Were Samson and Jesus molested?

[Bolshevik]

If memory serves, Noah was 'molested' by his daughters while on a binge.

No, one of Noah's sons saw him naked, the other two covered him up while walking backwards. What the big deal was I don't know.

[Bolshevik]

While at the gulag a bunch of us young guys got caught up in this topic of Jesus and mocking. Some of us believed twi taught that J.C. received the unthinkable, others thought we were nuts. I could of swore it was written in JCOP, but I couldn't find it. Anyway, leadership eventually intervened and encouraged us to drop the subject.

[RainbowsGirl]

I heard it taught on a SNS tape when VPW was still alive. If I recall it was in a series of tapes on Jesus Christ Over PassOver and taught other times as well but have no documentation. I will check my old tapes later and see if I can find it I have been in since 1972 so it will take me a while to check thro them.

Nevertheless I have heard it taught and wondered about it.

Thanks WordWolf for shedding more and new light on it!

[Bolshevik]

I heard it taught on a SNS tape when VPW was still alive. If I recall it was in a series of tapes on Jesus Christ Over PassOver and taught other times as well but have no documentation. I will check my old tapes later and see if I can find it I have been in since 1972 so it will take me a while to check thro them.

Nevertheless I have heard it taught and wondered about it.

Thanks WordWolf for shedding more and new light on it!

It had to have been taught again much more recently for someone my age to have heard it. If not, than the teaching has survived word-of-mouth for twenty some years.

[Belle]

Craig taught it to, Bolshevik. Where do you think he learned it? ;)

Craig, most likely, took it to more extremes and vivid descriptions of it. I do remember Craig teaching it and earlier in the thread, think I mentioned where he taught it.

While at the gulag a bunch of us young guys got caught up in this topic of Jesus and mocking. Some of us believed twi taught that J.C. received the unthinkable, others thought we were nuts. I could of swore it was written in JCOP, but I couldn't find it. Anyway, leadership eventually intervened and encouraged us to drop the subject.

ROFLMAO! The one time someone was told NOT to study something vee pee taught.

[Bolshevik]

Craiggers taught on a Sunday service that "mock" and "make sport" were homosexual attacks.

He taught several times - one, I believe was the AC special on the field. I have my notes and will look it up. Another time was during the Easter season because "Jesus was tempted in ALL things" and "took on ALL sin" so the ALL things had to include homosexual rape.

I'll have to look when I get home. I still have some tapes, too. Maybe it's on one of those.

What about dealing with a nagging wife and kids? How they gonna fit that into his life?

P.S. This statement is approved by Mrs. Bolshevik

[Belle]

Good point! Dan Brown and the Knights of the Templar may agree with you on that one.

[Dot Matrix]

My research (ha ha snort) paper included the account of Samson discussed here.

I understood the downfall and one time strength thing much the way White Dove did.

I focused on Deliah calling the shots and how fellowshiping with darkness does hamper our walk. I listened to Craig's teaching a bunch of times and tried to pull everything from the library on Samson. I did not find anything, or I do not RECALL finding anything from VPW about molestation.

But it was years ago and I barely recall my own paper.

[Belle]

I found where craig taught it and, because my notes are very sparse on the subject, it means that he had already taught it in depth somewhere previously. I write (wrote) pretty fast and between my notes and my ex's we could pretty much make a transcript of any teaching where both of us were.

These are notes from the Advanced Class Special that was taped and re-run "on the field". We took it at a KOA campground over several week-ends in 1997.

Not that it will be the same for everyone but these notes are from 5/7/97, Saturday morning session:

He's talking about Cain being the prototype for those born of the seed of the serpent:

Muses wrote in praise to spirits

Hallelujah chorus was written under total possession by Handel

Einstein said he didn't speak until he was 3 years old - he "willed himself not to speak baby talk" Admits the theory of relativity came to him by revelation.... from the wrong god.

Olympics to honor pagan gods - Also had festivals, music, events to honor pagan gods.

Ali - Islam got the glory - he was born again but used by the devil spirit realm. There are seed boys moving him.

Timothy - authority of woman in childrearing

Ishmael was seed and "made sport" with Isaac

Philistines "made sport" - homo manipulation of Samson

Abraham was told by God to listen to Sarah and put out Ishmael. Many references in this section that say "the lord said" refer to the god of this world, not God Almighty.

Sold Jacob to Ishmaelites - studying to figure this one out, not teaching SNS until sure.

[nandon]

Ali - Islam got the glory - he was born again but used by the devil spirit realm. There are seed boys moving him.

lol @ seed boys...

[excathedra]

do they have a site ?

[dmiller]

BAD SEED BOYS.

[WordWolf]

I found where craig taught it and, because my notes are very sparse on the subject, it means that he had already taught it in depth somewhere previously. I write (wrote) pretty fast and between my notes and my ex's we could pretty much make a transcript of any teaching where both of us were.

These are notes from the Advanced Class Special that was taped and re-run "on the field". We took it at a KOA campground over several week-ends in 1997.

Not that it will be the same for everyone but these notes are from 5/7/97, Saturday morning session:

(snip)

Philistines "made sport" - homo manipulation of Samson

(snip)

The problem here, of course, is that the Bible was not given in King James English.

Thus, taking the Hebrew word "fill",

rendering it "replenish",

then ignoring the Hebrew word completely and making a doctrine around the

specific meaning of the word "replenish", is wrong, error,

and what vpw would have called "private interpretation."

(For those who want to follow along without a Bible,

you can use http://www.biblegateway.com )

In this case, it is true that the word in the King James "sport" CAN refer to conjugal

relations. (Genesis 26:8.)

However, it also doesn't sometimes (Proverbs 10:23, II Peter 2:13).

That's all a DIVERSION, since all that's based on ENGLISH.

Therefore, we check the Hebrew.

I've found that, when checking the meaning of a word in Hebrew or Greek,

a good thing to do is to find the word in that language,

look at the places it's used to mean the same thing

(in my trusty concordance)

AND to go to the back of the concordance and look at all the OTHER words

it was translated into, and the places that is used.

Then I know what it meant in the Bible whether or NOT I can read Hebrew.

Now, the chapter on Samson uses the Hebrew word

"tsachaq" in one verse, and "sachaq" in the other, interchangeably.

Now, "sachaq" is also translated "sport" in Proverbs 26:19,

where it certainly does NOT mean conjugal relations.

"Tsachaq" is used in Genesis 26:8, where it might mean conjugal relations,

and I think a strong case can be made for it in the general.

So, so far it's about even.

Now I check the other usages of both words.

Sachaq is used to mean

deride

have in derision

laugh

make sport

mock

rejoice

scorn

be in sport

make sport

play

rejoice

mocker

them that make merry

laugh to scorn

The last one is II Chronicles 30:10.

"So the posts passed from city to city through the country of Ephraim and Manasseh

even unto Zebulun: but they laughed them to scorn, and mocked them."

OBVIOUSLY not conjugal relations.

Feel free to hammer that across by comparing the other usages for yourself.

For fun,you can look at the coognate "tsechoq", which seems to never carry a

meaning of conjugal relations.

===

Now, let's see, "tsachaq"...

laugh

make sport

mock

play

sport

Genesis 17:17, 18:12, 18:13, 18:15 and 21:6

all have "tsachaq" translated "laugh",

and 21:6 has the word "laugh" twice-

"Sarah said 'God has brought me laughter [tsechoq], and everyone who hears about this

wiill laugh [tsachaq] with me."

All of these usages involve the physical laughter involved when either

Abraham or Sarah laughed at the thought of having a child when they

thought it was impossible.

Therefore,

I conclude that the usages of the word "sachaq" or "tsachaq"

mean to scorn, laugh, make a laughingstock, be silly

and -by far the most rare usage- conjugal relations.

Therefore, not only does this not INDICATE Samson was molested,

the overwhelming likelihood is that he was NOT-

he was mocked and humiliated.

If anything else MUST be read into it, the verse MUST be clearer

on the subject, because one has to go far afield to try to support it.

No verse says "here, this is what it means",

neither in the verse itself, nor the context/surrounding verses,

and the overwhelming usages of the term BEFORE say otherwise.

IIRC,

"all Scripture" supposedly "explains itself" those 3 ways.

Scripture remains silent on whether this word meant exactly this

here. As vpw himself said,

"Where the Word of God remains silent,

he that speaks is a fool."

Why he chose to speak on this subject where the Word of God

remains silent cannot be told with absolute accuracy.

However, using his own rules,

the verses do NOT mean that,

and he is judged a fool for forcing the meaning onto them.

I STILL can't find a verse that MIGHT support this meaning.

Anyone?

As we saw, lcm said it, but the evidence is against him....

[rascal]

How much of these guys teachings were based by that which they abhorred? I mean we know what a freak lcm was about homosexuality....so the *big* sin in genesis became homosexual sex WITH a female serpent...

Wiewilles was a sick freak and so his idea on sin in genesis was masturbation and consuming the products....his hyper sensativity to critisizim translated pauls thorn in the flesh to be nagging people .....

All the women belonged to the mog...they were being healed sexually, they were acruing rewards in heaven , all things are lawfull...abortion...all scripturally backed teachings ...that would only occur and be developed by an already really depraved mind.

Jesus and Samson were raped because it all made sense in their sexually deviant minds....it all made sense to their way of warped sexual perception.

Edited April 16, 2007 by rascal

[Bolshevik]

How much of these guys teachings were based by that which they abhorred? I mean we know what a freak lcm was about homosexuality....so the *big* sin in genesis became homosexual sex WITH a female serpent...

Wiewilles was a sick freak and so his idea on sin in genesis was masturbation and consuming the products....his hyper sensativity to critisizim translated pauls thorn in the flesh to be nagging people .....

All the women belonged to the mog...they were being healed sexually, they were acruing rewards in heaven , all things are lawfull...abortion...all scripturally backed teachings ...that would only occur and be developed by an already really depraved mind.

Jesus and Samson were raped because it all made sense in their sexually deviant minds....it all made sense to their way of warped sexual perception.

kinda makes all the pieces start falling into place. . . (sigh)

[Danny]

For me many of these Treads tie together.

Yes I learned some things from TWI.

BUT I have to check if they were even close to being

TRUE.

No I do not think VP was a man of God.

Yes he was lots of other things but not that.

Not even a Dr.

Being young and unlearned I do believe I was lead

down the wrong path in my understanding of Gods goodness.

In him is no darkness at all.

And with great discussions like this we could understand better

who and why.

What Corps night could of been like to have open discussion

To come to the greatness of what God is all about.

[Danny]

And please (you know who you are) don't come here

and say eat the fish and spit out the bones

or some other worn out bull sheet.

I have my on beliefs than you very much.

Or baby and bath water

they both went down the drain.

[T-Bone]

Several things come to mind. I think their sexually perverted suggestions, speculations and embellishments of things left unspoken in Scripture reveals how pervasive their moral depravity was/is – permeating their viewpoint…their reasoning. Perhaps when the conscience is seared - cauterized by habitual sin – there is no internal warning system to sound an alarm, "hey, your thinking is WAY OFF COURSE – you're gonna crash!!!!!"

And whether it was intentional or not – bombarding TWI-followers with their moral filth/sexually oriented interpretations has a de-sensitizing effect. That would certainly work in the favor of any sexual predator. What behavior an outsider would consider criminal and lewd – loses some of its shock effect on insiders…weakened or nullified by the perverted onslaught…I don't know – is that being intellectually molested?

Is there – even a remote possibility – that some would eventually have an attitude of acceptance? When you combine their sexual predications with their law-of-believing doctrine I think that could happen. Maybe reasoning along these lines: "We live in a sinful world. Stuff like this happens all the time – just look a little deeper in the Bible and you'll see it's in there too. Bad things happen to people because of their fear – or lack of believing."

Edited April 16, 2007 by T-Bone

[rascal]

You just said it better than me.

[another spot]

I did an internet search on “making sport” and “sporting” and could

find no definition with a sexual connotation. The closet I could get

is an obsolete usage meaning flirtation.

” • (obsolete, uncountable) An amorous dalliance (flirtation).

• Charlie and Lisa enjoyed a bit of sport after their hike.

This is from Wiktionary.

It seems obvious there is no justification for a sexual meaning in either

English or Hebrew….Thanks for bringing this up WordWolf. This is

probably just the tip of the iceburg. Why does it matter? Because we

got told things that were private interpretation and led to believe it came

straight from the mouth of God. The phrase "handling the Word of God

deceitfully" comes to mind.

If I am am repeating something, well I didn't want to read the entire thread....

[Lone Wolf McQuade]

Hello,

If I have to say, yes, I think Jesus was molested. Can I prove that from the text? No. Therefore I could very well be wrong.

The only reason I think he was molested is because of what the Bible tells me about the Devil. Ever since the fall of Adam and Eve and the prophecy made by God about the "promised seed", the Devil has been on a rampage trying everything he could to kill off Abraham's descendants so the Christ couldn't be born. Generation after generation, the Devil tried, but was always outmatched by God who had the help of few and sometimes only 1 person.

This battle he fought for 4,000 years only to find that indeed the Christ was on the scene. All through his ministry, Jesus Christ made of fool of the Devil. Jesus was constantly one step ahead of him. Jesus was always providing just the right answer, always making the Devil's kids look like idiots.

Finally, Jesus surrenders himself and for the first time, after all the frustration, humiliation, and defeat, the Devil has a wide open window to get revenge.

I'm sure thousands of years of fury took over and the Devil unloaded on Jesus with every sick, twisted, and perverted torture and beating that I can't even imagine just to make Jesus suffer, and more importantly, to make God watch.

The Devil just frickin' hated Jesus Christ and when he had his chance, he made him suffer. Can I prove this from the text? No. But sometimes, God doesn't always say everything that happened. Sometimes God gives just enough details and waits for you to ponder and meditate and "fill in the blanks".

Just my opinion. :-)

Lone Wolf

Edited April 17, 2007 by Lone Wolf McQuade

[Bolshevik]

Finally, Jesus surrenders himself and for the first time, after all the frustration, humiliation, and defeat, the Devil has a wide open window to get revenge.

I'm sure thousands of years of fury took over and the Devil unloaded on Jesus with every sick, twisted, and perverted torture and beating that I can't even imagine just to make Jesus suffer, and more importantly, to make God watch.

The Devil just frickin' hated Jesus Christ and when he had his chance, he made him suffer.

Sounds like the Devil had issues that were "unresolved"

Sorry I couldn't help it.

You do make a good argument though Lone Wolf, I think.

"But sometimes, God doesn't always say everything that happened. Sometimes God gives just enough details and waits for you to ponder and meditate and "fill in the blanks"."--Lone Wolf McQuade

Maybe God doesn't want us to know every detail. TWI prided itself in details i.e. "the exact time of Jesus' birth". As wayfers we just miss God's big pictures. It's embarrassing. Thank God for Grace and Mercy.

Perhaps another thread could discuss this, but maybe God left these blanks because he wanted us to have some imagination. (I am speculating here). Jesus was mocked. However you interpret it, the Lamb of God did not deserve an ounce of it.

Edited April 17, 2007 by Bolshevik

[Edi]

The Hebrew word SACHAQ is used in Judges 16:25 & 27. It means laugh, play, mock, jest, toy with. There is nothing in the word/language that suggests this scripture here suggests anything sexual.

I think they also associated a lot of things sexual to the Genesis account and to a lot of other things when they were going through their homophobic stage. I think most of what they taught regarding sex was off the word, including their justification as to why it was ok to have affairs outside of marriage etc.

[WordWolf]

Hello,

If I have to say, yes, I think Jesus was molested. Can I prove that from the text? No. Therefore I could very well be wrong.

If you were asserting that the text illustrates it, I'd disagree.

However, you're asserting you have an opinion.

You are entitled to any opinion you wish,

so I'm not going to bullyrag you on it.

(Besides, I'd only repeat earlier posts, and you can read those anytime you wish.)

The only reason I think he was molested is because of what the Bible tells me about the Devil. Ever since the fall of Adam and Eve and the prophecy made by God about the "promised seed", the Devil has been on a rampage trying everything he could to kill off Abraham's descendants so the Christ couldn't be born. Generation after generation, the Devil tried, but was always outmatched by God who had the help of few and sometimes only 1 person.

This battle he fought for 4,000 years only to find that indeed the Christ was on the scene. All through his ministry, Jesus Christ made of fool of the Devil. Jesus was constantly one step ahead of him. Jesus was always providing just the right answer, always making the Devil's kids look like idiots.

Finally, Jesus surrenders himself and for the first time, after all the frustration, humiliation, and defeat, the Devil has a wide open window to get revenge.

I'm sure thousands of years of fury took over and the Devil unloaded on Jesus with every sick, twisted, and perverted torture and beating that I can't even imagine just to make Jesus suffer, and more importantly, to make God watch.

The Devil just frickin' hated Jesus Christ and when he had his chance, he made him suffer. Can I prove this from the text? No. But sometimes, God doesn't always say everything that happened. Sometimes God gives just enough details and waits for you to ponder and meditate and "fill in the blanks".

Just my opinion. :-)

Lone Wolf

So,

are you asserting that, in your opinion,

every perversion known to the Roman soldiers at that time were performed

on Jesus in that instance?

[Edi]

I'm not sure if anything can be proven from scripture but then again there is ALOT of scripture that we don't have access to. I've wondered if they didn't do sexual preversions to Jesus. If they would beat him so that his visage was marred more than any man then why wouldn't they do other kinds of atrocities to him too. It wouldn't surprise me if we found out they did - just what we know is pretty hlorrific.