To clarify.....I didn't post saying Lamsa was right or that I was in support of VP and I clearly said that in the post....I stated that I was writing the post to indicate WHERE VP got the idea and only included a quote from Lamsa's website for people who had never heard of him....which is no indication as to his correctness.
Clearly I stated I'm no researcher nor do I know anything about the Eastern vs the Western interpretation.
To clarify.....I didn't post saying Lamsa was right or that I was in support of VP and I clearly said that in the post....I stated that I was writing the post to indicate WHERE VP got the idea and only included a quote from Lamsa's website for people who had never heard of him....which is no indication as to his correctness.
Clearly I stated I'm no researcher nor do I know anything about the Eastern vs the Western interpretation.
I didn't say you did.
What sticks out to me (now as I'm a bit older) is how quickly I was willing to latch onto the "out there" beliefs.
The Church Lamsa refers to as "Eastern" is actually Nestorian, a very small branch of Eastern which held a view of Christ that the rest of the church believed is heretical.
Lamsa himself was not just Nestorian- he was "New Thought," which we know as Christian Science or Unity School of Christianity (USOC). It holds a metaphysical interpretation of the Bible far different from either TWI or orthodox Christianity. He spoke at USOC events and had his office on their campus in Kansas City.
From the standpoint of Church history, the "eastern" church is primarily Greek-speaking and covers an area including Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Turkey and all points east of there. This includes today primary the Eastern Orthodox Churches which go by ethnic names- Greek Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, etc. The western church is Latin speaking, primarily the Roman Catholic Church, and the Protestants as their descendants from a historical point of view.
None of the Eastern Churches hold to Lamsa's New Thought idea of "for this I was spared," because it is not accurate in either Greek or Aramaic/ Syriac.
what about *mr* w's claim about the bibles? That the versions headed for export have "for this purpose was I spared" and us lowly westerns getting the other version?
he then launched into a tirade about how the translators were cowards.. needed to grow a backbone..
asides from the lamsa version, I have never been able to find any more..
where are these versions? What are their names? Are they just hiding out some where?
At this point, I think it was one more of vics delusional melodramatic episodes intended only to stoke up more sensationalism..
Remember the fig tree that supposedly died in the wrong direction? Wierwille said that Jesus wasn't really hungry, "he just wanted a snack, like when you and I want a pack of gum."
All PFAL books destined for sale in The West say "a pack of gum", while all PFAL books destined for sale in The East say "a dab of hummus." (In the southern states of the good old U.S.A., it's "a side order of cole slaw.")
honestly.. who would want a snack.. like a pack of gum..
"wtf" is with that?
when I think "snack".. I think of some kind of semi partial (or at least potential) sustenance..
Normally.. even in yesterdays terms.. why would one want (not a whole, but the top couple of slabs of) a pack of gum..? Sustenance? filling one's belly with less that a gram of sugar, several milligrams of some kind of aromatic chemical.. and an inedible base?
Well, I'm not a tree expert, but I'm pretty sure trees can die either way, depending on the cause.
Anyhow, Jesus walks up to this tree 'cause "he's hungry for a snack, like when you and i want a pack of gum." Oops! No gum. (I think it might have actually been a gum tree.) So, he says, "I'll teach you not to have any gum. Die, sucker!" Next thing you know, it's kindling for the campfire ring.
Seriously, though, you have to ask yourself why Jesus would curse the tree for not having fruit when he knew that it wasn't time for fruit to be on the tree. Wierwille's explanation was that Jesus knew there should at least be buds on the tree and that the buds make a good snack. Do fig buds make a good snack? Where did VP get this idea that fig buds were a viable "snack food"?
Maybe they are. I don't know. But, I don't think Wierwille knew either. I think he just pulled this stuff out of his azz.
Unripe figs aren't worth eating any more than a green peach (or any other green fruit outside of an avocado). Not many people have ever had a fresh fig. We have 2 kinds of fig trees in our yard. The fruit is nothing whatsoever like the dried figs in fig newtons, just as raisins are nothing like fresh grapes. Pink and white flesh, many tiny seeds inside, sort of sticky inside. A thin, velvety, edible skin.
But the point wasn't whether or not it was the season. The point is that the fig tree (like the olive tree) stood for Israel, which was fruitless, faithless, worthless even after God waited a thousand years for it to produce. The same message, though more vivid, as Jesus' story about a fruitless tree and the gardener telling the owner to wait one more year to see if it would bear before it would be cut down. (Which indirectly is an argument for at least a 2 year ministry for Jesus).
where are these versions? What are their names?... At this point, I think it was one more of vics delusional melodramatic episodes intended only to stoke up more sensationalism..
another case of taking a metafor and trying to say it was an actual event.... Didn't VP teach that in at least one of those PFAL classes that many times people were taking easternisms and or metafors and teaching them as an incident.... so he breaks his won rule?
OF course he is breaking his own rule.. he is der man o gawd and is so holy his doodooo don't stink and he can do what ever he wants cause he is so on der word!
Okay my Rant is over.. this kind of stuff when I read it just makes me angry at him for what he did but more importantly at me for being so Naive that I fell for it!
Recommended Posts
newlife
Tzaia.......
To clarify.....I didn't post saying Lamsa was right or that I was in support of VP and I clearly said that in the post....I stated that I was writing the post to indicate WHERE VP got the idea and only included a quote from Lamsa's website for people who had never heard of him....which is no indication as to his correctness.
Clearly I stated I'm no researcher nor do I know anything about the Eastern vs the Western interpretation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tzaia
I didn't say you did.
What sticks out to me (now as I'm a bit older) is how quickly I was willing to latch onto the "out there" beliefs.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
The Church Lamsa refers to as "Eastern" is actually Nestorian, a very small branch of Eastern which held a view of Christ that the rest of the church believed is heretical.
Lamsa himself was not just Nestorian- he was "New Thought," which we know as Christian Science or Unity School of Christianity (USOC). It holds a metaphysical interpretation of the Bible far different from either TWI or orthodox Christianity. He spoke at USOC events and had his office on their campus in Kansas City.
From the standpoint of Church history, the "eastern" church is primarily Greek-speaking and covers an area including Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Turkey and all points east of there. This includes today primary the Eastern Orthodox Churches which go by ethnic names- Greek Orthodox, Serbian Orthodox, etc. The western church is Latin speaking, primarily the Roman Catholic Church, and the Protestants as their descendants from a historical point of view.
None of the Eastern Churches hold to Lamsa's New Thought idea of "for this I was spared," because it is not accurate in either Greek or Aramaic/ Syriac.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Thanks for your contribution John J..
what about *mr* w's claim about the bibles? That the versions headed for export have "for this purpose was I spared" and us lowly westerns getting the other version?
he then launched into a tirade about how the translators were cowards.. needed to grow a backbone..
asides from the lamsa version, I have never been able to find any more..
where are these versions? What are their names? Are they just hiding out some where?
At this point, I think it was one more of vics delusional melodramatic episodes intended only to stoke up more sensationalism..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Remember the fig tree that supposedly died in the wrong direction? Wierwille said that Jesus wasn't really hungry, "he just wanted a snack, like when you and I want a pack of gum."
All PFAL books destined for sale in The West say "a pack of gum", while all PFAL books destined for sale in The East say "a dab of hummus." (In the southern states of the good old U.S.A., it's "a side order of cole slaw.")
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
honestly.. who would want a snack.. like a pack of gum..
"wtf" is with that?
when I think "snack".. I think of some kind of semi partial (or at least potential) sustenance..
Normally.. even in yesterdays terms.. why would one want (not a whole, but the top couple of slabs of) a pack of gum..? Sustenance? filling one's belly with less that a gram of sugar, several milligrams of some kind of aromatic chemical.. and an inedible base?
maybe he just had bad breath or something..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Well, I'm not a tree expert, but I'm pretty sure trees can die either way, depending on the cause.
Anyhow, Jesus walks up to this tree 'cause "he's hungry for a snack, like when you and i want a pack of gum." Oops! No gum. (I think it might have actually been a gum tree.) So, he says, "I'll teach you not to have any gum. Die, sucker!" Next thing you know, it's kindling for the campfire ring.
Seriously, though, you have to ask yourself why Jesus would curse the tree for not having fruit when he knew that it wasn't time for fruit to be on the tree. Wierwille's explanation was that Jesus knew there should at least be buds on the tree and that the buds make a good snack. Do fig buds make a good snack? Where did VP get this idea that fig buds were a viable "snack food"?
Maybe they are. I don't know. But, I don't think Wierwille knew either. I think he just pulled this stuff out of his azz.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
Unripe figs aren't worth eating any more than a green peach (or any other green fruit outside of an avocado). Not many people have ever had a fresh fig. We have 2 kinds of fig trees in our yard. The fruit is nothing whatsoever like the dried figs in fig newtons, just as raisins are nothing like fresh grapes. Pink and white flesh, many tiny seeds inside, sort of sticky inside. A thin, velvety, edible skin.
But the point wasn't whether or not it was the season. The point is that the fig tree (like the olive tree) stood for Israel, which was fruitless, faithless, worthless even after God waited a thousand years for it to produce. The same message, though more vivid, as Jesus' story about a fruitless tree and the gardener telling the owner to wait one more year to see if it would bear before it would be cut down. (Which indirectly is an argument for at least a 2 year ministry for Jesus).
delusional, melodramatic, sensationalism....
plagiarism, stupidism, falsism....
excellent descriptions of most of VP's stuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites
leafytwiglet
another case of taking a metafor and trying to say it was an actual event.... Didn't VP teach that in at least one of those PFAL classes that many times people were taking easternisms and or metafors and teaching them as an incident.... so he breaks his won rule?
Okay my Rant is over.. this kind of stuff when I read it just makes me angry at him for what he did but more importantly at me for being so Naive that I fell for it!
Edited by leafytwigletLink 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.