Gen-2

That sort makes the whole marraige thing sound like it's not worthwhile to a gal like me. in either time. Most people today view marraige differently, even many religious people. Marraige is simply a legal contract anymorewhich ends in death or property/custody disputes. But just saying "I divorce you", BY writing a bill of divorcement and putting it in her hand, and sending her out of the house, means nothing, except that he'll be in the back of a squad car soon. I assume this is another one where the law has lost it's edge because the Temple is no more. Unless you like being tossed in jail.

Nah,... I wrote Peter, and the post hasn't been edited, and thanks for answwering that part.

I suppose one of the problems I have is that I have some relatives that are Jewish, and in a rather strict orthodox sense (their words). I also have some relative s that are Catholic. I remember how much fun it was when they got together - <grin> Love wasn't a good description of what I saw taking place. I learned that the Law was simply a stupid set of codes that was outdated and Illegal anyways. What if a stoning was required by the law,... due to the circumstances? I don't see a lot of stonings these days. So there are some laws that Jews simply ignore But offer them a BLT and you'd think the sky had fallen! The Law is just whatever in the heck they want it to be, and this goes way beyond a few of my relatives, a long way beyond.... And the ones that strive to do every single thing that they can are usually too poor to do anything they'd like that was legal, and oddly sinned with about the same regularity anyways. I could write a book about some of the funny things I've noticed. Anyways I have a question for James, and it's an honest one, based in my simple curiosity. How stringently do you believe the law should be followed? You probably know the law a lot better than I and what all it entails, But I think you also believe that Jesus was the Messiah, and you're aware of the troubles that were caused in the early church by disagreements over how much legalism was healthy for the believers. We have a record of Jesus telling Peter to eat some unclean food, post ascension and admonitions not to use the liberty they had in the law (somehow) as an occasion to the flesh. But it seems to me that you are saying that there is no real change here, while there obviously has been some. I don't see Jews stoning sinners that the law would support it on. Or do they in secret, stone people to death still? ...following the law. yes, it's an extreme example and no I don't see them doing stonings, yet that is the law and there are other laws they seem to have shoved under the table, I'm sure you can think of a short list pretty easily yourself. But I'd like to hear your views on the balance that that this has become and whether or not that's healthy or correct. And you are in a rather unique position to see things a bit from each side. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter,... what you know. and I'll not comment afterward in any negative sense, after all, I'm asking a favor of you here.

Some of the more despicable practices of The Way, weren't common knowledge early on. In the early days I believe Time magazine reported on the Groovy Christians in California. The Way was getting pretty good press and youthful enthusiasm that marked them a cut above the other "Jesus Freaks". There was no internet then. The ARPA-net wasn't but a sliver of what the internet would one day become and only seved the government and Universities. There were only 3 TV stations unless you were lucky enough to get one or more UHF channels in your area. If you weren't lucky you might only get one or two network channels. Many people were still buying their first color TV's. To the few that even heard of the Way, it was not much more than just another crazy Christian Youth Group. People started getting hurt though, although that fact didn't get a lot of publicity, and a little counter-cult group started warning churches about the Way, relating to them the stories of people who had left the ministry for some very sad reasons. The Churches began to stock up on the little pamphlets and leaflets ("tracks") where they made them available to their congregations. The next time the Way really got any attention in the news, was over deprogrammers, anti-cult groups that kidnapped wayfers and helped them out of their cultish minds. The exorcist was very popular at that time and you know, those deprogrammers caught onto the idea of tying wayfers to a bed and "unculting" them. When news of this practice got out people that heard it were often split between sympathy for the Wayfers who were forced to undergo the deprogramming or for the poor parents that paid to have their cultish children (usually, legally adults) saved.... To many churches, some of the Horror Stories encouraged them to restock heavily on the anti-cult pamphlets. Books were written on the subject as interest grew. The books sold well in Christian Bookstores, but not really anywhere else. Cable TV began to be pretty common, but news was still mainly the 3 networks. In the early eighties, which is where I started breathing, the internet went from an overly expensive fad with very few websites, to a cottage industry for those rich enough to afford "actual computers" and not early gaming systems Internet service providers were born, but few people that had home computers purchased Internet service and fewer knew how to even make a website, even if they had a story to tell. Though there were those few. The Way was still largely unknown to the general pubiic, and most of the participants in their programs wouldn't likely believe any stories published online (unless they knew and trusted the writer). The overall net effect was that by the Time Dr. Weirwille died in 1985, The Way (if it was known of at all) was still not really seen as a cult by most, with the exceptioon of a few ex-followers and in religious, anti-cult books and pamphlets. Any news stories about the Way were minor and often only local. From 1986 till WayDale emerged in the late 90's people started talking on their computers, and more people bought them. The Way Ministry has always seemed to be internet shy, relying on what machines they owned for office work and not "worldly chit-chat" but behind their backs, an information revolution was taking place, and they had failed to keep pace. Why, many of their own foillowers were buying those machines,... And they began talking. They began to assemble information. Some already knew the picture that was on the cover of the Puzzle box, but most only had a few pieces in their hands. The smaller websites of those days could not paint a picture as large as the one on the Puzzle's Boxtop. As the pieces came together, thousands and thousands of Way followers left the Ministry. In the mid eighties, it was mostly leadership that heard from others they knew that left, along with those who heard from them what was happening. At that time, The world began to see that the pamphlets and books had been right and the information began to show up compiled here and there, all over the web. But I think that it wasn't really untill the Allen Suit and WayDale that The Way International was really seen as a Cult. The truth was loose now and the Way couldn't contain it and the Dominoes began to fall. People flocked out in the nineties. Today, about the only people who don't think The Way is a Cult, are those still involved in it's programs. I don't think they cultivate that image, but they can't change it, no matter what they do. The only thing the cult image seems to inspire within The Way is paranoia of the rest of the World. paranoia and a sort of self-inflicted autism.

So,... just as with Jobs you pick, when you pick a cult,... er, religion, make sure you pick one with lots of bennies!

??"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them." ?? Yes, you are still there, and can't move beyond it, that's your choice and you've made it. I've made mine too. The law is the guide dog that fetched the sheep to the shepherd. Temporary as a sacrifice until he paid the price. All our fathers looked forward to the day when something more perfect should come, for without him, God could only be approached through sacrifice and most diligent observance. Moses led God's people until Joshua, and the law leads us to Christ, Christ, in turn leads us into the unmerited grace of God. Christ ended the slow bleeding for God's people and brought us something never really known before, access to God. Job said that God wasn't a man, as he was. He and God couldn't exactly sit down together over a cup of joe and talk things out, yanno? And he didn't have anyone to go to God and mediate for him. We do. When the law was given, man began to understand just how expansive his need was. He couldn't do it all and sacrifices were applied like band-aids until the Messiah came. There was this plan to help us, to stop the bleeding. It was a plan that God had, and with His son, He carried it out. God and Christ did this for us at great expense, out of love for us, so that we wouldn't have to be entangled. For Christ is the end of the law, and the beginning of grace for man. He was the only one that ever did the law, and God accepts through Christ's accomplishments. There is no other way. Edited to add: This is less about the Way International than your other posts, and probably belongs in "Doctrine'

You know, that's actually quite funny when you read it. Thanks for your diagnosis, oh unqualified one. I'm outta here Mark this is pointless. That's what I think, and you're in your 4th edit on this post already at 1:01 n the AM I got a 12 hour drive to make , starting in 2 hours. ciao!

You're asking me if what you've heard is true? Edited to add: While the above quote was your entire original post,.. I see you've gone back and edited it to answer your own questions. I was pretty sure you never wanted to hear what I had to say, just by the way you're phrasing things. You don't actually care what I say, so why ask? You're just trolling here. You asked me for an example, and when I gave one you decided not to reply. Your comment on the book of Revelation is perhaps based on the fact that I quoted from it? You certainly doesn't seem to be applying that sentiment to your own basis for your foundational theology on the resurrections, although they were oddly the basis of your initial post concerning it. Thanks for the edit. It explains a lot about your heart on this. I'm the one that doesn't understand Love, I need to go back and study it, while you, on the other hand. you're only doing this out of your great love for me, no doubt. It's quite reminiscent of what I've heard of Way Corps dressing downs or confrontations, do your best to belittle the other person and their beliefs while professing great care for God and His words. Cut out a rather clear example if it doesn't support your view, and be dismissive and rude to others that you do not like, and it's quite clear you do not like me by the drippingly sweet forced condescending tone you've taken with me, because I don't believe as you do about one issue. Congradulations Mark, job well done, you've managed to hurt my feelings again, not that that matters to you. Well done!

In Revelation Chapter fourteen, verse one, we learn that Christ will stand on Mount Sion with 144,000. And in verse thirteen it says Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth, & etc... Therefore we know that Christ returns and is on Mount Sion (a boots on the ground thing), that not all who shall die in the name of the Lord have yet died. Many events are recorded to happen between then and the first resurrection. Actualy the account in Thessalonians that you quoted seems al lot more like the account in Revelation Chapter eleven verse twelve, than it does - the Resurrection of the Just. Yet even then, though it is more similar it isn't the same. And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them. Well,... that account is only listed as happening for the two prophets (in that context) But they ascend up to heaven in a much more similar way to Thessalonians than the much later first resurrection and this happens before Jesus has his boots on the ground. There are many more, very easy to find examples that lead me to believe God is not limited to the two resurrections you've said are all. And it's easy to find on a word search, Heaven cloud ascend,.... etc

Is it true that if your Corps Sponsors didn't "come through",...... that, that was attributed to your poor and faulty believing?

May the road rise to greet your every step with gladness, and may your heart be satisfied with all you have. You're richer than you think Jeff. I'm proud to call you a friend.

No No,... My Bad. Obviously, you have it all right, no need to apologize. Of course I'm judgemental one here, You never would have assumed what I believed, and if you had? Well - I suppose I should just be tanklful to you as you told me I should. Thank you Mark.

Since you cannot be PM'd Mark I'll leave this not here for you I'm not sure why you assumed I am one of those "unbiblical" "Rapture" people whom you seem to detest, or why you simply refused to respond to my earlier comments. But you were quite an a$$ about it. Smug in your software and more perfect knowledge of how things are. This is how you came off in your post. If you don't see that Your eyes are glossed over, You were a jacka$s to me. You must have felt I deserved it.

I'm happy for you and your software Mark. There's a reason I put the word -Rapture- in quotes and qualified the term, which you take umbrage to as unbiblical. Yo seem to think I believen in the "Rapture" concept. At least your reply to me seems to assume that point You said After looking at the scriptures more carefully over time I now believe in just two resurrections. One for the just and one for the unjust. These two resurrections will take place at two different times. The scriptures in 1 Thes. 4:13-17 describe the first resurrection also known as the resurrection of the just So you believe that the dead that were beheaded (and had not worshipped the beast ,... and had not received the mark) and the living will meet the lord in the air and reign with him on the earth and that so shall they ever be with the lord for a thousand years. and that these two are all the same event. Well - you can believe that, but you'd have to do a heck of a lot to reconcile your "BIBLICAL" concept. It's all the same....? By the way, I don't believe in the groundswell concept of the "Rapture" but I do think it's rather obvious (by what's written) that these two events are NOT the same event. We may see through a glass darkly, in our present time,... but when the bible points out clear differences between 2 events, we should pay attention. If not, we will quickly lapse into disregarding scripture in favor of what we think God really meant. We don't know when God will do these things, But we do know He will perform his words. Maybe you don't agree. According to your view, and since you have not been beheaded (and so on) you must believe that you will not be raised from the dead until after the thousand years and judged out of the books. I believe that God has not limited Himself to your philosophy, Mark.

"I do not tell you that you should believe, I teach you how to believe." PFAL Gee,... wait, maybe he should have told us that we should believe and not taught us How to believe......

But God's just as mature no matter which revelation manifestation he uses with you...

Here we are seeing the tip of the iceberg. Stike up the band! Batten down the lifeboats, we're going in!

As to scripture,... I have indicated two points of disimilarity between these events which you cannot reconcile. Sure you can say that not everything is written, but as you said lets stick to scripture. and what is said, and it says completely different things.

The dead and the living,... versus the - dead only - being raised, is one good point another would be where everyone goes when this happens earth or the sky etc....

Who comes? ... Crow comes. Slow Joe Crow comes. Who sews crow's clothes? Sue sews crow's clothes. Slow Joe Crow sews whose clothes? Sue's clothes. Sue sews socks of fox in socks now. Slow Joe Crow sews Knox in box now. Sue sews rose on Slow Joe Crow's clothes. Fox sews hose on Slow Joe Crow's nose. Hose goes. Rose grows. Nose hose goes some. Crow's rose grows some. Mr. Fox! I hate this game, sir. This game makes my tongue quite lame, sir. Mr. Knox, sir, what a shame, sir. ------------------------------------------ Oh yeah,...... Hi Sue!

True, but I'd be amazed if you din't understand perfectly what I was referring to.

The concept referred to as the "Rapture" (or any other term used to describe it) seems to cover a different set of facts and circumstances than this account.

"Eighty-five to ninety percent of the Scriptures interpret themselves in the verse, right where they are written. You don't need a commentary to understand tose verses, they're as plain as day." VPW "Now kids I know we're taking a lot of time going through this chapter, verse by verse here. But there's a lot of depth here and I wouldn't want you to miss it." VPW Quotes from my Dad's diaries.

Ahhh Okay Roy, the link showed Nancy Pelosi (the Speaker of the House) and not Anita Dunn Anyways, you're right Roy. Her idea of manifestations is a little more "political" than it is "scriptural".

Thanks Sunesis, Really, the whole reason for my asking, was - I went through photos of my dad's old paintings in an album and I couldn't find one from that time that matched the description he gave of the place. He seemed to have liked the architecture {later in his life he became an Architect} but he was also a very good ameteur painter (artist?...whatever). Mostly he did houses or old-timey cityscapes He loved places that remind me of Ghost Houses with odd architectural elements to them. As an architect he did a lot of his own art for clients of the buildings he contracted to build for them, before they were built. But he also taught me how to paint, and I thought it might be nice to do that painting he never had a chance to do of the House in Sydney. I'll be in Ireland for most of the summer. I own some stuff there, businesses & buildings. One's a Bed & Breakfast like the Sydney house is nowadays. The B&B I own in Ireland is well run by family and family friends. When I visit there I'll be sure to ask way too many questions about the business, and maybe, armed with top-notch knowledge (lol) I can convince the current owners of the Sydney House to allow me a little freedom to paint that they might otherwise begrudge me of. It will be fun for me if I can do that before I have to go back to grad work at Princeton this fall.