facetious, i hope you appreciate my humor... LOL :lol: peace, jen-o

HEY ZSHOT! HOW YA BEEN! :) okay back to the topic: this is true for me as well... GOOD TO SEE YOU ZSHOT! peace, jen-o

bride, i was not addressing you specifically... i was just posting some of my general observations... bride, it's not always about you... but since you are asking me a question, i will respond... actually, i can... the bible... in acts 9:29, paul disputed against these "hellenists", and the "hellenists" sought to kill him! if you think these hellenists were christians, then you have a different definition for "christian" than i do... and in acts 11:20, some of the christian men that came to antioch preached (euaggelizo) the Lord Jesus to these "hellenists"... if the hellenists were christians, then why don't they already know about the Lord Jesus? (up until this time, they had preached the Word to jews only, according to acts 11:19) [btw, if you read "the message", you would not be able to see the pattern between these verses] now, you may believe these "hellenists" are christians... but i do NOT... like i said, we may have very different definitions of what it means to be a "christian"... as for commentaries, i take all commentaries with a grain of salt... i do not rely on commentaries... i have the Holy Spirit to teach me, and have no need of any man to teach me (1John2:27) do you think that your opinion is more valid because it agrees with a couple of "commentaries" (specifically, the NASB & the companion bible)? still, my point has nothing to do with whether the "hellenists" were jews or gentiles... my point is that "hellenists" are NOT christians (in my opinion, that is)... but hellenism is more than the language one speaks... hellenism is a culture! and hellenists follow the hellenistic (pagan) culture; they do not follow a christian way of life... now, as for "the message", it is a very poor paraphrase heavily laced with peterson's private interpretation (in my opinion, that is) :D in fact, i believe that this kind of poor paraphrase introduces all kinds of doctrinal errors while watering down the Word of God... to the degree that it is an instrument of satan in his attempt to merge christianity with the other world religions on his quest to form a global religion... (well, no one ever accused me of not having strong opinions) LOLOL :lol: peace, sister bride, jen-o

hey whitedove! i really don't need no "refreshing"... i'm aware of what you said, and understand that you are trying to get your point across that you think twi gave advance notice (in promotional literature) about "toughening people up"... but your post stuck out like a sore thumb to me because of your TIMING... it came right after excie's courageous and vulnerable exposure of her heart (love ya excie)... and other people had posted with compassion... but that all seemed to go right over your head!... you were so h3ll bent on making your point about "promotional literature", that you were oblivious to anything else going on around you... and i just don't get that! whitedove, i know it's been a while... but i do NOT remember you being like that! what the heck is going on in this place?... you sound like some kind of apologist for twi... say it isn't so! i really can't read all of your lengthy posts about "promotional literature"... it just sounds like a whole lotta who shot john to me... you really think that the goal of twi was to "toughen people up" spiritually, mentally, and physically?!? because i think that the RESULT of twi practices was to toughen people up EMOTIONALLY! you can't possible think that abusers are concerned for the welfare of those they abuse... no, whitedove, i STILL don't get where you are coming from... and i don't understand how you can ignore excie's post, and rush to the defense of a cultic organization... btw, the laundry is in the dryer, and i'm making lambchops for dinner! :) peace, jen-o

bride, you sound a little condescending and "preachy", and i NEVER use that latter term... you might want to reconsider the tone of your posts... (because those are 2 qualities in a post that do not make for easy communication) peace, jen-o

randy, honey, are you being serious?!? i can't figure out if this is a parody or something.... edited to add: oh dear, you are serious... :o but that doesn't mean i'm gonna straddle the fence or mince my words... personally, i can't find anything good to say about the organization of "the way" (a cult) nor about vpw (a cult leader)... so i guess i won't say anything at all... (for now, that is) :)

the "message" is a paraphrase based on someone's personal interpretation... no thanks, i don't need to read someone else's private interpretation! i've had enough private interpretation (via the way ministry) to last me a lifetime... by reading someone's paraphrase, you get an inaccurate picture of what is going on... these folks were not believers who happened to speak greek (greek-speaking believers per "the message"), they were those who were following the hellenistic culture (a pagan culture)... (personally, i would not call people who follow a paganistic culture "christian") by reading "the message," you have come to the conclusion that the apostles "didn't want to get involved with the poor"... when that is NOT what the text says... it says that it is not appropriate/desirable/fitting for the apostles to leave the Word of God in order to serve or "wait tables"... they would be spreading themselves too thin if they did both... and it's not appropriate for them to abandon the Word for waiting on tables... this says NOTHING about them not wanting to "get involved with the poor"... the reason this verse "seems a little off" to you is because you are reading "the message" which contains peterson's interpretation... edited to add: they were all of jewish background... but some followed the hellenistic way of life and some followed the hebrew way of life...

just one more quick question... bride, you don't believe in replacement theology, do you?

their good points?!? gee, you got me scratching my head here, bride... what good points?? the only possible thing i can think of that was any good was some of the people i came into contact with... but then, that had NOTHING to do with "the way"! these were just nice, caring people (twi didn't train them to be that way)... in fact, the more contact people had with twi, the less "nice" they seemed to become... twi was like a poison, infecting people... i'm curious to know what you think were the good points of this organization... shalom, jen-o

little ham-ster, twi most certainly did NOT represent the Lord and His ways or methods! i absolutely agree with you about twi's methods, and i am of the opinion that twi was NOT about the Lord Jesus! if someone got born again while participating in twi, then it was in spite of twi NOT because of twi... personally, i chucked everything i ever learned in twi and started over again... twi gave God a bad name, and left a bad taste in people's mouths... and i do understand that... but i'm not gonna blame God for that... i will have to write more later... cuz i have to run... peace, jen-o :)

bride, i wholeheartedly agree! i wasn't saying that the "leaders" actually have any "special" connection... i was saying that the people THINK that "leaders" have some "better" and "special" connection... and the "leaders" propagate that idea, which in turn, leads to abuse... i absolutely agree with you that this is the spirit of the nicolaitans, who set up a spiritual hierarchy (beginning with the roman catholic church) and twi did the very same thing!! twi was real good at accusing other churches of things, and then they turned around and did the same thing... and imo, twi took it to a more extreme level!... by micromanaging the lives of those on the lower rungs of the hierarchy! twi is an evil organization! shalom, jen-o p.s. i think we are on the same page about matthew 7 (although we may have gotten there from different places) i think matthew 7:21-23 is written to all those who call Jesus, 'Lord'... and therefore, it is directed at those who call themselves "christian"... and of course, we all know that christians have been grafted in to the root of israel... :)

i was reading this thread (via a link from another) and i just got to this post and had to stop... what gives, whitedove? here i am reading along, clicked on the song link from excie and read her post (with tears in my eyes), other folks were responding with posts of compassion, and you come out of nowhere trying to prove that "twi literature" supports "toughening people up"... have you no heart? have you no compassion? do you think it's a good thing that twi tried to toughen people up?!? i just don't understand where you are coming from at all! (okay, i'll finish reading the thread now)

waysider, thanks for the heads up! :D although oldiesman might never answer me... i guess it was a rhetorical question... :P i will check out that "toughen you up" thread though... peace, jen-o p.s. excie, i guess that was kinda funny... LOLOL :lol: