Whitedove, I am going to let you figure this out for yourself. I feel like I am spoon feeding you and this is not helping you at all. I am going to give you the scriptures and then I want you to figure this out for yourself.
Judg 16:16-22
17 So he told her everything. "No razor has ever been used on my head," he said, "because I have been a Nazirite set apart to God since birth. If my head were shaved, my strength would leave me, and I would become as weak as any other man."
18 When Delilah saw that he had told her everything, she sent word to the rulers of the Philistines, "Come back once more; he has told me everything." So the rulers of the Philistines returned with the silver in their hands. 19 Having put him to sleep on her lap, she called a man to shave off the seven braids of his hair, and so began to subdue him. And his strength left him.
20 Then she called, "Samson, the Philistines are upon you!"
He awoke from his sleep and thought, "I'll go out as before and shake myself free." But he did not know that the LORD had left him.
21 Then the Philistines seized him, gouged out his eyes and took him down to Gaza. Binding him with bronze shackles, they set him to grinding in the prison. 22 But the hair on his head began to grow again after it had been shaved.
Mark it was just a simple question for discussion, I'll decline your offer for spoon feeding thanks anyway. WW and I reached the same conclusion-inconclusive, for the same reasons. I don't read anywhere that it said if you break the vow and the hair grows back that it returns to the prior conditions. I think it is an assumption on your part. I still see no point for him to pray for something that he already had it makes no sense. Perhaps you will reconsider WW post.
This "Nazarite vow" thing always bothered me. There's a whole lot more to the Nazarite vow than long hair. No drinking, for instance. No touching a dead body. (A supposition here: does this also mean not CAUSING any dead bodies? Samson did a LOT of that.) Apparently, though, only the hair thing was pertinent to Samson's strength.
I've only glanced through here, and know I'm a damned unbeliever, but exactly are we to learn from this?
Seems a lot of time and energy has been expended on this thread, and for the life of me, I can't understand why. What does it matter if Samson or Jesus were molested at one time in their lives? Is it going to make your walk stronger? To prove the 'inerrancy' of the "word"?
It would seem to me, there are better ways to occupy your time, than 'straining at gnats'.
If someone could explain this to me, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Just out of curiosity....why is this an important subject to you? Does it help you today? If you knew the exact answer would it change your life in any way?
The Greek word for “mocked” in the gospels was the same as the Greek word for “sport” in the Septuagint version of the OT. It was also supposed to be the same for "sporting" in Gen 26:8. I am not enough of a Greek and Hebrew scholar to verify this but the words do look similar when I checked them on a Septuagint website.
This was the only scriptural justification I remember for the teaching.
Gen 26:7
And the men of the place asked [him] of his wife; and he said, She [is] my sister: for he feared to say, [she is] my wife; lest, [said he], the men of the place should kill me for Rebekah; because she [was] fair to look upon.
Gen 26:8
And it came to pass, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out at a window, and saw, and, behold, Isaac [was] sporting with Rebekah his wife.
Gen 26:9
And Abimelech called Isaac, and said, Behold, of a surety she [is] thy wife: and how saidst thou, She [is] my sister? And Isaac said unto him, Because I said, Lest I die for her.
A personal theory of mine is that if this was true- that if Jesus was homosexually raped then under the OT law he would be required to be put to death, even if He had not sinned.
This might have been required for him to truly fulfill the Law, because He was innocent of the charges brought against Him and the trial was illegal, and He never transgressed the law- He fulfilled it
But I wonder if something in the Law had to condemn him to death, and this would be one of the few things that would do it- Because both the “victim” and “victimizer” were required to be put to death (The only other two I can think of were incest and bestiality)
I also wonder if this was part of what was revealed to him at the garden of Gethsemane.
Sushi and Sogwap51- This might be why this subject is worthwhile to some. It is why it is to me.
The word for "that he may make us sport" in the King James Version from Judges 25:16 for the Hebrew English equivalent is "sachaq". The Strong's number is 7832. Below is a Lexical definition. There are 36 usages of this word in the Old Testament. There are no usages of this word in the Genesis or prior to Judges 16:25 which is the first usage in the Old Testament. The word used for sporting in Genesis 26:8 is Strong's number 6711. The Hebrew English equivalent for this word is spelled "tsachaq".
I am not an authority for the Hebrew language by any stretch. However, I do have excellent biblical reference materials. In spite of a similar spelling in the English when comparing the two words in the Hebrew, these two words do not look alike at all. The spelling in the Hebrew alphabet looks to be noticably different. Here is perhaps a more precise spelling of these two Hebrew words using English letter equivalents from the Interlinear Bible. The word in Judges 16:25 is "wiysacheq." The word in Genesis 26:8 is "mtsacheeq." These words to me look difficult to pronounce. One could try to pronounce them using the English Hebrew equivalents. However, they are noticably different and may not sound alike either.
OT:7832
sachaq --
to laugh, to play, to mock
a) (Qal)
1) to laugh (usually in contempt or derision)
2) to sport, to play
b) (Piel)
1) to make sport
2) to jest
3) to play (including instrumental music, singing, dancing)
I've only glanced through here, and know I'm a damned unbeliever, but exactly are we to learn from this?
Seems a lot of time and energy has been expended on this thread, and for the life of me, I can't understand why. What does it matter if Samson or Jesus were molested at one time in their lives? Is it going to make your walk stronger? To prove the 'inerrancy' of the "word"?
It would seem to me, there are better ways to occupy your time, than 'straining at gnats'.
If someone could explain this to me, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Just out of curiosity....why is this an important subject to you? Does it help you today? If you knew the exact answer would it change your life in any way?
Same questions, from 2 different people. To save time, I'll answer them together.
twi put forth that they had not only A true understanding of Scripture, but
THE True Understanding of Scripture,
that anyone who agreed with them had the incontrovertible truth,
that anyone who disagreed with them were idjits who lived in error.
They still push this.
Among other things, they've put forth doctrines that are not allowed to be questioned-
that are unable to be supported beyond "this is what I say so believe it"-
and people questioning beyond that are told to just accept that leadership
has examined it and concluded it to be true.
(This is generally a lie-nobody "examined" it-it was declared by divine fiat.)
Among the beliefs they taught/teach are some odd teachings concerning sex.
The two subjects mentioned here were interrelated in their explanations-
they propounded ONE odd belief to justify the OTHER odd belief,
NEITHER of which seems to have a shred of BIBLICAL support.
Mind you,
even discussing or entertaining the notion that they might be wrong
was forbidden in twi/IS STILL FORBIDDEN IN TWI.
Even the messageboards of members face "sanctions" if anyone dares to
initiate even a well-mannered discussion of same.
So, this discussion has never taken place before.
Furthermore,
twi, AFAIK, STILL teaches this, and there are other people who teach
this- since "if it was good enough for wierwille, it's good enough
for me".
So, the discussing of doctrines I find to be a healthy thing.
The actual investigations, as we saw, were NEVER conducted in twi,
and-I gather-were never done until now by ex-twi, either.
So, this is technically new ground.
Thus, I consider this unfinished business.
Furthermore, sooner or later,
someone's going to come in and claim these are true.
(It happened with the other subject-about the oath-before.)
Therefore, I'm saving time in refutation of it when it happens.
I think the odd grouping of a number of teachings-
unique to twi-all centering around sex or body parts-
One of the things that I like about you (or at least your GS persona) is that you lay out what TWI says, compare it to what the bible says and let folks draw the obvious conclusions. Heck, sometimes you compare what TWI says to what TWI says, and spotlight the contradictions.
A lot of this stuff makes little difference in how we live life...BUT it points out how the supposed ministry where "the Word" is taught "like it hasn't been taught since the 1st century" ISN't!
True, people will not hear until they're ready to hear, but they've got to have something to hear.
To answer Sushi and Sogwap's question on what's to be learned from this topic I would like to mention what I get out of it - it's a good exercise in critical thinking. And really I must say that about any of WordWolf's posts. I've been reading this thread but haven't had anything I thought worth contributing...
...And I don't mean to digress here or get off topic but with WordWolf trying to track down the details of this teaching I am tempted to open up my old Corps notes and Corps journals. Not to find anything on this topic per se but to scan through the HUNDREDS of off-the-wall elusively mutating error propagating comments I heard [in residence] live teachings, night owls, at dinner, etc., that were not written down and published, or on a tape made available to the general body of TWI followers!!!!!!!!!!!! For example, I remember in some after-meeting with the Corps Don W. said "Anytime you have to make a decision you should think 'What would the Board of Trustees want.' " Ok - I'm sorry I did get off topic - sorta - but my point is it's a lot of fun exercising our critical thinking skills on this and other threads where we try to nail down the source and analyze the idea itself !!!!!...Alright - continue with the molesting - - arrggghh - I mean analyzing...
first do ya'll not KNOW how to study the bible, that is what the way sort of was trying to teach us,
i got and recommend ONLINE BIBLE, www.onlinebible.net
you can do word studies in minutes, and don't have to a guru or a clergy and you do it it isn't done for you,
KNOW is the greek ginosko and means to know by experience, to learn experientially, and is occasionally used of sex, the way always saw the sexual meanings in everything, in hind site i think we KNOW why and thus we see the confusion. only occasionally is this word used of sex, and then mostly of married couples sex resulting in pregnancy.
sport - as in samson took me less than ten minutes to look up and breifly go over and it always means sport, fun play, NOT SEX!!! bunch of sicko's those guys were that fixated on this sex stuff.
the biggest thing i have learned about the bible is GOD is a wonderful communicator and thus WE do not have to fill in the blanks just read what is there and if we do not know what it says, HONESTLY study it a little and see what it says for itself.
BULLINGER though i do not agree with all his conclusions i Love his heart towards the word in that it makes sense genesis to revelations, we may not understand it, but it makes sense, without our interjections or conjectures.
if it does NOT say samson was molested then it does not say it,
likewise with Jesus.
this game of GOD having hidden meanings is what brought about the devinci code and the bible code, instead of people just walking with GOD simply, honestly, people think they have to have a code or learn some great secrets, the bible is simple and when you don't understand it, it doesn't change the fact that you should love your neighbor, not steal from your employer, should be true to your spouse, even ifyou are married, fornication of unmarried christians is clearly taught as is fidelity. walk with god...
many christians throughout history walked with GOD, without knowing what the bible said, they either couldn't read or didn't have it in print and it didn't make it impossible to walk with HIM.
first do ya'll not KNOW how to study the bible, that is what the way sort of was trying to teach us,
[Actually, regarding these accounts, twi taught us to discard any
study method and just accept their account as true.]
i got and recommend ONLINE BIBLE, www.onlinebible.net
you can do word studies in minutes, and don't have to a guru or a clergy and you do it it isn't done for you,
[Or you can take longer, if you like, because you enjoy the task.]
KNOW is the greek ginosko and means to know by experience, to learn experientially, and is occasionally used of sex, the way always saw the sexual meanings in everything, in hind site i think we KNOW why and thus we see the confusion. only occasionally is this word used of sex, and then mostly of married couples sex resulting in pregnancy.
[You'd need to substantiate that LAST phrase, since the only answer I ever
heard for that is "twi says it, that settles it..."]
sport - as in samson took me less than ten minutes to look up and breifly go over and it always means sport, fun play, NOT SEX!!! bunch of sicko's those guys were that fixated on this sex stuff.
[Except Genesis 26:18, as covered on page 1 of this thread.
One usage does NOT a trend make, so it's a rather thin reed to built their
entire "boat" from.
And yes, they seem/seemed fixated on sex.]
the biggest thing i have learned about the bible is GOD is a wonderful communicator and thus WE do not have to fill in the blanks just read what is there and if we do not know what it says, HONESTLY study it a little and see what it says for itself.
BULLINGER though i do not agree with all his conclusions i Love his heart towards the word in that it makes sense genesis to revelations, we may not understand it, but it makes sense, without our interjections or conjectures.
if it does NOT say samson was molested then it does not say it,
likewise with Jesus.
[We seem to have documented this as well,
but I'm waiting to see if there's anything we missed.]
this game of GOD having hidden meanings is what brought about the devinci code and the bible code, instead of people just walking with GOD simply, honestly, people think they have to have a code or learn some great secrets, the bible is simple and when you don't understand it, it doesn't change the fact that you should love your neighbor, not steal from your employer, should be true to your spouse, even ifyou are married, fornication of unmarried christians is clearly taught as is fidelity. walk with god...
many christians throughout history walked with GOD, without knowing what the bible said, they either couldn't read or didn't have it in print and it didn't make it impossible to walk with HIM.
first do ya'll not KNOW how to study the bible, that is what the way sort of was trying to teach us,
i got and recommend ONLINE BIBLE, www.onlinebible.net
you can do word studies in minutes, and don't have to a guru or a clergy and you do it it isn't done for you,
KNOW is the greek ginosko and means to know by experience, to learn experientially, and is occasionally used of sex, the way always saw the sexual meanings in everything, in hind site i think we KNOW why and thus we see the confusion. only occasionally is this word used of sex, and then mostly of married couples sex resulting in pregnancy.
sport - as in samson took me less than ten minutes to look up and breifly go over and it always meanssport, fun play, NOT SEX!!! bunch of sicko's those guys were that fixated on this sex stuff.
Welcome to Grease Spot, jr4jc - may I suggest you spend a little more time looking over GSC before waltzing in here and insulting everybody...I personally think Bible study is more an exercise in critical thinking than a speed-reading test. :)
i honestly wondered if those on here new how to study the bible, i was in the way in the late 70's to mid 80's and was taught how to study it, after i left i do not know what they taught, thus the question,
the circles i was in there were many who were good at really studying the bible and taught those around them how to also, bullingers' how to enjoy the bible, a great reference and lots of dr VPW premises were good, some conclusions off, some precepts and approaches off too,
but because of vp's teaching, bullingers and those i met through the way, i learned i can figure out the hard to understand at a glance passages. some of it is reading and studying but leave out walking with our father and you can make it say anything you want to,
we have the spirit of truth leading us into all truth, or the bible is ink on paper and nothing more.
each of us is responsible for our own walk with GOD< what we did during our way years, WE choose to do,
what we do now is a choice too
know is an easy word to understand and everybody i new knew it could be taken sexually, or NOT!!!
a brief study as you stated if one wants to invest a little time shows it most often is not used this way.
more time studying will show more detail but is not required to see what the word means and how it is most often used.
you want to talk around the subject and vent about the way cool i'll step out of the way and you go ahead,
that is valuble if that's what you need to do, but at some point move on, grow, go forth walking with the GOD have come to know,
you want to figure out about molestation of samson or jesus, read/study even breifly and the answer is easy, those that gave a line of shi* did so because they had an agenda, a very sick agenda
i was a WOW with another guy and 2 beautiful young women, niether i nor my wow brother fornicated with our wow sisters, BUT who in their right mind puts 4-- 20 year olds 2 of each sex in a house for a year, to teach the bible, unless you are wanting them to go down a wrong road, which i think was their intention.
cause once in that glass house you couldn't throw stones at them as easily.
warped sicko's they are, and they need to be glad i didn't know about this crap,
if they had hurt someone i loved and cared about.......i know vengence is mine saith the lord,
but making a whip seems very appropriate....[what would jesus do]
sport - as in samson took me less than ten minutes to look up and breifly go over and it always means sport, fun play, NOT SEX!!! bunch of sicko's those guys were that fixated on this sex stuff.
[Except Genesis 26:18 (you must have meant 26:8), as covered on page 1 of this thread.
One usage does NOT a trend make, so it's a rather thin reed to built their
entire "boat" from.
As I explained in my post the other day. There is a different Hebrew word used for sport in Genesis 26:8 compared to Judges 16:25. See my previous post. The two words could possibly be related, but not necessarily. I certainly would not base any scriptural understanding on two different Hebrew words being considered to be related when they may not be. That was one of the problems with the Way Denomination. Leaders did biblical research and drew conclusions from it assuming they were Hebrew or Greek scholars. I would say that with a few rare exceptions that most were not. In fact, I am wondering if there was ever any Hebrew scholars at all in the Way Denomination and if there was would they put up with the leaders giant egos? How would they feel if their findings were over ruled by someone with inferior knowledge?
One more thing about biblical research. And this is very important. Biblical truth is always repeated throughout scripture. Another words you can never draw a definite conclusion based on one scripture solely. All great truths are repeated in multiple places. If one sees what they see as a truth, but can not find the same principle repeated else where, they have likely either misread the scripture or drawn an incorrect conclusion from it.
Matt 18:16
16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'
NIV
Deut 17:6
6 On the testimony of two or three witnesses a man shall be put to death, but no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.
NIV
Deut 19:15
15 One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.
NIV
1 Tim 5:19
19 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.
The degradation of Jesus had to do with the pure life that he lived and as a Son of God, as the Messiah, the Saviour, was treated, beaten publicly and privately as a common low life criminal and hanged on a tree (stake or cross) for all to see and again mock via words.
It needed nothing added to it to make it any more humilating or degrading.
It would have been the epitome of shame for any family to have a family member executed in such a manner, nevertheless the family of the one that many flocked to for teaching and healings.
What's more, as I see it, many doctrines of The Way INternational seem to be infiltrated by a sexual theme.
VP taught that all the women of the kingdom belonged to the king, in regards to David and Bathseba. If that was true, why did David have to set up Uriah to die to hide the fact that he (David) impregnated BAthseba if she legally belonged to the King?
How about when the angel appeared to Joseph telling Joseph that the babe in Mary's womb was conceived by the Holy Spirit? I remember JAL teaching that the words "took unto his wife" or something like that meant that they had sexual relations right there and then and by passed the whole betrothal thing ....TWI took the traditional meaning of Joseph accepting Mary and NOT having her stoned to death or publicly ashamed by him into Joseph jumping Mary's bones.
Then don't forget the Christian FAmily and Sex class where all body parts were just parts and there was bascially no difference between a nose and penis...parts is parts don't we all know.
While many may argue the 'benefits' of trying to shed shame over private body parts, one should look at the whole of sexual inneundos and right out sexual insertions into areas of scripture that was totally of TWI origin and wonder what the purpose for that was..
along with the alleged showing of beastiality films...
It's the hidden, covert actions that can do the most damage as they are not easily spotted for what they are.
i looked up the words in judges and genesis and they are the same hebrew words in my reference matierials, not trying to argue so hear me out, why does either have to be sexual, genesis sounds like a husband and wife playing, which is different from brother and sister playing
so he saw them carrying on like a husband and a wife---non sexually, kidding and playing, and flirting maybe even,
neither place does sex enter into what i see in scripture, nor does it have to to make sense.
joseph and mary---to marry a pregnant virgin i would need to get a message from GOD too, and when joseph did, he agreed to marry her.
to 'take' her for his wife meant he stopped rejecting the idea, this is not rocket science.
i have no problem with them consumating the marriage before or after the birth, but i do nto see scripture telling us whether they did or didn't and why would it, GOD is not as perverse as the WAY leadership was.
JESUS-- can you imagine what the disciples thought, there hangs who we followed; with murders and robbers.
boy it's gonna be hard to convert people after this!??!?!?!?!
there was no bigger blow to their hearts then for him to die this way, to add any perversions to this you need to consider the source---we now know are/were sick perverts!!!
jesus was VERY badly beaten, spit upon, mocked, alone, betrayed, denied, sleep deprived, and then questioned. the jews and the romans against him, his followers confused. his family and close freinds distrought my heart goes out to what HE must have felt. sexual stuff on top of all this is conjecture, the bible does not support it. and filling in the blanks is where they led us wrong, if the bible doesn't say it then you don't know, if it does then youknow what it says and that is all!!!
JR4JC, I have bible study software on my computer hard drive. The name of the software that I use is called the PC Study Bible. It is put out by Biblesoft. You can find their web site at www.biblesoft.com. They have a Hebrew Interlinear Bible which I used. I also used the Strong's Hebrew/Greek Dictionary and the Brown's-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon. I recommend the Biblesoft software for all serious bible students. In fact, a friend of mine who attended a seminary for a while, when he saw my software, told me that this is what a biblical seminary student would use.
The degradation of Jesus had to do with the pure life that he lived and as a Son of God, as the Messiah, the Saviour, was treated, beaten publicly and privately as a common low life criminal and hanged on a tree (stake or cross) for all to see and again mock via words.
It needed nothing added to it to make it any more humilating or degrading.
It would have been the epitome of shame for any family to have a family member executed in such a manner, nevertheless the family of the one that many flocked to for teaching and healings.
What's more, as I see it, many doctrines of The Way INternational seem to be infiltrated by a sexual theme.
VP taught that all the women of the kingdom belonged to the king, in regards to David and Bathseba. If that was true, why did David have to set up Uriah to die to hide the fact that he (David) impregnated BAthseba if she legally belonged to the King?
How about when the angel appeared to Joseph telling Joseph that the babe in Mary's womb was conceived by the Holy Spirit? I remember JAL teaching that the words "took unto his wife" or something like that meant that they had sexual relations right there and then and by passed the whole betrothal thing ....TWI took the traditional meaning of Joseph accepting Mary and NOT having her stoned to death or publicly ashamed by him into Joseph jumping Mary's bones.
Then don't forget the Christian FAmily and Sex class where all body parts were just parts and there was bascially no difference between a nose and penis...parts is parts don't we all know.
While many may argue the 'benefits' of trying to shed shame over private body parts, one should look at the whole of sexual inneundos and right out sexual insertions into areas of scripture that was totally of TWI origin and wonder what the purpose for that was..
along with the alleged showing of beastiality films...
It's the hidden, covert actions that can do the most damage as they are not easily spotted for what they are.
I felt all this was worth repeating.
I DID want to point out, re: the film...
Several posters say it was used, either in the CFS or in the ADVANCED CLASS.
It was definitely MENTIONED in BOTH in the filmed version,
but apparently the LIVE versions featured this during them.
That reminds me...
Since he charged for classes that featured this video,
did he secure the rights to air it from the smut peddlers that made it?
I'm sure it had the standard "authorized for private viewing" caveat,
and technically he charged money to play it for the audiences.
i looked up the words in judges and genesis and they are the same hebrew words in my reference matierials, not trying to argue so hear me out, why does either have to be sexual, genesis sounds like a husband and wife playing, which is different from brother and sister playing
so he saw them carrying on like a husband and a wife---non sexually, kidding and playing, and flirting maybe even,
neither place does sex enter into what i see in scripture, nor does it have to to make sense.
Based on the discussion so far,
I imagine it was something like a 2-person game of grabass or something.
Nothing that would be considered pornographic by modern standards.
Questionable to put on tv, but not more.
joseph and mary---to marry a pregnant virgin i would need to get a message from GOD too, and when joseph did, he agreed to marry her.
to 'take' her for his wife meant he stopped rejecting the idea, this is not rocket science.
i have no problem with them consumating the marriage before or after the birth, but i do nto see scripture telling us whether they did or didn't and why would it, GOD is not as perverse as the WAY leadership was.
The opposite of "put away"-which he was planning,- being "took unto him",
meaning he married her.
Makes plenty of sense, and one doesn't need to inject additional meanings into words.
Unless one has an agenda requiring one to discuss sex,
or one has a fixation with it.
(Why WAS he showing deviant porn to teenagers?
We never DID get a good answer to that...)
JESUS-- can you imagine what the disciples thought, there hangs who we followed; with murders and robbers.
boy it's gonna be hard to convert people after this!??!?!?!?!
there was no bigger blow to their hearts then for him to die this way, to add any perversions to this you need to consider the source---we now know are/were sick perverts!!!
jesus was VERY badly beaten, spit upon, mocked, alone, betrayed, denied, sleep deprived, and then questioned. the jews and the romans against him, his followers confused. his family and close freinds distrought my heart goes out to what HE must have felt. sexual stuff on top of all this is conjecture, the bible does not support it. and filling in the blanks is where they led us wrong, if the bible doesn't say it then you don't know, if it does then youknow what it says and that is all!!!
"The Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom."
"Master, we would see a sign from thee."
As someone (Ralph D) pointed out once,
if you're looking for signs,
"Messiah-dead-on-a-tree"
is not even on the list of possible good messages.
Then we are in agreement JR4JC. I was trying to determine if these two Hebrew words were related. I could not tell concretely, but then my knowledge of Hebrew is limited to what I can mine from my reference books. This might simply be a case of two different Hebrew words having a similar meaning. We see this quite a bit in the English language. For example, avenue, street, road, drive all have a similar meaning, yet they are completely unrelated to a root word. Why not in Hebrew also? And yes, neither word appears to have a sexual context.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
9
25
5
8
Popular Days
Jun 2
23
Jun 5
12
Apr 15
12
Apr 16
10
Top Posters In This Topic
Mark Sanguinetti 9 posts
WordWolf 25 posts
WhiteDove 5 posts
Bolshevik 8 posts
Popular Days
Jun 2 2006
23 posts
Jun 5 2006
12 posts
Apr 15 2007
12 posts
Apr 16 2007
10 posts
Mark Sanguinetti
Whitedove, I am going to let you figure this out for yourself. I feel like I am spoon feeding you and this is not helping you at all. I am going to give you the scriptures and then I want you to figure this out for yourself.
Judg 16:16-22
17 So he told her everything. "No razor has ever been used on my head," he said, "because I have been a Nazirite set apart to God since birth. If my head were shaved, my strength would leave me, and I would become as weak as any other man."
18 When Delilah saw that he had told her everything, she sent word to the rulers of the Philistines, "Come back once more; he has told me everything." So the rulers of the Philistines returned with the silver in their hands. 19 Having put him to sleep on her lap, she called a man to shave off the seven braids of his hair, and so began to subdue him. And his strength left him.
20 Then she called, "Samson, the Philistines are upon you!"
He awoke from his sleep and thought, "I'll go out as before and shake myself free." But he did not know that the LORD had left him.
21 Then the Philistines seized him, gouged out his eyes and took him down to Gaza. Binding him with bronze shackles, they set him to grinding in the prison. 22 But the hair on his head began to grow again after it had been shaved.
NIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
In this case, I think WD has a valid point.
Whether or not Samson's strength returned prior to, or independently
of, his invocation of God when he collapsed the temple, was not
established.
That Samson had SOME natural strength, I think, is reasonable.
(I think he was physically strong.)
That Samson had a reputation based on history, I think, is beyond question.
(Everybody knew at least SOME of the stuff he'd done.)
That Samson's strength was connected to the Nazarite vow, I think,
is clear when reviewing the incidents with his parents and following forward.
Therefore, Samson refrained from things forbidden under the Nazarite vow,
like the haircuts.
Samson's hair was cut. This was a violation of the conditions of the Nazarite
vow. That means either Samson's enhanced strength was either withdrawn
due to breaking a contract,
or Samson no longer believing he HAD that strength, or refusing to ask for it,
due to having the conditions broken.
(Either way, the result is the same.)
Samson's hair grew back.
Did that mean that the vow was considered reinstated by all parties?
Did the strength enhancements return on that basis?
Or was the previous vow VOIDED and a NEW vow necessary for any consideration?
I think the latter is MORE likely-since Samson's prayer at the end sounds
like Samson is requesting a special blessing-and restoration of the strength
enhancement. Whether or not Samson actually HAD the strength at the time
was not guaranteed by this. Did Samson have a partial enhancement as his
hair returned? I do not think the verses make a convincing case for it,
nor do I think they preclude any such return.
So I say the conclusions are "inconclusive", or "maybe".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Mark it was just a simple question for discussion, I'll decline your offer for spoon feeding thanks anyway. WW and I reached the same conclusion-inconclusive, for the same reasons. I don't read anywhere that it said if you break the vow and the hair grows back that it returns to the prior conditions. I think it is an assumption on your part. I still see no point for him to pray for something that he already had it makes no sense. Perhaps you will reconsider WW post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
Warning:
This "Nazarite vow" thing always bothered me. There's a whole lot more to the Nazarite vow than long hair. No drinking, for instance. No touching a dead body. (A supposition here: does this also mean not CAUSING any dead bodies? Samson did a LOT of that.) Apparently, though, only the hair thing was pertinent to Samson's strength.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
I've only glanced through here, and know I'm a damned unbeliever, but exactly are we to learn from this?
Seems a lot of time and energy has been expended on this thread, and for the life of me, I can't understand why. What does it matter if Samson or Jesus were molested at one time in their lives? Is it going to make your walk stronger? To prove the 'inerrancy' of the "word"?
It would seem to me, there are better ways to occupy your time, than 'straining at gnats'.
If someone could explain this to me, I'd greatly appreciate it.
Edited by SushiLink to comment
Share on other sites
sogwap51
Just out of curiosity....why is this an important subject to you? Does it help you today? If you knew the exact answer would it change your life in any way?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ckeer
As I remember this teaching:
The Greek word for “mocked” in the gospels was the same as the Greek word for “sport” in the Septuagint version of the OT. It was also supposed to be the same for "sporting" in Gen 26:8. I am not enough of a Greek and Hebrew scholar to verify this but the words do look similar when I checked them on a Septuagint website.
This was the only scriptural justification I remember for the teaching.
Gen 26:7
And the men of the place asked [him] of his wife; and he said, She [is] my sister: for he feared to say, [she is] my wife; lest, [said he], the men of the place should kill me for Rebekah; because she [was] fair to look upon.
Gen 26:8
And it came to pass, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out at a window, and saw, and, behold, Isaac [was] sporting with Rebekah his wife.
Gen 26:9
And Abimelech called Isaac, and said, Behold, of a surety she [is] thy wife: and how saidst thou, She [is] my sister? And Isaac said unto him, Because I said, Lest I die for her.
A personal theory of mine is that if this was true- that if Jesus was homosexually raped then under the OT law he would be required to be put to death, even if He had not sinned.
This might have been required for him to truly fulfill the Law, because He was innocent of the charges brought against Him and the trial was illegal, and He never transgressed the law- He fulfilled it
But I wonder if something in the Law had to condemn him to death, and this would be one of the few things that would do it- Because both the “victim” and “victimizer” were required to be put to death (The only other two I can think of were incest and bestiality)
I also wonder if this was part of what was revealed to him at the garden of Gethsemane.
Sushi and Sogwap51- This might be why this subject is worthwhile to some. It is why it is to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
The word for "that he may make us sport" in the King James Version from Judges 25:16 for the Hebrew English equivalent is "sachaq". The Strong's number is 7832. Below is a Lexical definition. There are 36 usages of this word in the Old Testament. There are no usages of this word in the Genesis or prior to Judges 16:25 which is the first usage in the Old Testament. The word used for sporting in Genesis 26:8 is Strong's number 6711. The Hebrew English equivalent for this word is spelled "tsachaq".
I am not an authority for the Hebrew language by any stretch. However, I do have excellent biblical reference materials. In spite of a similar spelling in the English when comparing the two words in the Hebrew, these two words do not look alike at all. The spelling in the Hebrew alphabet looks to be noticably different. Here is perhaps a more precise spelling of these two Hebrew words using English letter equivalents from the Interlinear Bible. The word in Judges 16:25 is "wiysacheq." The word in Genesis 26:8 is "mtsacheeq." These words to me look difficult to pronounce. One could try to pronounce them using the English Hebrew equivalents. However, they are noticably different and may not sound alike either.
OT:7832
sachaq --
to laugh, to play, to mock
a) (Qal)
1) to laugh (usually in contempt or derision)
2) to sport, to play
b) (Piel)
1) to make sport
2) to jest
3) to play (including instrumental music, singing, dancing)
c) (Hiphil) to laugh mockingly
(from The Online Bible Thayer's Greek Lexicon and Brown Driver & Briggs Hebrew Lexicon, Copyright ©1993, Woodside Bible Fellowship, Ontario, Canada. Licensed from the Institute for Creation Research.)
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Same questions, from 2 different people. To save time, I'll answer them together.
twi put forth that they had not only A true understanding of Scripture, but
THE True Understanding of Scripture,
that anyone who agreed with them had the incontrovertible truth,
that anyone who disagreed with them were idjits who lived in error.
They still push this.
Among other things, they've put forth doctrines that are not allowed to be questioned-
that are unable to be supported beyond "this is what I say so believe it"-
and people questioning beyond that are told to just accept that leadership
has examined it and concluded it to be true.
(This is generally a lie-nobody "examined" it-it was declared by divine fiat.)
Among the beliefs they taught/teach are some odd teachings concerning sex.
The two subjects mentioned here were interrelated in their explanations-
they propounded ONE odd belief to justify the OTHER odd belief,
NEITHER of which seems to have a shred of BIBLICAL support.
Mind you,
even discussing or entertaining the notion that they might be wrong
was forbidden in twi/IS STILL FORBIDDEN IN TWI.
Even the messageboards of members face "sanctions" if anyone dares to
initiate even a well-mannered discussion of same.
So, this discussion has never taken place before.
Furthermore,
twi, AFAIK, STILL teaches this, and there are other people who teach
this- since "if it was good enough for wierwille, it's good enough
for me".
So, the discussing of doctrines I find to be a healthy thing.
The actual investigations, as we saw, were NEVER conducted in twi,
and-I gather-were never done until now by ex-twi, either.
So, this is technically new ground.
Thus, I consider this unfinished business.
Furthermore, sooner or later,
someone's going to come in and claim these are true.
(It happened with the other subject-about the oath-before.)
Therefore, I'm saving time in refutation of it when it happens.
I think the odd grouping of a number of teachings-
unique to twi-all centering around sex or body parts-
is suspicious and indicative of something.
Up to you to conclude WHAT it is indicative OF.
Edited by WordWolfLink to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
WordWolf:
Good answers bro'
One of the things that I like about you (or at least your GS persona) is that you lay out what TWI says, compare it to what the bible says and let folks draw the obvious conclusions. Heck, sometimes you compare what TWI says to what TWI says, and spotlight the contradictions.
A lot of this stuff makes little difference in how we live life...BUT it points out how the supposed ministry where "the Word" is taught "like it hasn't been taught since the 1st century" ISN't!
True, people will not hear until they're ready to hear, but they've got to have something to hear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
To answer Sushi and Sogwap's question on what's to be learned from this topic I would like to mention what I get out of it - it's a good exercise in critical thinking. And really I must say that about any of WordWolf's posts. I've been reading this thread but haven't had anything I thought worth contributing...
...And I don't mean to digress here or get off topic but with WordWolf trying to track down the details of this teaching I am tempted to open up my old Corps notes and Corps journals. Not to find anything on this topic per se but to scan through the HUNDREDS of off-the-wall elusively mutating error propagating comments I heard [in residence] live teachings, night owls, at dinner, etc., that were not written down and published, or on a tape made available to the general body of TWI followers!!!!!!!!!!!! For example, I remember in some after-meeting with the Corps Don W. said "Anytime you have to make a decision you should think 'What would the Board of Trustees want.' " Ok - I'm sorry I did get off topic - sorta - but my point is it's a lot of fun exercising our critical thinking skills on this and other threads where we try to nail down the source and analyze the idea itself !!!!!...Alright - continue with the molesting - - arrggghh - I mean analyzing...
...WordWolf, keep on with the keepin' on.
Edited by T-BoneLink to comment
Share on other sites
jr4jc
i skimmed this post but here goes
first do ya'll not KNOW how to study the bible, that is what the way sort of was trying to teach us,
i got and recommend ONLINE BIBLE, www.onlinebible.net
you can do word studies in minutes, and don't have to a guru or a clergy and you do it it isn't done for you,
KNOW is the greek ginosko and means to know by experience, to learn experientially, and is occasionally used of sex, the way always saw the sexual meanings in everything, in hind site i think we KNOW why and thus we see the confusion. only occasionally is this word used of sex, and then mostly of married couples sex resulting in pregnancy.
sport - as in samson took me less than ten minutes to look up and breifly go over and it always means sport, fun play, NOT SEX!!! bunch of sicko's those guys were that fixated on this sex stuff.
the biggest thing i have learned about the bible is GOD is a wonderful communicator and thus WE do not have to fill in the blanks just read what is there and if we do not know what it says, HONESTLY study it a little and see what it says for itself.
BULLINGER though i do not agree with all his conclusions i Love his heart towards the word in that it makes sense genesis to revelations, we may not understand it, but it makes sense, without our interjections or conjectures.
if it does NOT say samson was molested then it does not say it,
likewise with Jesus.
this game of GOD having hidden meanings is what brought about the devinci code and the bible code, instead of people just walking with GOD simply, honestly, people think they have to have a code or learn some great secrets, the bible is simple and when you don't understand it, it doesn't change the fact that you should love your neighbor, not steal from your employer, should be true to your spouse, even ifyou are married, fornication of unmarried christians is clearly taught as is fidelity. walk with god...
many christians throughout history walked with GOD, without knowing what the bible said, they either couldn't read or didn't have it in print and it didn't make it impossible to walk with HIM.
so walk with HIM
...spirit of truth guide you into all truth...
ring a bell
Edited by jr4jcLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Aw-so CLOSE!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
Welcome to Grease Spot, jr4jc - may I suggest you spend a little more time looking over GSC before waltzing in here and insulting everybody...I personally think Bible study is more an exercise in critical thinking than a speed-reading test. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jr4jc
i honestly wondered if those on here new how to study the bible, i was in the way in the late 70's to mid 80's and was taught how to study it, after i left i do not know what they taught, thus the question,
the circles i was in there were many who were good at really studying the bible and taught those around them how to also, bullingers' how to enjoy the bible, a great reference and lots of dr VPW premises were good, some conclusions off, some precepts and approaches off too,
but because of vp's teaching, bullingers and those i met through the way, i learned i can figure out the hard to understand at a glance passages. some of it is reading and studying but leave out walking with our father and you can make it say anything you want to,
we have the spirit of truth leading us into all truth, or the bible is ink on paper and nothing more.
each of us is responsible for our own walk with GOD< what we did during our way years, WE choose to do,
what we do now is a choice too
know is an easy word to understand and everybody i new knew it could be taken sexually, or NOT!!!
a brief study as you stated if one wants to invest a little time shows it most often is not used this way.
more time studying will show more detail but is not required to see what the word means and how it is most often used.
you want to talk around the subject and vent about the way cool i'll step out of the way and you go ahead,
that is valuble if that's what you need to do, but at some point move on, grow, go forth walking with the GOD have come to know,
you want to figure out about molestation of samson or jesus, read/study even breifly and the answer is easy, those that gave a line of shi* did so because they had an agenda, a very sick agenda
i was a WOW with another guy and 2 beautiful young women, niether i nor my wow brother fornicated with our wow sisters, BUT who in their right mind puts 4-- 20 year olds 2 of each sex in a house for a year, to teach the bible, unless you are wanting them to go down a wrong road, which i think was their intention.
cause once in that glass house you couldn't throw stones at them as easily.
warped sicko's they are, and they need to be glad i didn't know about this crap,
if they had hurt someone i loved and cared about.......i know vengence is mine saith the lord,
but making a whip seems very appropriate....[what would jesus do]
Edited by jr4jcLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
As I explained in my post the other day. There is a different Hebrew word used for sport in Genesis 26:8 compared to Judges 16:25. See my previous post. The two words could possibly be related, but not necessarily. I certainly would not base any scriptural understanding on two different Hebrew words being considered to be related when they may not be. That was one of the problems with the Way Denomination. Leaders did biblical research and drew conclusions from it assuming they were Hebrew or Greek scholars. I would say that with a few rare exceptions that most were not. In fact, I am wondering if there was ever any Hebrew scholars at all in the Way Denomination and if there was would they put up with the leaders giant egos? How would they feel if their findings were over ruled by someone with inferior knowledge?
One more thing about biblical research. And this is very important. Biblical truth is always repeated throughout scripture. Another words you can never draw a definite conclusion based on one scripture solely. All great truths are repeated in multiple places. If one sees what they see as a truth, but can not find the same principle repeated else where, they have likely either misread the scripture or drawn an incorrect conclusion from it.
Matt 18:16
16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.'
NIV
Deut 17:6
6 On the testimony of two or three witnesses a man shall be put to death, but no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness.
NIV
Deut 19:15
15 One witness is not enough to convict a man accused of any crime or offense he may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.
NIV
1 Tim 5:19
19 Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.
NIV
Edited by Mark SanguinettiLink to comment
Share on other sites
Samurai
The degradation of Jesus had to do with the pure life that he lived and as a Son of God, as the Messiah, the Saviour, was treated, beaten publicly and privately as a common low life criminal and hanged on a tree (stake or cross) for all to see and again mock via words.
It needed nothing added to it to make it any more humilating or degrading.
It would have been the epitome of shame for any family to have a family member executed in such a manner, nevertheless the family of the one that many flocked to for teaching and healings.
What's more, as I see it, many doctrines of The Way INternational seem to be infiltrated by a sexual theme.
VP taught that all the women of the kingdom belonged to the king, in regards to David and Bathseba. If that was true, why did David have to set up Uriah to die to hide the fact that he (David) impregnated BAthseba if she legally belonged to the King?
How about when the angel appeared to Joseph telling Joseph that the babe in Mary's womb was conceived by the Holy Spirit? I remember JAL teaching that the words "took unto his wife" or something like that meant that they had sexual relations right there and then and by passed the whole betrothal thing ....TWI took the traditional meaning of Joseph accepting Mary and NOT having her stoned to death or publicly ashamed by him into Joseph jumping Mary's bones.
Then don't forget the Christian FAmily and Sex class where all body parts were just parts and there was bascially no difference between a nose and penis...parts is parts don't we all know.
While many may argue the 'benefits' of trying to shed shame over private body parts, one should look at the whole of sexual inneundos and right out sexual insertions into areas of scripture that was totally of TWI origin and wonder what the purpose for that was..
along with the alleged showing of beastiality films...
It's the hidden, covert actions that can do the most damage as they are not easily spotted for what they are.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jr4jc
bunch of sicko's they were [are]
i looked up the words in judges and genesis and they are the same hebrew words in my reference matierials, not trying to argue so hear me out, why does either have to be sexual, genesis sounds like a husband and wife playing, which is different from brother and sister playing
so he saw them carrying on like a husband and a wife---non sexually, kidding and playing, and flirting maybe even,
neither place does sex enter into what i see in scripture, nor does it have to to make sense.
joseph and mary---to marry a pregnant virgin i would need to get a message from GOD too, and when joseph did, he agreed to marry her.
to 'take' her for his wife meant he stopped rejecting the idea, this is not rocket science.
i have no problem with them consumating the marriage before or after the birth, but i do nto see scripture telling us whether they did or didn't and why would it, GOD is not as perverse as the WAY leadership was.
JESUS-- can you imagine what the disciples thought, there hangs who we followed; with murders and robbers.
boy it's gonna be hard to convert people after this!??!?!?!?!
there was no bigger blow to their hearts then for him to die this way, to add any perversions to this you need to consider the source---we now know are/were sick perverts!!!
jesus was VERY badly beaten, spit upon, mocked, alone, betrayed, denied, sleep deprived, and then questioned. the jews and the romans against him, his followers confused. his family and close freinds distrought my heart goes out to what HE must have felt. sexual stuff on top of all this is conjecture, the bible does not support it. and filling in the blanks is where they led us wrong, if the bible doesn't say it then you don't know, if it does then youknow what it says and that is all!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
JR4JC, I have bible study software on my computer hard drive. The name of the software that I use is called the PC Study Bible. It is put out by Biblesoft. You can find their web site at www.biblesoft.com. They have a Hebrew Interlinear Bible which I used. I also used the Strong's Hebrew/Greek Dictionary and the Brown's-Driver-Briggs Hebrew Lexicon. I recommend the Biblesoft software for all serious bible students. In fact, a friend of mine who attended a seminary for a while, when he saw my software, told me that this is what a biblical seminary student would use.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I felt all this was worth repeating.
I DID want to point out, re: the film...
Several posters say it was used, either in the CFS or in the ADVANCED CLASS.
It was definitely MENTIONED in BOTH in the filmed version,
but apparently the LIVE versions featured this during them.
That reminds me...
Since he charged for classes that featured this video,
did he secure the rights to air it from the smut peddlers that made it?
I'm sure it had the standard "authorized for private viewing" caveat,
and technically he charged money to play it for the audiences.
I'm just saying, here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Based on the discussion so far,
I imagine it was something like a 2-person game of grabass or something.
Nothing that would be considered pornographic by modern standards.
Questionable to put on tv, but not more.
The opposite of "put away"-which he was planning,- being "took unto him",meaning he married her.
Makes plenty of sense, and one doesn't need to inject additional meanings into words.
Unless one has an agenda requiring one to discuss sex,
or one has a fixation with it.
(Why WAS he showing deviant porn to teenagers?
We never DID get a good answer to that...)
"The Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom."
"Master, we would see a sign from thee."
As someone (Ralph D) pointed out once,
if you're looking for signs,
"Messiah-dead-on-a-tree"
is not even on the list of possible good messages.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jr4jc
i appologize i went back and checked my sources and they are two different hebrew words,
i looked at the strong's numbers wrong----
but they have very similar meaning and i have yet to find ONCE when either is used in a sexual context.
Edited by jr4jcLink to comment
Share on other sites
Mark Sanguinetti
Then we are in agreement JR4JC. I was trying to determine if these two Hebrew words were related. I could not tell concretely, but then my knowledge of Hebrew is limited to what I can mine from my reference books. This might simply be a case of two different Hebrew words having a similar meaning. We see this quite a bit in the English language. For example, avenue, street, road, drive all have a similar meaning, yet they are completely unrelated to a root word. Why not in Hebrew also? And yes, neither word appears to have a sexual context.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
The word "mocked" accorded to Jesus had to be checked in the Greek, Aramaic and every other text. I'll be darned...the word really meant...MOCKED.
Nothing on Jesus being raped. It's a paranoid invention of someone's twisted mind.
I have never checked the record of Samson but now I will. Thanks.
Eagle
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.