speaking of using multiple reference points for learning consider the words of Sir Isaac Newton:
"If i have seen farther than others it is because i have stood upon the shoulders of giants."
~~
there's a sense of honesty and humility in the above statement.....and i think that's how advances, improvements, inventions, and discoveries in any field usually come about .... the world isn't a one man show. people build upon the work of others - people collaborate with others.
now vp's ticket to fame & fortune was a little different...he looked over the shoulders of others, plagiarizing like it was going out of style......and claimed God taught him that stuff.
One center of reference for truth? How do you get something as big as "the truth" squeezed into one little box? No, I think you find bits and pieces of truth all around you if you keep your mind open to possibility and change. And, it's not a constant. It evolves and grows, much like a tiny seed grows into a mighty Redwood. (It's always a Redwood throughout the entire process. It simply takes on differing forms.)
Some might argue that Jesus is the only truth because of what he said in John 6:14. But, if one is to interpret that verse as such, it follows suit that he must be the only Way, as well. So, then, The Way (ministry) had no business calling itself The Way, if that verse is to be interpreted literally.
The purpose of believing there is only one constant truth, is to allow the mind to cope with conflicting ideas. The human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time so it reaches a sort of compromise between the two. That's called resolving cognitive dissonance. PFAL provided that compromise. It provided a way to ease that uncomfortable feeling, as long as one was willing to forgo critical thinking in exchange for commitment to PFAL prescribed doctrine. Critical thinking and careful reconsideration is the antidote. For some people, the cure is more painful than the ailment.
In some circles truth is thought of as a language distortion called nominalization (definition).
Put simply, nominalization is a process disguised as a event, a verb wearing the clothes of a noun. For example, you can't hold ability in your hand, or to use a well worn example, "You can't heat up love in a test tube and have a test tube of hot love."
In this case, there is no truth (one absolute thing), there are only things that are true (a constant process of finding out through testing and critical thinking).
quote: One center of reference for truth? How do you get something as big as "the truth" squeezed into one little box? No, I think you find bits and pieces of truth all around you if you keep your mind open to possibility and change. And, it's not a constant. It evolves and grows, much like a tiny seed grows into a mighty Redwood. (It's always a Redwood throughout the entire process. It simply takes on differing forms.)
The word 'truth' has more than one shade of meaning. Truth is the opposite of lies, which are spoken; fact is the opposite of fiction, which is written.
In a court of law, a witness must swear to tell the truth (speak it). In this meaning, truth is relative, limited by the understanding and intents of the person speaking the "truth".
The more biblical meaning of truth is that which is the same yesterday, today, and forever, Jesus Christ. That truth doesn't evolve and grow; it's absolute.
It is difficult to pin down the difference between relative truth and absolute truth, since both are woven together in many conversations (threads), but consider that in Matt. 4 and Luke 4 when Jesus was tempted by the devil, 5 of the 6 times he says "it is written" (truth), but one time he says "it is said". Perhaps our relative truth, that which we hold together with points of reference, should lean heavily on the written absolute truth, Jesus Christ.
The word 'truth' has more than one shade of meaning. Truth is the opposite of lies, which are spoken; fact is the opposite of fiction, which is written.
Been reading Crabbe's Synonyms and Antonyms?
I don't believe truth and facts are as easily demarked as you say.
Cleveland is located in Ohio--a fact, written down has nothing to do with it.
Barack Obama is the president of the United States--again a fact, written down has noting to do with it.
If there's any demarkation between truth and facts its: truth is a nominalization based on facts.
[quote name=johniam' date='21 March 2011 - 07:00 PM' timestamp='1300748442' post='5254
The more biblical meaning of truth is that which is the same yesterday, today, and forever, Jesus Christ. That truth doesn't evolve and grow; it's absolute.
The premise you are presenting here is that, because John 14:6 says that Jesus is ...the truth and Hebrews 13:8 says he is the same yesterday, tomorrow and forever, that Jesus is absolute truth. Using this same premise, we can say that because John 14 says that Jesus is... the way and Hebrews says he is the same yesterday, today and forever, The Way (ministry) must be Jesus Christ, himself. I'm sure you're not saying that, are you?
It is difficult to pin down the difference between relative truth and absolute truth, since both are woven together in many conversations (threads), but consider that in Matt. 4 and Luke 4 when Jesus was tempted by the devil, 5 of the 6 times he says "it is written" (truth), but one time he says "it is said". Perhaps our relative truth, that which we hold together with points of reference, should lean heavily on the written absolute truth, Jesus Christ.
This one has me a bit stumped. Did you mean to say Jesus Christ is the written absolute truth? Or, am I reading this incorrectly? What are you talking about? I don't want to assume...but, I am unsure of what you mean by that statement.
When Jesus was tempted....Satan spoke the truth. He didn't misquote the OT. When Jesus answered him....Jesus spoke the truth. Both were speaking the truth...Both were handling the truth but, what was the difference?
Was one handling it deceitfully? Was one trying to use the truth for his own gain?
Jesus is the word in the flesh.
There are many ways to handle and understand the written word... One can manipulate the written word, but the person of Jesus Christ is unchanging. We can't manipulate Him, change Him, or redefine Him, ....it doesn't work like that. That leads no where but to an empty faith and a different "truth".
Johniam, Jesus will define Himself and truth for us when we humble ourselves before Him, and we submit to Him. It doesn't work the other way around. We are in relationship to Jesus, not the bible. The bible, we can define any way we wish.....when Jesus is our Lord....He defines truth for us. Does that make sense to you? We had it backward in TWI. We were telling God what truth was instead of letting Him tell us. It is the Holy Spirit who leads us into all truth, not we operating the Holy Spirit. Backwards...we had it wrong.
I dunno. Can't a mature mind deal with conflicting ideas, without figuratively going off the deep end?
Why is it so urgent, and IMPORTANT.. that everything one perceives.. fits into finely defined and crafted cabinets..
Why is it so important? Because it scares us to think otherwise. That puts us out of control, and out of our push-button world. Things could change at any second and we can't stand the thought that we will not be ready for it. That's what I think, anyway.
One center of reference for truth? How do you get something as big as "the truth" squeezed into one little box? No, I think you find bits and pieces of truth all around you if you keep your mind open to possibility and change. And, it's not a constant. It evolves and grows, much like a tiny seed grows into a mighty Redwood. (It's always a Redwood throughout the entire process. It simply takes on differing forms.)
Some might argue that Jesus is the only truth because of what he said in John 6:14. But, if one is to interpret that verse as such, it follows suit that he must be the only Way, as well. So, then, The Way (ministry) had no business calling itself The Way, if that verse is to be interpreted literally.
The purpose of believing there is only one constant truth, is to allow the mind to cope with conflicting ideas. The human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time so it reaches a sort of compromise between the two. That's called resolving cognitive dissonance. PFAL provided that compromise. It provided a way to ease that uncomfortable feeling, as long as one was willing to forgo critical thinking in exchange for commitment to PFAL prescribed doctrine. Critical thinking and careful reconsideration is the antidote. For some people, the cure is more painful than the ailment.
I believe there are absolute truths that are constant. They only seem to evolve because we change over our years. You say the human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time. Are you referencing some scientific study, or is that your opinion? Is that just us western thinkers? I'm not being contentious, here, I would really like to know. The reason I'm asking is because I've learned that certain truths that appear to us to be opposing each other are in fact real at times. We humans often think very linear. We often fail, or are unable to grasp everything that is going on around us. Moreover I think there are some schools of thought that recognize two opposing thoughts can both be true, like the "ying" and the "yang". Then again, I may not fully understand the concept of "ying" and "yang".
The "truth" was that the heavens revolved round the earth.
Then Copernicus and other astronomers and thinkers showed othewise. Copernicus was persecuted by the church for his heretical belief. (In fact, he's only recently been "forgiven"!)
Did the truth change? No.
But human understanding did.
Likewise other things that appear to be in conflict as "truths" may not conflict at all, when we have a bigger picture, more information. But we will never have all information. Therefore, our understanding is always going to be imperfect.
Wasn't it Bride of JC who used to have a tagline, "Truth is not a 'what' but a 'who'"?
. You say the human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time. Are you referencing some scientific study, or is that your opinion? Is that just us western thinkers? I'm not being contentious, here, I would really like to know.
Sorry, I probably should have noted that i "hid" THIS link in my post. (post #155)
quote: You say the human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time.
Dissonance is a good word here. It's a musical term. In the most PG rated music, a simple minor chord is technically a dissonance. In deeper music, a dissonance can be resolved by a lesser dissonance. Each mind entertains thoughts differently. VP said that when 2 clear and plain duties conflict, then one has to decide which to perform and which to neglect.
quote:
When Jesus was tempted....Satan spoke the truth. He didn't misquote the OT.
Actually, he did. The original scripture read...
Ps.91:11,12 - For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways; they shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.
The devil said...
He shall give his angels charge over thee; to keep thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
The devil omitted in all thy ways and he added at any time. According to Matt. he also omitted to keep thee. The only reason you even know who Jesus is is because it is written. That was Jesus' standard in dealing with the devil himself. That's good enough for me.
vp said.. vp said. vp said what? What I don't understand is how you can't see he lived a LIFE of dissonance. "preach da word" on one hand, "screw the sheep" on the other. "humble" and "unassuming" in public on one hand.. and in more private settings, a tyrant, and one who thrived on praise and attention on the other..
a "founder" and "researcher" as far a persona on one side.. but a thief and plagiarist and worse on the other.
"nothing but da word" on one hand, then a hater of the Word on the other (biblically justifying alcoholism, adultery, rape, extreme opulence and the like..)
"vp said". Is THAT your "soapboax"? The words of vic are holy or something?
P said that when 2 clear and plain duties conflict, then one has to decide which to perform and which to neglect.
when two "duties" are clear. Do I take advantage of my position, and mercilessly screw or worse those "under my charge", or not..
When Jesus was tempted....Satan spoke the truth. He didn't misquote the OT.
Actually, he did. The original scripture read...
Ps.91:11,12 - For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways; they shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.
The devil said...
He shall give his angels charge over thee; to keep thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
The devil omitted in all thy ways and he added at any time. According to Matt. he also omitted to keep thee. The only reason you even know who Jesus is is because it is written. That was Jesus' standard in dealing with the devil himself. That's good enough for me.
Actually, I knew very little about Jesus from reading about Him johniam...for me, it took hearing about Him from someone not in a cult to begin to know Him. It was a true Christian without a malevolent and aberrant understanding who had to confront me and help me. It took the Lord Himself calling me, the Holy Spirit showing me, and the will of God to reach me. It took undoing years of looking at the scriptures with a peculiar focus and odd understanding to begin to know Him. I was blinded to Him in scripture because of VP's teachings and where he lead me to focus. You are not going to like this, but, it took me suffering by being broken....for the Lord to rescue me from TWI.
James and Jude knew Jesus personally. . . they were His brothers. They grew up with Him....they went to temple with Him.....they had the same mother. They knew who He was, in an intimate and personal way. They saw the miracles He did with their own eyes. James was very devout and he knew the scriptures. However, he didn't know the Lord. It took them both seeing Jesus resurrected before they believed who He was. James was so humbled that he referred to himself as a slave of Jesus Christ.
I was in TWI for too long a time, and I know what they taught.....which is why I mentioned it to you.
It wasn't a game of retemory gotcha they were playing in Matt 4 & Luke 4. I remember how VP got us to focus on those kinds of things. Do you think Satan doesn't know or understand what the scriptures say? Satan has a more orthodox understanding of the scriptures than you do, and he wasn't purposely misquoting it here....nor was the focus "It is written" .
The relevance is that the scripture said God would protect Jesus if He jumped...the devil was tempting Him to specifically jump. The devil told Him what the scripture said in relation to the temptation. Satan was correct.
Satan was trying to get Jesus to tempt God and to avoid suffering. Jesus could have jumped and God would have protected Him. Satan was absolutely right in what he said, but the result of jumping would have been to have cast doubt on and challenge God's faithfulness.
Satan was going after God and relationship...not...it is written.
If you look at the temptations, putting aside the way VP got us to focus on ..."It is written" for just a minute...you will find...that technically Satan was right in his quotations.
Jesus could have done all of these things according to scripture. He had the power and Satan was trying to get Him to use it. Jesus did use it a few chapters later when He multiplied loaves and fishes. Angels did come minister to Jesus when the temptations were over. There is so much more depth to it, but I can't even begin to share it with you, I know you would not hear me. Maybe the next time you read this passage you can consider it in light of Satan trying to get Jesus to avoid suffering and the Cross. I would really love to be able to genuinely discuss scripture with you, but sadly, we really do not share a common faith. That breaks my heart.
False teachers don't quote from the Koran. They use the bible and they quote it and tell you exactly what it says. You can look at what they are saying and think.."Yeah, it does say that". Technically they can be right. However, they are also very wrong at the same time. False teachers give us another understanding of right scripture. It is very subtle and difficult to see if we are isolated from Christians and indoctrinated in focus. They give us another gospel, even if they preach the same words, use the same version, and have the same cadence in their voice! They give us another Jesus...even though they use the same scriptures to define Him.....and we can receive another spirit because of this.
Paul said false Apostles were like their father the devil....and he compares them to the serpent. Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. If I were you, which I am not :) ......I would be less concerned in looking for Satan in a therapists office and more concerned by finding him to be the one who has preached the gospel to you.
quote: I would really love to be able to genuinely discuss scripture with you, but sadly, we really do not share a common faith. That breaks my heart.
I said earlier that we are not going to connect. When you posted (wherever that was) that you don't believe you were Christian in twi you lost all credibility with me. I will read your posts, but your premises I don't agree with. I think that anybody who SIT in session 12 (or anywhere else, for that matter) is born again of God's spirit and is going to be in the gathering together. I know you don't believe that, but hopefully we'll laugh at this stuff someday.
quote: I would really love to be able to genuinely discuss scripture with you, but sadly, we really do not share a common faith. That breaks my heart.
I said earlier that we are not going to connect. When you posted (wherever that was) that you don't believe you were Christian in twi you lost all credibility with me. I will read your posts, but your premises I don't agree with. I think that anybody who SIT in session 12 (or anywhere else, for that matter) is born again of God's spirit and is going to be in the gathering together. I know you don't believe that, but hopefully we'll laugh at this stuff someday.
So, you don't think someone can fake speaking in tongues? Even Wierwille said in The Way Living in Love that he faked it when some people tried to lead him into it (claims he spoke in Greek and then Hebrew). What prevents a demon mimicking a language that we don't understand? Do you think that every class instructor was qualified enough to know if a tongue was genuine or fake?
There have been others who have claimed they faked speaking in tongues while in TWI and it went undetected for years.
I also think it rather sad that you come to a site like this and then state that as far as your concerned someone has no credibility because they claim they did not receive the new birth in TWI. Frankly, I find it hard to believe when someone tells me they were led into the new birth as a result of TWI teaching. Yet, I don't bring their credibility into question. This is an arrogant attitude on your part.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
39
40
46
44
Popular Days
Mar 11
55
Mar 29
34
Mar 16
23
Mar 21
22
Top Posters In This Topic
johniam 39 posts
Ham 40 posts
waysider 46 posts
So_crates 44 posts
Popular Days
Mar 11 2011
55 posts
Mar 29 2011
34 posts
Mar 16 2011
23 posts
Mar 21 2011
22 posts
Popular Posts
waysider
"I could use the same argument when sex abuse victims tell their stories. I could say that in India it's still possible for a husband to find his wife not pleasing and have her burned. That twi sex ab
WordWolf
Sounds like you have a LOT of different "they's". Are "they" all one big "they", or are there many independent "theys" that lack specific names? "They" is INCREDIBLY vague- and thus INCREDIBLY CONV
waysider
Posted Images
Twinky
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
uhm........er........paying off the student loan i took out for the Way College at Rome City?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
speaking of using multiple reference points for learning consider the words of Sir Isaac Newton:
"If i have seen farther than others it is because i have stood upon the shoulders of giants."
~~
there's a sense of honesty and humility in the above statement.....and i think that's how advances, improvements, inventions, and discoveries in any field usually come about .... the world isn't a one man show. people build upon the work of others - people collaborate with others.
now vp's ticket to fame & fortune was a little different...he looked over the shoulders of others, plagiarizing like it was going out of style......and claimed God taught him that stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
One center of reference for truth? How do you get something as big as "the truth" squeezed into one little box? No, I think you find bits and pieces of truth all around you if you keep your mind open to possibility and change. And, it's not a constant. It evolves and grows, much like a tiny seed grows into a mighty Redwood. (It's always a Redwood throughout the entire process. It simply takes on differing forms.)
Some might argue that Jesus is the only truth because of what he said in John 6:14. But, if one is to interpret that verse as such, it follows suit that he must be the only Way, as well. So, then, The Way (ministry) had no business calling itself The Way, if that verse is to be interpreted literally.
The purpose of believing there is only one constant truth, is to allow the mind to cope with conflicting ideas. The human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time so it reaches a sort of compromise between the two. That's called resolving cognitive dissonance. PFAL provided that compromise. It provided a way to ease that uncomfortable feeling, as long as one was willing to forgo critical thinking in exchange for commitment to PFAL prescribed doctrine. Critical thinking and careful reconsideration is the antidote. For some people, the cure is more painful than the ailment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I dunno. Can't a mature mind deal with conflicting ideas, without figuratively going off the deep end?
Why is it so urgent, and IMPORTANT.. that everything one perceives.. fits into finely defined and crafted cabinets..
its easier to admit that everything one believes is just plain wrong..
well. I think it WILL happen. If not now, eventually..
If you believe in some kind of judgment.. one look into the Creator's eye.. and everything you thought will be shown to be false..
and when it all burns away, it does not really hurt..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
In some circles truth is thought of as a language distortion called nominalization (definition).
Put simply, nominalization is a process disguised as a event, a verb wearing the clothes of a noun. For example, you can't hold ability in your hand, or to use a well worn example, "You can't heat up love in a test tube and have a test tube of hot love."
In this case, there is no truth (one absolute thing), there are only things that are true (a constant process of finding out through testing and critical thinking).
SoCrates
Edited by So_cratesLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: One center of reference for truth? How do you get something as big as "the truth" squeezed into one little box? No, I think you find bits and pieces of truth all around you if you keep your mind open to possibility and change. And, it's not a constant. It evolves and grows, much like a tiny seed grows into a mighty Redwood. (It's always a Redwood throughout the entire process. It simply takes on differing forms.)
The word 'truth' has more than one shade of meaning. Truth is the opposite of lies, which are spoken; fact is the opposite of fiction, which is written.
In a court of law, a witness must swear to tell the truth (speak it). In this meaning, truth is relative, limited by the understanding and intents of the person speaking the "truth".
The more biblical meaning of truth is that which is the same yesterday, today, and forever, Jesus Christ. That truth doesn't evolve and grow; it's absolute.
It is difficult to pin down the difference between relative truth and absolute truth, since both are woven together in many conversations (threads), but consider that in Matt. 4 and Luke 4 when Jesus was tempted by the devil, 5 of the 6 times he says "it is written" (truth), but one time he says "it is said". Perhaps our relative truth, that which we hold together with points of reference, should lean heavily on the written absolute truth, Jesus Christ.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
So_crates
Been reading Crabbe's Synonyms and Antonyms?
I don't believe truth and facts are as easily demarked as you say.
Cleveland is located in Ohio--a fact, written down has nothing to do with it.
Barack Obama is the president of the United States--again a fact, written down has noting to do with it.
If there's any demarkation between truth and facts its: truth is a nominalization based on facts.
SoCrates
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
[quote name=johniam' date='21 March 2011 - 07:00 PM' timestamp='1300748442' post='5254
The more biblical meaning of truth is that which is the same yesterday, today, and forever, Jesus Christ. That truth doesn't evolve and grow; it's absolute.
This is an extrapolation.
The premise you are presenting here is that, because John 14:6 says that Jesus is ...the truth and Hebrews 13:8 says he is the same yesterday, tomorrow and forever, that Jesus is absolute truth. Using this same premise, we can say that because John 14 says that Jesus is... the way and Hebrews says he is the same yesterday, today and forever, The Way (ministry) must be Jesus Christ, himself. I'm sure you're not saying that, are you?
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
If truth does not evolve or grow.. its dead, isn't it?
but that's not what you are saying, or is it?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
This one has me a bit stumped. Did you mean to say Jesus Christ is the written absolute truth? Or, am I reading this incorrectly? What are you talking about? I don't want to assume...but, I am unsure of what you mean by that statement.
When Jesus was tempted....Satan spoke the truth. He didn't misquote the OT. When Jesus answered him....Jesus spoke the truth. Both were speaking the truth...Both were handling the truth but, what was the difference?
Was one handling it deceitfully? Was one trying to use the truth for his own gain?
Jesus is the word in the flesh.
There are many ways to handle and understand the written word... One can manipulate the written word, but the person of Jesus Christ is unchanging. We can't manipulate Him, change Him, or redefine Him, ....it doesn't work like that. That leads no where but to an empty faith and a different "truth".
Johniam, Jesus will define Himself and truth for us when we humble ourselves before Him, and we submit to Him. It doesn't work the other way around. We are in relationship to Jesus, not the bible. The bible, we can define any way we wish.....when Jesus is our Lord....He defines truth for us. Does that make sense to you? We had it backward in TWI. We were telling God what truth was instead of letting Him tell us. It is the Holy Spirit who leads us into all truth, not we operating the Holy Spirit. Backwards...we had it wrong.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Why is it so important? Because it scares us to think otherwise. That puts us out of control, and out of our push-button world. Things could change at any second and we can't stand the thought that we will not be ready for it. That's what I think, anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
I believe there are absolute truths that are constant. They only seem to evolve because we change over our years. You say the human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time. Are you referencing some scientific study, or is that your opinion? Is that just us western thinkers? I'm not being contentious, here, I would really like to know. The reason I'm asking is because I've learned that certain truths that appear to us to be opposing each other are in fact real at times. We humans often think very linear. We often fail, or are unable to grasp everything that is going on around us. Moreover I think there are some schools of thought that recognize two opposing thoughts can both be true, like the "ying" and the "yang". Then again, I may not fully understand the concept of "ying" and "yang".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Spoken by a man who is comfortable with all of the "shades of meaning" TWI provides under the label "truth".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Isn't THAT the truth!
Really though, that is such a good point. I can relate to that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Does "truth" change?
Or is it simply our understanding that changes?
The "truth" was that the heavens revolved round the earth.
Then Copernicus and other astronomers and thinkers showed othewise. Copernicus was persecuted by the church for his heretical belief. (In fact, he's only recently been "forgiven"!)
Did the truth change? No.
But human understanding did.
Likewise other things that appear to be in conflict as "truths" may not conflict at all, when we have a bigger picture, more information. But we will never have all information. Therefore, our understanding is always going to be imperfect.
Wasn't it Bride of JC who used to have a tagline, "Truth is not a 'what' but a 'who'"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Sorry, I probably should have noted that i "hid" THIS link in my post. (post #155)
Here is another link, as well.
http://www.ithaca.edu/faculty/stephens/cdback.html
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: You say the human mind does not like to entertain two opposing thoughts at the same time.
Dissonance is a good word here. It's a musical term. In the most PG rated music, a simple minor chord is technically a dissonance. In deeper music, a dissonance can be resolved by a lesser dissonance. Each mind entertains thoughts differently. VP said that when 2 clear and plain duties conflict, then one has to decide which to perform and which to neglect.
quote:
When Jesus was tempted....Satan spoke the truth. He didn't misquote the OT.
Actually, he did. The original scripture read...
Ps.91:11,12 - For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways; they shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.
The devil said...
He shall give his angels charge over thee; to keep thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
The devil omitted in all thy ways and he added at any time. According to Matt. he also omitted to keep thee. The only reason you even know who Jesus is is because it is written. That was Jesus' standard in dealing with the devil himself. That's good enough for me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
vp said.. vp said. vp said what? What I don't understand is how you can't see he lived a LIFE of dissonance. "preach da word" on one hand, "screw the sheep" on the other. "humble" and "unassuming" in public on one hand.. and in more private settings, a tyrant, and one who thrived on praise and attention on the other..
a "founder" and "researcher" as far a persona on one side.. but a thief and plagiarist and worse on the other.
"nothing but da word" on one hand, then a hater of the Word on the other (biblically justifying alcoholism, adultery, rape, extreme opulence and the like..)
"vp said". Is THAT your "soapboax"? The words of vic are holy or something?
when two "duties" are clear. Do I take advantage of my position, and mercilessly screw or worse those "under my charge", or not..
isn't that a plain enough "duty"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Actually, I knew very little about Jesus from reading about Him johniam...for me, it took hearing about Him from someone not in a cult to begin to know Him. It was a true Christian without a malevolent and aberrant understanding who had to confront me and help me. It took the Lord Himself calling me, the Holy Spirit showing me, and the will of God to reach me. It took undoing years of looking at the scriptures with a peculiar focus and odd understanding to begin to know Him. I was blinded to Him in scripture because of VP's teachings and where he lead me to focus. You are not going to like this, but, it took me suffering by being broken....for the Lord to rescue me from TWI.
James and Jude knew Jesus personally. . . they were His brothers. They grew up with Him....they went to temple with Him.....they had the same mother. They knew who He was, in an intimate and personal way. They saw the miracles He did with their own eyes. James was very devout and he knew the scriptures. However, he didn't know the Lord. It took them both seeing Jesus resurrected before they believed who He was. James was so humbled that he referred to himself as a slave of Jesus Christ.
I was in TWI for too long a time, and I know what they taught.....which is why I mentioned it to you.
It wasn't a game of retemory gotcha they were playing in Matt 4 & Luke 4. I remember how VP got us to focus on those kinds of things. Do you think Satan doesn't know or understand what the scriptures say? Satan has a more orthodox understanding of the scriptures than you do, and he wasn't purposely misquoting it here....nor was the focus "It is written" .
The relevance is that the scripture said God would protect Jesus if He jumped...the devil was tempting Him to specifically jump. The devil told Him what the scripture said in relation to the temptation. Satan was correct.
Satan was trying to get Jesus to tempt God and to avoid suffering. Jesus could have jumped and God would have protected Him. Satan was absolutely right in what he said, but the result of jumping would have been to have cast doubt on and challenge God's faithfulness.
Satan was going after God and relationship...not...it is written.
If you look at the temptations, putting aside the way VP got us to focus on ..."It is written" for just a minute...you will find...that technically Satan was right in his quotations.
Jesus could have done all of these things according to scripture. He had the power and Satan was trying to get Him to use it. Jesus did use it a few chapters later when He multiplied loaves and fishes. Angels did come minister to Jesus when the temptations were over. There is so much more depth to it, but I can't even begin to share it with you, I know you would not hear me. Maybe the next time you read this passage you can consider it in light of Satan trying to get Jesus to avoid suffering and the Cross. I would really love to be able to genuinely discuss scripture with you, but sadly, we really do not share a common faith. That breaks my heart.
False teachers don't quote from the Koran. They use the bible and they quote it and tell you exactly what it says. You can look at what they are saying and think.."Yeah, it does say that". Technically they can be right. However, they are also very wrong at the same time. False teachers give us another understanding of right scripture. It is very subtle and difficult to see if we are isolated from Christians and indoctrinated in focus. They give us another gospel, even if they preach the same words, use the same version, and have the same cadence in their voice! They give us another Jesus...even though they use the same scriptures to define Him.....and we can receive another spirit because of this.
Paul said false Apostles were like their father the devil....and he compares them to the serpent. Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. If I were you, which I am not :) ......I would be less concerned in looking for Satan in a therapists office and more concerned by finding him to be the one who has preached the gospel to you.
Edited by geisha779Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: I would really love to be able to genuinely discuss scripture with you, but sadly, we really do not share a common faith. That breaks my heart.
I said earlier that we are not going to connect. When you posted (wherever that was) that you don't believe you were Christian in twi you lost all credibility with me. I will read your posts, but your premises I don't agree with. I think that anybody who SIT in session 12 (or anywhere else, for that matter) is born again of God's spirit and is going to be in the gathering together. I know you don't believe that, but hopefully we'll laugh at this stuff someday.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
NOT sharing a common "faith" can be a very, very, good thing..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
So, you don't think someone can fake speaking in tongues? Even Wierwille said in The Way Living in Love that he faked it when some people tried to lead him into it (claims he spoke in Greek and then Hebrew). What prevents a demon mimicking a language that we don't understand? Do you think that every class instructor was qualified enough to know if a tongue was genuine or fake?
There have been others who have claimed they faked speaking in tongues while in TWI and it went undetected for years.
I also think it rather sad that you come to a site like this and then state that as far as your concerned someone has no credibility because they claim they did not receive the new birth in TWI. Frankly, I find it hard to believe when someone tells me they were led into the new birth as a result of TWI teaching. Yet, I don't bring their credibility into question. This is an arrogant attitude on your part.
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
that is the essence of the "soapbox" isn't it?
an arrogant superiority to our lowly mortals *small* dose of morals, etc., etc..?
da word of vic, properly applied, will wipe you clean..
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.