That's perfectly fine with me. :) Iron sharpeneth iron.
Why not address the subject at hand and not just a particular theology? I mean, there's a lot of input here... why only address rascal's arguments?
Who said I ONLY address Rascal's arguments? My point was that the THEOLOGY is being targeted, not the person. This isn't about personal attacks; do you ever hear me whining that folks are ganging up on me? Please quit playing the victim card.
Eyesopen, if you saw love in a person, joy in Christ, peace in Christ, gentleness, goodness, etc. and Rascal who wasn't even there said it was a counterfeit; I think you too may be asking many questions and seeking specific clarification of that position.
The bottom line is, and I'll say this as nice as I can: Rascal doesn't know what the heck she's talking about with respect to my experiences.
OM, I will grant you that as the truth. She doesnt know anything about your personal experiences. This truism applies to everyone. Including you, who I have personally seen tell others on this board that their personal experiences are not valid. Regardless of what you say concerning "Rascalian Theology" not being a personal attack I for one am not buying it. Rascal's theology is not so different than many posters here and yet you have chosen to brand it as Rascalian which implies that she is the author of it. That is very presumtious. Time and again you have singled out Rascal's posts and disregarded dozens by others to attack only hers. That Sir is personal. Call it what you want.
And before you do your usual twist and shout...no I will not bother looking up the many posts in which you have attacked others because simply put...you are not worth that much energy to me.
hi there fellow greasespotters!...........since this thread seems to have a life of its own, i thought i'd like to set the record straight by correcting the poster who complained on post #670 of this thread that it was i who was among the first to derail it..........it was this very same poster who brought up nathan friedly's participation in a fellowlaborers program run by cff, and nathan's "membership" in cff just a few posts before my first post on this thread (post#37 on page 2).......as a result of nathan's reply to that poster's suggestion that nathan is indeed a faithful follower of cff, i posted the following........
Hi there Nathan Friedly!........welcome to the greasespot cafe!........you seem like a very nice young man........thank you for your posts here.......i hope you'll stick around long enough to enjoy some of the many varying theological cusines that our menu has to offer!......i particularly enjoy our house special reality brew.......i find it stimulating and really an "eye-opener" on those hard-to-get-out-of -the-bed-you've-made-for-yourself days!.........i hope you will too.......
your topic here, "A note on forgiving", caught my attention today!..........it has been a topic of particular practical import and impact for many of us who frequent this place.........maybe, as you've "read around" here, you've come across some threads that delve into this same topic?.........if not, check them out........you may find them of interest and/or value.......
your posts on this thread, and on the "tightly wrapped packages" thread, have stirred up some questions in me that i'd like to ask you.......it would be really loving of you to answer them if and when you get a chance.........you mention "the word" many times.........for example,......."god's word", "the true and accurate word", "the accurate word", "speaking the word", "the truth of god's word", etc.,..........what are you referring to when you refer to "the word"??.........what is "the word" in CFF?........
you mentioned that you are in CFF's "fellowlabourers program", which you describe as a "leadersip training program"........i'm wondering, when it comes to "forgiving", i am interested to know if CFF teaches anything about the unique and specific responsibilities of "leaders" in the church of the body of christ, when it comes to their practical application of the doctrines and "processes" of forgiving and forgiveness?..........from my limited understanding of the christian scriptures, it seems that there are demands made of "leaders" in the church regarding such things as repentance for wrongs committed by them towards the believers in their church, which are additional requirements for "leaders" in order to enjoy the forgiveness from the believers who have been wronged, for the wrongs committed against them...........are there??...........i notice that you mention rev. wayne clapp (his name is on the link you provided on the "packages" thread), and quote rev. john nessle..........under whose auspices were these CFF leaders ordained?........do they have formal seminary training or credentials from an accredited christian college or seminary?.......do they have formal training in biblical exegesis, or textual criticism?........do they have formal training in greek, hebrew, aramaic or latin?.........are they thus qualified to provide you "fellowlabourers" with "the true and accurate word" in your leadership training? ......what formal, professional training do they have in christian ministry or counselling?.........do they adhere to the "principles of biblical research" as taught in and by the way international?........were they "leaders" in TWI??..........if so, have they apologized to the believers they may have wronged during their time as TWI leaders?.........do they need to?..........did they teach you "fellowlabourers" to "lump loving and forgiving in together" as you stated you do?......... if so, what is their scriptural basis for this "lumping together"?..........or is this just something you have developed on your own?
you stated that you never considered CFF to be a TWI OFFSHOOT...........but, since visiting the greasespot, you may now consider CFF to indeed be an OFFSHOOT of TWI.......because, as you said, "i guess we do have a lot of the old way folks in our group"...........may i offer my opinion that, it is not WHO is in your group which makes it a TWI OFFSHOOT, but rather, WHAT is taught and promulgated by CFF leaders, which makes it an OFFSHOOT of TWI........what do you think?........also, the "original manuscript" of about 70% of the content of the PFAL BOOK that you say you're trying to get a copy of can be found in E.W. Bullinger's book "HOW TO ENJOY THE BIBLE"........which, imho, is a more expertly and finely written book, authored by an eminently more qualified scholar than vp!.........i'm pretty sure your dad has a copy lying around somewhere........or if not,.........surely your CFF bookstore or library will have one.......check it out, nathan.....it really is a much better read!
i sure hope you don't get defensive from this "barrage" of questions!.........please don't, or you'll miss the point of my asking them..........hope you won't mind doing the work it may take to answer these questions..........i really do appreciate you taking the time to think about them and answer them.......it should provide a good learning opportunity for both of us, don't you think??........thanks again for this thread , and your posts!.........nice meeting you here at the greasespot......come and sit a spell..........enjoy our reality brew!.........the first cup's on me!!..........................peace.
This post has been edited by Don'tWorryBeHappy: Dec 14 2007, 10:51 PM
so, there it is!..........now all of you readers can judge for yourselves whether or not i need more "reproof" from you for derailing this thread........i eagerly await such reproof from those who deem it necessary based on the "record" this thread itself provides!..........nathan answered one question, and lied in answer to one other, when he stated that there is "no link" between twi and cff.......the rest of my questions to him were never answered, and remain unanswered to this date!
my quetions concerning the topic of forgiveness were totally ignored by nathan, as well as by the vic apologists who are the posters most responsible for the numerous "derails" since i first asked those questions on post #37.........the author of post #670 continues to amaze me with his persistence at derailing this thread with posts that can only be described as firsthand evidence that he is firmly committed to self-righteously, arrogantly and condescendingly remaining "stuck on stupid"!.........his many derailing questions have been anwsered repeatedly, in many different ways, by many posters on this thread, yet he apparently is unable to simply, objectively read what has been written here!..........perhaps a course in remedial reading would be helpful, along with some tips on improving one's memory!
the questions regarding forgiveness of vic, lcm, cff leaders, are all part of the consistent efforts of the vic apologists to keep this thread (or any thread, for that matter) focused on what THEY want, not whatever the topic of the thead may be.........they insist upon demanding that there is some "biblical", or "scriptural" truth that somehow requires all extwi folks to forgive the aforementioned "leaders" for their "crimes and misdemeanors" against the body of christ!.......with acute faithfulness to the techniques of private interpretation of the scriptures they seem to have adopted completely from vic, they take entire sections of scripture from all over the bible, and attempt to prove their false premises, assumptions , and interpretations as being somehow "true" to "the word"...........and then point their smug, self-righteous fingers accusingly at those who have the god-given right, according to those same scriptures, to demand and expect an apology from those "leaders", as well as expecting that those same "leaders" conform to the numerous scriptures addressed specifically to real "leaders" in the chuirch, as recorded in the so-called pastoral epistles of timothy, titus and philemon!.....somehow, in their promulgation of vic and his twisted theology, they completely avoid or ignore these pastoral epistles, which are chock-full of specific commands and requirements of "leaders", and "elders", and "bishops", etc., that are above and beyond those of your "average believer" in the body of christ!......these pastoral epistles fully deal with all the smokescreen questions that vic apologists throw out around here, while totally ignoring what is clearly written in those pastoral epistles which answers the very questions they ask!!.............it gets to the point where jesus' teaching regarding "casting pearls before swine" is the only way one can justify responding to anything the vic apologists post!
let me quote a few things from the corps notes section of the waydale documents archive on the greasespot homepage.........these are from the corps meeting notes of september 28, 1994
Leah Martindale is not allowed alone with a boy during the ROA; not allowed on certain parts of the grounds; not allowed to go somewhere that they don't know where she is.
Found 14 more homos. Still happening--still confronting. About 10% of those who were going out WOW were homos.Believing Principles of a Christian Family Bottom line is children obey your parents in the Lord.
Protect the household. It's the spirits that are evil.
Any Corps who go back in debt after getting out of debt should be DFAC. It's got to be spirit influenced!
Change a bad habit by intense daily concentration and effort. Kick your own butt to don't mindlessly fall back into those areas. Help each other stay sharp.
Jesus Christ is the true shepherd in Ezekiel.
If people don't want help, why waste time on them. Forgiveness is for those who want forgiveness.
Jeremiah 9:6 False ministry. Whole households and fellowships we could just shut off if they don't stand with us.
Spirit is thicker than blood. Word stands when you mean business. Plenty of men and women stood against their children (or parents.) They should have remorse and want to correct it. 1 Timothy 4:1 "In the latter times" is now and since the day of Pentecost.
[some things God revealed to VPW on the night he first S.I.T. One of them was that it would never get so dark that only one person stands.]
Why: Giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. It's the reason anyone leaves.
i suggest you read the whole thing if you want more "context" concerning the above excerpts.......although, the doofus from okie's "teaching style" does not really lend itself much to establishing any context to his "revelatory rants"!.........but, i particularly want to direct your attention to the following, "if people don't want help, why waste time on them? FORGIVENESS IS FOR THOSE WHO WANT FORGIVENESS"!........"THEY SHOULD HAVE REMORSE AND WANT TO CORRECT IT"......vic nor king okie obviously never wanted or needed our "help", or "forgiveness".......that's why i've never "wasted time on them" by forgiving them!.........and, since any who chose to leave twi and all its false teachings and evil practicies did so by "giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. It's THE reason anyone leaves."!...........no room is ever left for open, honest discussion, because all those who left "should have remorse and want to correct" all the reasons we left!.......should vic or king okie have remorse and want to correct their "crimes and misdemeanors"??........did they have any "bad habits" they needed to "change by intense daily concentration and effort"??............of course not........in their minds they never did anything wrong......they had no "bad habits"........it's only all those possessed "cop-outs" that left who need to do things like change bad habits!!!
in closing, permit me to once again quote my pal, al: "most people say that it is the intellect which makes a great scientist. they are wrong! it is character."........and, from martin luther king jr., " i look forward to the day when my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character"..........i judge vic, lcm, twi, ces, cff, word promotions, et al, not by the "color" of their websites, teachings, or programs, but rather by the content of their "christian" character, as demonstrated by their consistent actions and practices, past and PRESENT!..........which actions and practices have been "weighed in the balances, and found wanting" according to the very "word of god" they claim to be standing on!...................i apologize for the "derail"!!...............................peace.
DWBH...I see no reason for "reproof" in fact I agree with Exie, Wow! Very nicely said. But if you want I will slap your hand for you...just hold it out to the nice little shark...
OM, I will grant you that as the truth. She doesnt know anything about your personal experiences. This truism applies to everyone. Including you, who I have personally seen tell others on this board that their personal experiences are not valid. Regardless of what you say concerning "Rascalian Theology" not being a personal attack I for one am not buying it. Rascal's theology is not so different than many posters here and yet you have chosen to brand it as Rascalian which implies that she is the author of it. That is very presumtious. Time and again you have singled out Rascal's posts and disregarded dozens by others to attack only hers. That Sir is personal. Call it what you want.
And before you do your usual twist and shout...no I will not bother looking up the many posts in which you have attacked others because simply put...you are not worth that much energy to me.
Eyesopen, thanks for your comment about my personal experiences. It is appreciated.
Regarding Rascals posts, has it ever occured to you that my attacks against Rascal's posts are giving them credence and respect enough for a detailed response? As opposed to your statement, "you are not worth that much energy to me". Well for me, Rascalian Theology is worth responding to! I think that's better than putting her posts on ignore or saying her posts aren't worth that much of my energy.
in closing, permit me to once again quote my pal, al: "most people say that it is the intellect which makes a great scientist. they are wrong! it is character."........and, from martin luther king jr., " i look forward to the day when my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character".....
DWBH, good post, thanks. BTW, it is widely known that Martin Luther King Jr. was a womanizing adulterer. So once again that old addage is proven, "the sins of the teacher do not negate the truth in the teachings." Thanks, DWBH.
Eyesopen, thanks for your comment about my personal experiences. It is appreciated.
Regarding Rascals posts, has it ever occured to you that my attacks against Rascal's posts are giving them credence and respect enough for a detailed response? As opposed to your statement, "you are not worth that much energy to me". Well for me, Rascalian Theology is worth responding to! I think that's better than putting her posts on ignore or saying her posts aren't worth that much of my energy.
You are welcome OM, I always endeavor to give due credit and remain fair. In light of that please notice that I did not say that your posts aren't worth that much of my energy, the context was looking up old posts looking for specific items. That would be a very time consuming task and the benefit does not outweigh the effort.
I still don't think that "Rascalian Theology" is appropriately named, nor do I think that the focus on Rascal has much to do with honest interest in her views. But if you insist on jumping on that train then be my guest, however please be aware that I will diligently point out the obvious whenever it presents itself. And just for the record I always find Rascal worth responding to irregardless of her theologies or anything else. I also find your imput interesting as well, when it does not appear that you are just stiring the pot to see what rises to the surface.
BTW, it is widely known that Martin Luther King Jr. was a womanizing adulterer. So once again that old addage is proven, "the sins of the teacher do not negate the truth in the teachings."
An adage is a familiar and/or popular saying.
It's a common expression, unlike "the sins of the teacher do not negate the truth in the teachings", which is not an expression that I personally recognize as being either familiar to many people or commonly used by the general populace.
An adage is not some sort of profound statement of wisdom and truth.
Here are two adages that are at opposite ends of the spectrum:
1. Birds of a feather flock together.
2. Opposites attract.
Which adage is the provable one?
Furthermore, it's one heck of a stretch of reality to suggest that VPW was on some sort of parallel with Dr. King.
DWBH, good post, thanks. BTW, it is widely known that Martin Luther King Jr. was a womanizing adulterer.
Oldies - I'm wondering how you would explain the difference between the post quoted above to DWBH and this post that you recently made in another thread concerning your experiences with vp:
Regarding my experiences with the man, I'm bearing witness to what I saw and experienced. Anything other than that for me would be bearing false witness.
I'm assuming that you have never met Martin Luther King Jr. You neither saw nor experienced his "womanizing and adultery" - correct?
I wonder why your first post is not considered bearing false witness.
Please explain and give three examples...
The parallel I'd make is that both were adulterers, both had great messages, and the messages are worth considering and repeating despite their sins.
In the 1980s, questions were raised regarding the authorship of King's dissertation, other papers, and his speeches. Concerns about his doctoral dissertation at Boston University led to a formal inquiry by university officials, which concluded that approximately a third of it had been plagiarized. However, Boston University decided not to revoke his doctorate, stating that although King acted improperly, his dissertation still "makes an intelligent contribution to scholarship". Theodore Pappas points out in his book Plagiarism and the Culture War, that King took a class on scholarly standards and plagiarism at Boston University
Since 1989, when Reverend Ralph Abernathy wrote about Martin's adulterous relationships, the question of whether or not Martin Luther King, Jr. was unfaithful to his wife or not is still being debated.
A year before he died, Martin allegedly revealed a longstanding affair to Coretta. However, Coretta has stated that she and Martin "never had one single serious discussion about either of us being involved with another person."
Source: "I May Not Get There With You", by Michael Dyson, p. 216.
King described his affairs as "a form of anxiety reduction." Martin said, "I’m away from home twenty-five to twenty-seven days a month."
Three relationships were more than one-night stands, and Martin grew especially close to one woman. The "relationship, rather than his marriage, increasingly became the emotional centerpiece of King's life, but it did not eliminate the incidental couplings that were a commonplace of King's travels."
Source: "Bearing the Cross", by David Garrow, p. 375.
Ralph Abernathy: "Martin and I were away more often than we were at home; and while this was no excuse for extramarital relations, it was a reason. Some men are better able to bear such deprivations than others, though all of us in SCLC headquarters had our weak moments. We all understood and believed in the biblical prohibition against sex outside of marriage. It was just that he had a particularly difficult time with that temptation.
As a part of its surveillance activities, the FBI did document some sexual encounters involving Martin Luther King.
The parallel I'd make is that both were adulterers, both had great messages, and the messages are worth considering and repeating despite their sins.
And both messages are viewed both with admiration and disdain - depending on who you speak to.
White Dove and Oldies,
I see one major problem with this line of thinking. While both men may have committed the same 'sins' - and both had a "great message" (at least in your eyes), all that proves is that it is possible for a man with some "great ideas" to also partake in wrongdoing.
All this is said while I consider that MLK moved a nation to change - while VP only moved a bunch of us to purchase more camping equipment.
The parallel I'd make is that both were adulterers, both had great messages, and the messages are worth considering and repeating despite their sins.
Hmmm...seems to me that to have that in common with someone is personally embarrassing but for others to know that you had it in common and were talking about it 20+ years after you had died is pathetic.
Since we are speaking of things in common Dooj noted:
And both messages are viewed both with admiration and disdain - depending on who you speak to.
The same could be said for Marx, Hitler, Paul the Apostle and Jesus the Christ. But I am fairly certain that the last three were not adulterers...I could be wrong. But they all had a message that someone thought was worth listening to. So lots of folks have stuff in common...BFD...can we get back to the topic now?
BTW, I still have my camping gear. I'm not sure what that means... :blink:
The relatives of Uriah must have had a tough time forgiving David.
There are two things going on here: some warm terms of endearment and some reproof.
Let’s color the endearment portions red for warm, and the reproof portions blue for cold.
And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual,
but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
Mike, being called a babe in Christ isn't exactly a compliment!
I have fed you with milk, and not with meat:
for hitherto ye were not able to bear it,
neither yet now are ye able.
See what I mean?
Telling them that they were still attached to Mama is not one either.
Next verses, 3 and 4:
For ye are yet carnal:
for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions,
are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos;
are ye not carnal?
Verse 5:
Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos,
but ministers by whom ye believed,
even as the Lord gave to every man?
Ahhhhh! Warm.
Verses 6 and 7:
I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth;
but God that giveth the increase.
Verse 8a:
Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one:
“One” in purpose.
Paul and Apollos were one in purpose, united, like-minded in their helping the Corinthians and operating in the Body of Christ. Like their individual grooviness, their individual contributions were only significant on the 5 senses level. Spiritually they were one in the Body of Christ and it didn’t matter who did what.
HOWEVER, and here’s where there’s a mistranslation, but it’s not the crucial controversial one. It’s a relatively simple one.
Verse 8b reads in the KJV:
...and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
The word “and” can and should be rendered “but.” The next half verse is in contrast to the first half.
"De" in the Greek can be translated in these ways: "but, on the other hand, and, also, now, etc."
and I would have translated it with the word "but."
Verse 8 a and b:
Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one:
but every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour.
That reward part looked warming. Maybe and maybe not....
Verses 9-11:
For we are labourers together with God:
ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.
According to the grace of God which is given unto me,
as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation,
and another buildeth thereon.
But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid,
which is Jesus Christ.
Okay, so where's the rest? I've been away for some days and I am now just getting to this. Geez, I hope you finished it all the way.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
128
169
106
102
Popular Days
Feb 19
54
Feb 26
50
Feb 22
47
Apr 2
40
Top Posters In This Topic
rascal 128 posts
Mike 169 posts
Ham 106 posts
waysider 102 posts
Popular Days
Feb 19 2008
54 posts
Feb 26 2008
50 posts
Feb 22 2008
47 posts
Apr 2 2008
40 posts
Posted Images
waysider
Oldiesmanonian Theology is the target, not Oldiesman. It isn't personal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
That's perfectly fine with me. :) Iron sharpeneth iron.
Who said I ONLY address Rascal's arguments? My point was that the THEOLOGY is being targeted, not the person. This isn't about personal attacks; do you ever hear me whining that folks are ganging up on me? Please quit playing the victim card.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
You're funny!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
OM, I will grant you that as the truth. She doesnt know anything about your personal experiences. This truism applies to everyone. Including you, who I have personally seen tell others on this board that their personal experiences are not valid. Regardless of what you say concerning "Rascalian Theology" not being a personal attack I for one am not buying it. Rascal's theology is not so different than many posters here and yet you have chosen to brand it as Rascalian which implies that she is the author of it. That is very presumtious. Time and again you have singled out Rascal's posts and disregarded dozens by others to attack only hers. That Sir is personal. Call it what you want.
And before you do your usual twist and shout...no I will not bother looking up the many posts in which you have attacked others because simply put...you are not worth that much energy to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Nope-----I only hear you whining that you think people are "ganging up" on "The Teacher".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
hi there fellow greasespotters!...........since this thread seems to have a life of its own, i thought i'd like to set the record straight by correcting the poster who complained on post #670 of this thread that it was i who was among the first to derail it..........it was this very same poster who brought up nathan friedly's participation in a fellowlaborers program run by cff, and nathan's "membership" in cff just a few posts before my first post on this thread (post#37 on page 2).......as a result of nathan's reply to that poster's suggestion that nathan is indeed a faithful follower of cff, i posted the following........
Hi there Nathan Friedly!........welcome to the greasespot cafe!........you seem like a very nice young man........thank you for your posts here.......i hope you'll stick around long enough to enjoy some of the many varying theological cusines that our menu has to offer!......i particularly enjoy our house special reality brew.......i find it stimulating and really an "eye-opener" on those hard-to-get-out-of -the-bed-you've-made-for-yourself days!.........i hope you will too.......
your topic here, "A note on forgiving", caught my attention today!..........it has been a topic of particular practical import and impact for many of us who frequent this place.........maybe, as you've "read around" here, you've come across some threads that delve into this same topic?.........if not, check them out........you may find them of interest and/or value.......
your posts on this thread, and on the "tightly wrapped packages" thread, have stirred up some questions in me that i'd like to ask you.......it would be really loving of you to answer them if and when you get a chance.........you mention "the word" many times.........for example,......."god's word", "the true and accurate word", "the accurate word", "speaking the word", "the truth of god's word", etc.,..........what are you referring to when you refer to "the word"??.........what is "the word" in CFF?........
you mentioned that you are in CFF's "fellowlabourers program", which you describe as a "leadersip training program"........i'm wondering, when it comes to "forgiving", i am interested to know if CFF teaches anything about the unique and specific responsibilities of "leaders" in the church of the body of christ, when it comes to their practical application of the doctrines and "processes" of forgiving and forgiveness?..........from my limited understanding of the christian scriptures, it seems that there are demands made of "leaders" in the church regarding such things as repentance for wrongs committed by them towards the believers in their church, which are additional requirements for "leaders" in order to enjoy the forgiveness from the believers who have been wronged, for the wrongs committed against them...........are there??...........i notice that you mention rev. wayne clapp (his name is on the link you provided on the "packages" thread), and quote rev. john nessle..........under whose auspices were these CFF leaders ordained?........do they have formal seminary training or credentials from an accredited christian college or seminary?.......do they have formal training in biblical exegesis, or textual criticism?........do they have formal training in greek, hebrew, aramaic or latin?.........are they thus qualified to provide you "fellowlabourers" with "the true and accurate word" in your leadership training? ......what formal, professional training do they have in christian ministry or counselling?.........do they adhere to the "principles of biblical research" as taught in and by the way international?........were they "leaders" in TWI??..........if so, have they apologized to the believers they may have wronged during their time as TWI leaders?.........do they need to?..........did they teach you "fellowlabourers" to "lump loving and forgiving in together" as you stated you do?......... if so, what is their scriptural basis for this "lumping together"?..........or is this just something you have developed on your own?
you stated that you never considered CFF to be a TWI OFFSHOOT...........but, since visiting the greasespot, you may now consider CFF to indeed be an OFFSHOOT of TWI.......because, as you said, "i guess we do have a lot of the old way folks in our group"...........may i offer my opinion that, it is not WHO is in your group which makes it a TWI OFFSHOOT, but rather, WHAT is taught and promulgated by CFF leaders, which makes it an OFFSHOOT of TWI........what do you think?........also, the "original manuscript" of about 70% of the content of the PFAL BOOK that you say you're trying to get a copy of can be found in E.W. Bullinger's book "HOW TO ENJOY THE BIBLE"........which, imho, is a more expertly and finely written book, authored by an eminently more qualified scholar than vp!.........i'm pretty sure your dad has a copy lying around somewhere........or if not,.........surely your CFF bookstore or library will have one.......check it out, nathan.....it really is a much better read!
i sure hope you don't get defensive from this "barrage" of questions!.........please don't, or you'll miss the point of my asking them..........hope you won't mind doing the work it may take to answer these questions..........i really do appreciate you taking the time to think about them and answer them.......it should provide a good learning opportunity for both of us, don't you think??........thanks again for this thread , and your posts!.........nice meeting you here at the greasespot......come and sit a spell..........enjoy our reality brew!.........the first cup's on me!!..........................peace.
This post has been edited by Don'tWorryBeHappy: Dec 14 2007, 10:51 PM
so, there it is!..........now all of you readers can judge for yourselves whether or not i need more "reproof" from you for derailing this thread........i eagerly await such reproof from those who deem it necessary based on the "record" this thread itself provides!..........nathan answered one question, and lied in answer to one other, when he stated that there is "no link" between twi and cff.......the rest of my questions to him were never answered, and remain unanswered to this date!
my quetions concerning the topic of forgiveness were totally ignored by nathan, as well as by the vic apologists who are the posters most responsible for the numerous "derails" since i first asked those questions on post #37.........the author of post #670 continues to amaze me with his persistence at derailing this thread with posts that can only be described as firsthand evidence that he is firmly committed to self-righteously, arrogantly and condescendingly remaining "stuck on stupid"!.........his many derailing questions have been anwsered repeatedly, in many different ways, by many posters on this thread, yet he apparently is unable to simply, objectively read what has been written here!..........perhaps a course in remedial reading would be helpful, along with some tips on improving one's memory!
the questions regarding forgiveness of vic, lcm, cff leaders, are all part of the consistent efforts of the vic apologists to keep this thread (or any thread, for that matter) focused on what THEY want, not whatever the topic of the thead may be.........they insist upon demanding that there is some "biblical", or "scriptural" truth that somehow requires all extwi folks to forgive the aforementioned "leaders" for their "crimes and misdemeanors" against the body of christ!.......with acute faithfulness to the techniques of private interpretation of the scriptures they seem to have adopted completely from vic, they take entire sections of scripture from all over the bible, and attempt to prove their false premises, assumptions , and interpretations as being somehow "true" to "the word"...........and then point their smug, self-righteous fingers accusingly at those who have the god-given right, according to those same scriptures, to demand and expect an apology from those "leaders", as well as expecting that those same "leaders" conform to the numerous scriptures addressed specifically to real "leaders" in the chuirch, as recorded in the so-called pastoral epistles of timothy, titus and philemon!.....somehow, in their promulgation of vic and his twisted theology, they completely avoid or ignore these pastoral epistles, which are chock-full of specific commands and requirements of "leaders", and "elders", and "bishops", etc., that are above and beyond those of your "average believer" in the body of christ!......these pastoral epistles fully deal with all the smokescreen questions that vic apologists throw out around here, while totally ignoring what is clearly written in those pastoral epistles which answers the very questions they ask!!.............it gets to the point where jesus' teaching regarding "casting pearls before swine" is the only way one can justify responding to anything the vic apologists post!
let me quote a few things from the corps notes section of the waydale documents archive on the greasespot homepage.........these are from the corps meeting notes of september 28, 1994
Leah Martindale is not allowed alone with a boy during the ROA; not allowed on certain parts of the grounds; not allowed to go somewhere that they don't know where she is.
Found 14 more homos. Still happening--still confronting. About 10% of those who were going out WOW were homos.Believing Principles of a Christian Family Bottom line is children obey your parents in the Lord.
Protect the household. It's the spirits that are evil.
Any Corps who go back in debt after getting out of debt should be DFAC. It's got to be spirit influenced!
Change a bad habit by intense daily concentration and effort. Kick your own butt to don't mindlessly fall back into those areas. Help each other stay sharp.
Jesus Christ is the true shepherd in Ezekiel.
If people don't want help, why waste time on them. Forgiveness is for those who want forgiveness.
Jeremiah 9:6 False ministry. Whole households and fellowships we could just shut off if they don't stand with us.
Spirit is thicker than blood. Word stands when you mean business. Plenty of men and women stood against their children (or parents.) They should have remorse and want to correct it. 1 Timothy 4:1 "In the latter times" is now and since the day of Pentecost.
[some things God revealed to VPW on the night he first S.I.T. One of them was that it would never get so dark that only one person stands.]
Why: Giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. It's the reason anyone leaves.
i suggest you read the whole thing if you want more "context" concerning the above excerpts.......although, the doofus from okie's "teaching style" does not really lend itself much to establishing any context to his "revelatory rants"!.........but, i particularly want to direct your attention to the following, "if people don't want help, why waste time on them? FORGIVENESS IS FOR THOSE WHO WANT FORGIVENESS"!........"THEY SHOULD HAVE REMORSE AND WANT TO CORRECT IT"......vic nor king okie obviously never wanted or needed our "help", or "forgiveness".......that's why i've never "wasted time on them" by forgiving them!.........and, since any who chose to leave twi and all its false teachings and evil practicies did so by "giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. It's THE reason anyone leaves."!...........no room is ever left for open, honest discussion, because all those who left "should have remorse and want to correct" all the reasons we left!.......should vic or king okie have remorse and want to correct their "crimes and misdemeanors"??........did they have any "bad habits" they needed to "change by intense daily concentration and effort"??............of course not........in their minds they never did anything wrong......they had no "bad habits"........it's only all those possessed "cop-outs" that left who need to do things like change bad habits!!!
in closing, permit me to once again quote my pal, al: "most people say that it is the intellect which makes a great scientist. they are wrong! it is character."........and, from martin luther king jr., " i look forward to the day when my children will be judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character"..........i judge vic, lcm, twi, ces, cff, word promotions, et al, not by the "color" of their websites, teachings, or programs, but rather by the content of their "christian" character, as demonstrated by their consistent actions and practices, past and PRESENT!..........which actions and practices have been "weighed in the balances, and found wanting" according to the very "word of god" they claim to be standing on!...................i apologize for the "derail"!!...............................peace.
Edited by Don'tWorryBeHappyLink to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
holyfruckingwowzer to post #707 (i just figured out post numbers after all these years)
with love and thanks,
a less than average believer (thank you god)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
DWBH...I see no reason for "reproof" in fact I agree with Exie, Wow! Very nicely said. But if you want I will slap your hand for you...just hold it out to the nice little shark...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Eyesopen, thanks for your comment about my personal experiences. It is appreciated.
Regarding Rascals posts, has it ever occured to you that my attacks against Rascal's posts are giving them credence and respect enough for a detailed response? As opposed to your statement, "you are not worth that much energy to me". Well for me, Rascalian Theology is worth responding to! I think that's better than putting her posts on ignore or saying her posts aren't worth that much of my energy.
Edited by oldiesmanLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
DWBH, good post, thanks. BTW, it is widely known that Martin Luther King Jr. was a womanizing adulterer. So once again that old addage is proven, "the sins of the teacher do not negate the truth in the teachings." Thanks, DWBH.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
You are welcome OM, I always endeavor to give due credit and remain fair. In light of that please notice that I did not say that your posts aren't worth that much of my energy, the context was looking up old posts looking for specific items. That would be a very time consuming task and the benefit does not outweigh the effort.
I still don't think that "Rascalian Theology" is appropriately named, nor do I think that the focus on Rascal has much to do with honest interest in her views. But if you insist on jumping on that train then be my guest, however please be aware that I will diligently point out the obvious whenever it presents itself. And just for the record I always find Rascal worth responding to irregardless of her theologies or anything else. I also find your imput interesting as well, when it does not appear that you are just stiring the pot to see what rises to the surface.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
An adage is a familiar and/or popular saying.
It's a common expression, unlike "the sins of the teacher do not negate the truth in the teachings", which is not an expression that I personally recognize as being either familiar to many people or commonly used by the general populace.
An adage is not some sort of profound statement of wisdom and truth.
Here are two adages that are at opposite ends of the spectrum:
1. Birds of a feather flock together.
2. Opposites attract.
Which adage is the provable one?
Furthermore, it's one heck of a stretch of reality to suggest that VPW was on some sort of parallel with Dr. King.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
The parallel I'd make is that both were adulterers, both had great messages, and the messages are worth considering and repeating despite their sins.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Oldies - I'm wondering how you would explain the difference between the post quoted above to DWBH and this post that you recently made in another thread concerning your experiences with vp:
I'm assuming that you have never met Martin Luther King Jr. You neither saw nor experienced his "womanizing and adultery" - correct?
I wonder why your first post is not considered bearing false witness.
Please explain and give three examples...
Wait. Did you witness the adultery or not?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Another King parallel with VPW
In the 1980s, questions were raised regarding the authorship of King's dissertation, other papers, and his speeches. Concerns about his doctoral dissertation at Boston University led to a formal inquiry by university officials, which concluded that approximately a third of it had been plagiarized. However, Boston University decided not to revoke his doctorate, stating that although King acted improperly, his dissertation still "makes an intelligent contribution to scholarship". Theodore Pappas points out in his book Plagiarism and the Culture War, that King took a class on scholarly standards and plagiarism at Boston University
Since 1989, when Reverend Ralph Abernathy wrote about Martin's adulterous relationships, the question of whether or not Martin Luther King, Jr. was unfaithful to his wife or not is still being debated.
A year before he died, Martin allegedly revealed a longstanding affair to Coretta. However, Coretta has stated that she and Martin "never had one single serious discussion about either of us being involved with another person."
Source: "I May Not Get There With You", by Michael Dyson, p. 216.
King described his affairs as "a form of anxiety reduction." Martin said, "I’m away from home twenty-five to twenty-seven days a month."
Three relationships were more than one-night stands, and Martin grew especially close to one woman. The "relationship, rather than his marriage, increasingly became the emotional centerpiece of King's life, but it did not eliminate the incidental couplings that were a commonplace of King's travels."
Source: "Bearing the Cross", by David Garrow, p. 375.
Ralph Abernathy: "Martin and I were away more often than we were at home; and while this was no excuse for extramarital relations, it was a reason. Some men are better able to bear such deprivations than others, though all of us in SCLC headquarters had our weak moments. We all understood and believed in the biblical prohibition against sex outside of marriage. It was just that he had a particularly difficult time with that temptation.
As a part of its surveillance activities, the FBI did document some sexual encounters involving Martin Luther King.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
What's up with the obsession to compare VPW with men of Biblical or historical note?
So far he's been likened to David, The Apostle Paul and now Dr. King.
I think he's more like Harold Hill from Meredith Wilson's The Music Man.
Except that in The Music Man, Harold has a change of heart and everybody lives happily ever after.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
And both messages are viewed both with admiration and disdain - depending on who you speak to.
White Dove and Oldies,
I see one major problem with this line of thinking. While both men may have committed the same 'sins' - and both had a "great message" (at least in your eyes), all that proves is that it is possible for a man with some "great ideas" to also partake in wrongdoing.
All this is said while I consider that MLK moved a nation to change - while VP only moved a bunch of us to purchase more camping equipment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
for years i have personally been saying the problem (for me wasn't) with adultery
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Hmmm...seems to me that to have that in common with someone is personally embarrassing but for others to know that you had it in common and were talking about it 20+ years after you had died is pathetic.
Since we are speaking of things in common Dooj noted:
The same could be said for Marx, Hitler, Paul the Apostle and Jesus the Christ. But I am fairly certain that the last three were not adulterers...I could be wrong. But they all had a message that someone thought was worth listening to. So lots of folks have stuff in common...BFD...can we get back to the topic now?
BTW, I still have my camping gear. I'm not sure what that means... :blink:
Edited by EyesopenLink to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Hi Rascal, I'm just getting back and am now reading this about five days out of it.... :blink:
But you're most welcome....I've learned....that Jesus knew what He was talking about :)
Edited by brideofjcLink to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
or a p rick ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
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.