Thanks for your well-meaning post jetc57, you certainly seem sincere.
You did state a lot of things as facts, however, that I (in my opinion) would classify as opinion. We don't all agree on the value of the PFAL class, the "ministry" (if it even was a mionistry) or on Wierwille himself. That being said you are welcome to your opinion of all of the above.
Why pick apart each others' faults? Not to place blame, not to attack, but to continue to place the spotlight on an organization that is still doing harm, even though you or I may have left it and moved on with our lives. Same with living in the past. There are many people still in TWI who don't know a lot of this stuff, if one person leaves TWI because of Grease Spot, then it was all worth it...and more than one has.
You don't care what The Way is doing? That's your decision. They're still hurting people...so I care.
Thanks for your good intentions, and the road that they pave :D-->
jetc57..."We are all sinners, only difference is OUR decisions, Our Choices we make. For every decision we make, we have consequences."
And every consequences that come upon us sinners, we have to make decisions to determine what consequences that may come upon other sinners who make decisions that only make a difference OURs & OTHERS decisions.
sinners? in what way jetc57? Are we talking about not leaving the lid down on the toilet or a Hitlor type of sinner?
"Why don't we all continue to 'guard the mystery'?"
Guard it from who??? The adversary a Billions year old being who was once in the presence of god almighty as the angel of light? Sure I am with ya on that... tell me how can i guard this mystery... surely you have such revelation and proof this mystery you guard?
I must agree with Oakspear, many if not most of the things that that you presented as "facts" are simply your opinions.
To be to the point, your post seems kinda like an excuse for the despicable behavoir of men like Wierwille who used his self-appointed authority as God's spokespersons to sexually exploit those who looked up to them as Men of God.
I have heard "the all have sinned" rationalization/excuse so many times that it is almost sickening. Christian leaders should be held to the Biblical standards established for the positions they hold. No one is asking for sinlessness or perfection - just accountability. If they cannot meet those standards then they need to be removed from those positions.
You never gave a thought to the the human faults within TWI? --- Well, neither did many of the rest of us, and as a result TWI's leaders were pretty much given free reign to run roughshod over the lives of thousands and break up families and ruin the lives of many good folks. History tells us that religious leaders need to be held accountable - or abuses will abound. Casting the blind eye in the name of love is foolish.
What you call "pointing fingers" I call revealing the darkness that permeated TWI's core. - I do it not out of "bitterness" or "of living in the past" but instead out of concern for those who still subject themsleves to TWI current "wolves in sheeps clothing" and who may still be unaware of the despicable things done and taught by men such as Wierwille, Martindale and others.
You posted:
quote:I no longer care what the Way Ministry is doing, as long as they are telling others about the Good News of God's Unconditional Love and how we can all inherit the Kingdom
Jeanette this is kinda frightening to me. Do you have any clue at all what TWI is doing now? I bet not.
You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but don't expect your little sermon (as well intentioned as it may be) to be too well recieved.
Thanking John Lynn for his post and I appeciated hearing your points of view. I also enjoyed your teaching in Seattle WA several years ago. I also appreciate that you cared enough for years to keep in touch with me.
****
Whoa Whoa Whaa... are you talking about this lame post of his where he does not respond and has a courier... uhmmm oh my god...
jetc57 you really need to write JAL and have his courier post for ya. That's what JAL does.
Forgive me jetc57, JAL did actually respond to a post that jeff threaded for jal in angel doctrinal section, uhmmm almost like saltine crackers crumbled from a mouth full of the uncola or something like that...
uhmmm dig it
take it to JAL and maybe he will do a duo wit ya here... doubt it though...
your praises to JAL i am sure he notices another mouthfull of saltine crackers and milk...
I want to ask one little teenie tiny question... has JAL ever posted a reply this thread o his?
And his point is?
And his point to Paw is?
quote: John Lynn
GS Discoverer
posted July 29, 2004 19:23
Hi Folks.
God bless you one and all.
My dear pal Jeff recently informed me that he has been posting some things I've written in the past, and that it has stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest. At his suggestion, I had a nice visit with "PawTucket" by phone, and told him I'd be glad to make myself available to some degree, though probably not to the extent that will satisfy some of you. Let me clarify myself.
Jeannette said, "If we were in the WAY to watch its leaders and judge the actions of other 'sinners' and make THEM take the fall for your Decision making processes, then we are FOOLISH., and HAVE NOT LEARNED to Live God's Love. God is LOVE, Unconditional Love."
Jeannette, we do have the right, in America, to publish the fact that the person we lined ourselves up with and gave our very lives for his ministry, deceived us. And, yes, what he taught and how he taught the scriptures DID influence greatly how we made decisions--mostly according to how he said we should serve God is how we tried to serve God.
I do see this as liberating to speak about it with others who have been through the same thing, not as a negative experience.
While there is no hate for the people who taught me wrongly, there is regret for my choosing, once again, to align myself with them. But to say it never happened is to be untruthful to myself and others.
If it is wrong to expose seriously harmful practices by a group's leaders, what is right then? Be silent?
jetc57 quote:
"I do not believe VPW ever wanted others to Worship HIM, or think of HIM as the GREAT PROFIT."
I know it is a typo but the irony was just too good to pass up! :-) There certainly was great "profit" for them. LOL!
Taught the Word as it hadn't been known since the first century? Who taught all of the classes? Who was on more WayRag covers? Who ran the show? C'mon now, who's kidding whom? Sounds like he was running for the office to me.
Sooo... Just what did Wierwille teach that people might take to be "the Word of God as it has not been known since the first century"?
Could it have been "The Mystery" we have heard so much about? a period of time that was originally revealed first to the apostle Paul? knowledge of which was "lost" and then taught to Wierwille by God, if he would teach others also? that we have to "guard" against losing again?
Would it surprise you to know that there are mysteries recorded in the New Testament writings that were revealed to someone else before they were revealed to Paul?
For instance, the mystery that God was going to elevate Jesus of Nazareth to the position of glorious Lord because of His obedience even unto the death of the cross? (I Corinthians 2:7&8)
Or how about the truth that the Bride of Christ (the believing remnant of Israel) would become the Body of Christ through the one flesh relationship of Genesis 2:24? (Ephesians 5:30-32)
Paul himself, certainly an inhabitant of the first century, claimed initial revelation of one and only one mystery, "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel" (Ephesians 3:6).
That believing Gentiles, as Gentiles, could become fellowheirs with the believing remnant of Israel; that believing Gentiles, as Gentiles, could be of the same body of Christ through the bride's one flesh relationship; that believing Gentiles, as Gentiles, could partake of the New Testament promised to the believing remnant of Israel in Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Neither Paul nor his original readers, all inhabitants of the first century, considered "management" ("oikonomia") to indicate a period of time.
That which Wierwille palmed off as "the Word of God as it has not been known since the first century" was the deceptive construct of a nineteenth century spiritual quack, J.N. Darby.
Do you realize there is NO BIBLICAL EVIDENCE, NOT EVEN ONE IOTA, for a pre-tribulation "rapture" (a non-biblical word if ever there was one) of the Church? There is plenty of evidence for a post-tribulation, pre-wrath gathering together of the elect (the believing remnant of Israel + believing Gentiles), but NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for a "rapture" that separates believing Gentiles from the remnant of Israel.
TWI's error doesn't just lie in the law of believing, or ignoring the Lordship of Jesus Christ. It goes far, far deeper than that. To depths that CES has failed to plumb.
You're entitled to your views on what the Bible does and does not teach, but the word "rapture" is indeed a Biblical word. It's the latin form of the word "caught up."
Saying "the rapture" is not a Biblical word is similar to saying "the new birth" and "advent" are not Biblical terms. Maybe they're not in the King James, but the concepts are certainly there.
(I'm not trying to defend pre-trib or dispensationalism at this point: only noting that the word "rapture" is not unbiblical).
Steve, have you listened to John Schoenheit's tape set on the Book of Revelation? I thought it was pretty exciting and detailed some amazing and blessed things.
Say, Raf, can you cite me a place in the Bible where the phrase "new birth" occurs?
Gosh, isn't the word "rapture" a noun? Isn't the word "harpazo" in I Thessalonians 4:17 a verb? Nouns misused as verbs... Verbs misused as nouns... Wasn't there a discussion on these forums about such misuse regarding the word "pistis"?
Wierwille always used the biblically correct term for the event, "the gathering together", even though he misplaced it before the tribulation, and mistakenly restricted it to the "Church" as opposed to the believing remnant of Israel with believing Gentiles grafted in on the same basis, by grace through faith.
So why did CES deliberately choose to abandon the biblically accurate term in favor of a 19th century neologism? I've asked them before, and never got an answer.
quote:So why did CES deliberately choose to abandon the biblically accurate term in favor of a 19th century neologism? I've asked them before, and never got an answer.
Steve, listen to John Schoenheit's tape set on Revelation and you will hear the answer.
oldies - Yes, I have listened to Schoenheit's tape set on Revelation. I listened to it when it first became available, and like you, I would have described it then as pretty exciting and detailing some amazing and blessed things.
However... several years later I went back to Schoenheit's tapes to search out some things about the seven church epistles in Revelation 2 and 3, and was vastly disappointed by the whole thing.
What DID the writings that became what we know as the New Testament mean to those who first composed and those who first read them? How can we know that we have "the Word of God as it has not been known since the first century" if we don't seek out answers to that question?
The seven church epistles are NOT addressed to some future recidivist (as dispensationalists might put it) children of Israel. They WERE addressed to the Christian congregations of seven actual, first century cities. Real, living, breathing Christians, alive at the time the letters were composed.
Stop and think about it. Revelation 2:1-7 was read aloud to the congregation in Ephesus. If Paul's letter was written in the 60s, and Revelation was written in the 90s, there was only a thirty years difference between the readings of the two letters. There could well have been a few oldsters sitting there listening to John's messenger that could remember as youngsters sitting there listening to Paul's messenger reading what we know as Ephesians.
Revelation was addressed to the same people as Paul's book of Ephesians. Possibly to some of the very same individuals!
What do you think about Revelation 2:13b? "...and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you..."
Those guys and gals sitting there in Pergamos listening to John's messenger HAD KNOWN Antipas. Some may even have been his relatives. Antipas was KILLED among them. Do you think the book of Revelation said something to THEM. They were living, breathing Christians IN THE FIRST CENTURY.
Yet Schoenheit, from the height of his ivory tower, asks, why not believe that there was a secret, verbal instruction John sent along with his writings, directing the people who received them to ignore the written message as "not addressed" to them!?!
As exciting and as detailed as Schoenheit's tapes may seem, that doesn't make them right.
The best reference I have found for understanding Revelation is "The New International Commentary on The New Testament, The Book of Revelation" by Robert H. Mounce. Vastly superior to anything CES has to offer.
A few more words on Revelation. In fact, a few of Schoenheit's own.
Regarding the "harsh" tone of Christ in the book of Revelation (this from one who discounts Romans 11:22 as due to Paul's mistaken "Jewish mindset"), Schoenheit said, "...which again adds, you know, more evidence for the fact that the entire book of Revelation was written to the people of the time period of the future. Now John obviously had to send the book of Revelation which he penned in its entirety to somebody to keep. But why not believe that those people would understand that this book was written for a future time period?" (emphasis added - Steve).
If what Schoenheit said is true, then John would have had to send to the churches, along with copies of the book itself, an oral tradition to the effect: Don't pay any attention to this book, because the rapture hasn't happened yet.
That would flat out contradict the words that were read aloud in the churches toward the end of the first century, "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand" (Revelation 1:3).
Schoenheit continued, "Why not believe that there is some book written to the people that will be going through this tremendous and horrible time of tribulation and wrath to keep them firm and help them out?" (again, emphasis added - Steve)
Now, English usage includes a number of stock formulas that give clues to the readers or hearers as to the nature of the words following the formula. If we hear "once upon a time", we know that the following words are a fairy tale. There was an idiomatic usage of the phrase "this is a no-s**tter" when I was in the Navy which meant the speaker was about to tell a tall-tale regarding his experiences at sea.
The phase "why not believe that" indicates the speaker is about to state a proposition for which there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE. If there were EVIDENCE to believe the proposition, the speaker would CITE the evidence. When a speaker uses the phrase "why not believe that", he is admitting that there is NO EVIDENCE TO CITE.
Schoenheit's interpretation of the book of Revelation is NOT founded on scriptural evidence. It is founded on an unquestioning acceptance of man-made, dispensational tradition.
Who is the book of Revelation addressed to? He who hath an ear, let him hear.
Love,
Steve
By the way, regarding the quotes from John Schoenheit in this posting, I transcripted them from CES' six-audiotape set, "The Book of Revelation", Indianapolis, 1995.
I listened to the rev tapes I never finished them . See I would like someone to teach me and I would like to walk around and say I KNOW this is what the bible says is true!
because I believe God wants us to know and I desire to know.
but then this kind of agruement happens and I get very sad.
who do we believe? it seems far to complicated ya know?
I think John is giving the idea it could go that way Steve// and maybe not as you say.. but these type of bible wars really hurt everyone do they not?
John often teaches with his scope of the bible verses he has studied in mind as do I , I build on my learning in every subject something I learned last year can be added to something I see today to make a lesson clear. I think John is doing that in these tapes. How much liberty or trust is ok is up to the individual to decide I guess.
If you think your debate is valid have you told them your idea ? what is their response they just ignore you?
I think it is dangerous to start taking somone eles scope of learning for granted and assume he must be right because he has studied the bible for a career tho.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
28
25
23
19
Popular Days
Jul 30
50
Aug 10
37
Sep 9
30
Jul 31
28
Top Posters In This Topic
sky4it 28 posts
oldiesman 25 posts
satori001 23 posts
TheSongRemainsTheSame 19 posts
Popular Days
Jul 30 2004
50 posts
Aug 10 2004
37 posts
Sep 9 2004
30 posts
Jul 31 2004
28 posts
Oakspear
Thanks for your well-meaning post jetc57, you certainly seem sincere.
You did state a lot of things as facts, however, that I (in my opinion) would classify as opinion. We don't all agree on the value of the PFAL class, the "ministry" (if it even was a mionistry) or on Wierwille himself. That being said you are welcome to your opinion of all of the above.
Why pick apart each others' faults? Not to place blame, not to attack, but to continue to place the spotlight on an organization that is still doing harm, even though you or I may have left it and moved on with our lives. Same with living in the past. There are many people still in TWI who don't know a lot of this stuff, if one person leaves TWI because of Grease Spot, then it was all worth it...and more than one has.
You don't care what The Way is doing? That's your decision. They're still hurting people...so I care.
Thanks for your good intentions, and the road that they pave
:D-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Were they "Rightly divided??"
:D--> 
--> 
:D-->
Ps -- thanks!
;)-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
jetc57..."We are all sinners, only difference is OUR decisions, Our Choices we make. For every decision we make, we have consequences."
And every consequences that come upon us sinners, we have to make decisions to determine what consequences that may come upon other sinners who make decisions that only make a difference OURs & OTHERS decisions.
sinners? in what way jetc57? Are we talking about not leaving the lid down on the toilet or a Hitlor type of sinner?
"Why don't we all continue to 'guard the mystery'?"
Guard it from who??? The adversary a Billions year old being who was once in the presence of god almighty as the angel of light? Sure I am with ya on that... tell me how can i guard this mystery... surely you have such revelation and proof this mystery you guard?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Hi Jeanette,
Welcome to GS.
I must agree with Oakspear, many if not most of the things that that you presented as "facts" are simply your opinions.
To be to the point, your post seems kinda like an excuse for the despicable behavoir of men like Wierwille who used his self-appointed authority as God's spokespersons to sexually exploit those who looked up to them as Men of God.
I have heard "the all have sinned" rationalization/excuse so many times that it is almost sickening. Christian leaders should be held to the Biblical standards established for the positions they hold. No one is asking for sinlessness or perfection - just accountability. If they cannot meet those standards then they need to be removed from those positions.
You never gave a thought to the the human faults within TWI? --- Well, neither did many of the rest of us, and as a result TWI's leaders were pretty much given free reign to run roughshod over the lives of thousands and break up families and ruin the lives of many good folks. History tells us that religious leaders need to be held accountable - or abuses will abound. Casting the blind eye in the name of love is foolish.
What you call "pointing fingers" I call revealing the darkness that permeated TWI's core. - I do it not out of "bitterness" or "of living in the past" but instead out of concern for those who still subject themsleves to TWI current "wolves in sheeps clothing" and who may still be unaware of the despicable things done and taught by men such as Wierwille, Martindale and others.
You posted:
Jeanette this is kinda frightening to me. Do you have any clue at all what TWI is doing now? I bet not.
You are certainly entitled to your opinions, but don't expect your little sermon (as well intentioned as it may be) to be too well recieved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
jetc57
posted September 08, 2004 21:30
Thanking John Lynn for his post and I appeciated hearing your points of view. I also enjoyed your teaching in Seattle WA several years ago. I also appreciate that you cared enough for years to keep in touch with me.
****
Whoa Whoa Whaa... are you talking about this lame post of his where he does not respond and has a courier... uhmmm oh my god...
jetc57 you really need to write JAL and have his courier post for ya. That's what JAL does.
Forgive me jetc57, JAL did actually respond to a post that jeff threaded for jal in angel doctrinal section, uhmmm almost like saltine crackers crumbled from a mouth full of the uncola or something like that...
uhmmm dig it
take it to JAL and maybe he will do a duo wit ya here... doubt it though...
your praises to JAL i am sure he notices another mouthfull of saltine crackers and milk...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
My dig on JAL is that he is a wonderful human being.
Rok On JAL
Please do The Devils Bathroom here at GSC
That would really be cool if ya have the time personally or through Jeff!!!
Hey I know... maybe You and Mike could hook up and be the Singing Swinging Dudes of The Way...
Now that would be freaking awesome since Mike has told you YOUR ministry what HE thought and whatever
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
I want to ask one little teenie tiny question... has JAL ever posted a reply this thread o his?
And his point is?
And his point to Paw is?
And so Paw, where is your response Sir?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheSongRemainsTheSame
"My dear pal Jeff"...
Hey JAL did you not once say something like "...we are everybody's PAL?"... uhmmm did ya leave the "f" out?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tonto
Goey and Oak, my thoughts exactly...if only my thoughts were that well organized. Thanks for your posts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Don'tFenceMeIn
Jeannette said, "If we were in the WAY to watch its leaders and judge the actions of other 'sinners' and make THEM take the fall for your Decision making processes, then we are FOOLISH., and HAVE NOT LEARNED to Live God's Love. God is LOVE, Unconditional Love."
Jeannette, we do have the right, in America, to publish the fact that the person we lined ourselves up with and gave our very lives for his ministry, deceived us. And, yes, what he taught and how he taught the scriptures DID influence greatly how we made decisions--mostly according to how he said we should serve God is how we tried to serve God.
I do see this as liberating to speak about it with others who have been through the same thing, not as a negative experience.
While there is no hate for the people who taught me wrongly, there is regret for my choosing, once again, to align myself with them. But to say it never happened is to be untruthful to myself and others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Don'tFenceMeIn
P.S. He said he was teaching us how the scritures interpreted themselves, but in reality, he interpreted them for us, didn't he?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
If it is wrong to expose seriously harmful practices by a group's leaders, what is right then? Be silent?
jetc57 quote:
"I do not believe VPW ever wanted others to Worship HIM, or think of HIM as the GREAT PROFIT."
I know it is a typo but the irony was just too good to pass up! :-) There certainly was great "profit" for them. LOL!
Taught the Word as it hadn't been known since the first century? Who taught all of the classes? Who was on more WayRag covers? Who ran the show? C'mon now, who's kidding whom? Sounds like he was running for the office to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
Sooo... Just what did Wierwille teach that people might take to be "the Word of God as it has not been known since the first century"?
Could it have been "The Mystery" we have heard so much about? a period of time that was originally revealed first to the apostle Paul? knowledge of which was "lost" and then taught to Wierwille by God, if he would teach others also? that we have to "guard" against losing again?
Would it surprise you to know that there are mysteries recorded in the New Testament writings that were revealed to someone else before they were revealed to Paul?
For instance, the mystery that God was going to elevate Jesus of Nazareth to the position of glorious Lord because of His obedience even unto the death of the cross? (I Corinthians 2:7&8)
Or how about the truth that the Bride of Christ (the believing remnant of Israel) would become the Body of Christ through the one flesh relationship of Genesis 2:24? (Ephesians 5:30-32)
Paul himself, certainly an inhabitant of the first century, claimed initial revelation of one and only one mystery, "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel" (Ephesians 3:6).
That believing Gentiles, as Gentiles, could become fellowheirs with the believing remnant of Israel; that believing Gentiles, as Gentiles, could be of the same body of Christ through the bride's one flesh relationship; that believing Gentiles, as Gentiles, could partake of the New Testament promised to the believing remnant of Israel in Jeremiah 31:31-34.
Neither Paul nor his original readers, all inhabitants of the first century, considered "management" ("oikonomia") to indicate a period of time.
That which Wierwille palmed off as "the Word of God as it has not been known since the first century" was the deceptive construct of a nineteenth century spiritual quack, J.N. Darby.
Do you realize there is NO BIBLICAL EVIDENCE, NOT EVEN ONE IOTA, for a pre-tribulation "rapture" (a non-biblical word if ever there was one) of the Church? There is plenty of evidence for a post-tribulation, pre-wrath gathering together of the elect (the believing remnant of Israel + believing Gentiles), but NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER for a "rapture" that separates believing Gentiles from the remnant of Israel.
TWI's error doesn't just lie in the law of believing, or ignoring the Lordship of Jesus Christ. It goes far, far deeper than that. To depths that CES has failed to plumb.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Steve,
You're entitled to your views on what the Bible does and does not teach, but the word "rapture" is indeed a Biblical word. It's the latin form of the word "caught up."
Saying "the rapture" is not a Biblical word is similar to saying "the new birth" and "advent" are not Biblical terms. Maybe they're not in the King James, but the concepts are certainly there.
(I'm not trying to defend pre-trib or dispensationalism at this point: only noting that the word "rapture" is not unbiblical).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Steve, have you listened to John Schoenheit's tape set on the Book of Revelation? I thought it was pretty exciting and detailed some amazing and blessed things.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JustThinking
Steve,
Is your reference to Darby due to views on dispensations?
JT
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
Say, Raf, can you cite me a place in the Bible where the phrase "new birth" occurs?
Gosh, isn't the word "rapture" a noun? Isn't the word "harpazo" in I Thessalonians 4:17 a verb? Nouns misused as verbs... Verbs misused as nouns... Wasn't there a discussion on these forums about such misuse regarding the word "pistis"?
Wierwille always used the biblically correct term for the event, "the gathering together", even though he misplaced it before the tribulation, and mistakenly restricted it to the "Church" as opposed to the believing remnant of Israel with believing Gentiles grafted in on the same basis, by grace through faith.
So why did CES deliberately choose to abandon the biblically accurate term in favor of a 19th century neologism? I've asked them before, and never got an answer.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
JustThinking - Wierwille's teaching regarding "administrations" and his definition of the "Mystery" as a period of time are views on dispensations.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
oldies - Yes, I have listened to Schoenheit's tape set on Revelation. I listened to it when it first became available, and like you, I would have described it then as pretty exciting and detailing some amazing and blessed things.
However... several years later I went back to Schoenheit's tapes to search out some things about the seven church epistles in Revelation 2 and 3, and was vastly disappointed by the whole thing.
What DID the writings that became what we know as the New Testament mean to those who first composed and those who first read them? How can we know that we have "the Word of God as it has not been known since the first century" if we don't seek out answers to that question?
The seven church epistles are NOT addressed to some future recidivist (as dispensationalists might put it) children of Israel. They WERE addressed to the Christian congregations of seven actual, first century cities. Real, living, breathing Christians, alive at the time the letters were composed.
Stop and think about it. Revelation 2:1-7 was read aloud to the congregation in Ephesus. If Paul's letter was written in the 60s, and Revelation was written in the 90s, there was only a thirty years difference between the readings of the two letters. There could well have been a few oldsters sitting there listening to John's messenger that could remember as youngsters sitting there listening to Paul's messenger reading what we know as Ephesians.
Revelation was addressed to the same people as Paul's book of Ephesians. Possibly to some of the very same individuals!
What do you think about Revelation 2:13b? "...and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you..."
Those guys and gals sitting there in Pergamos listening to John's messenger HAD KNOWN Antipas. Some may even have been his relatives. Antipas was KILLED among them. Do you think the book of Revelation said something to THEM. They were living, breathing Christians IN THE FIRST CENTURY.
Yet Schoenheit, from the height of his ivory tower, asks, why not believe that there was a secret, verbal instruction John sent along with his writings, directing the people who received them to ignore the written message as "not addressed" to them!?!
As exciting and as detailed as Schoenheit's tapes may seem, that doesn't make them right.
The best reference I have found for understanding Revelation is "The New International Commentary on The New Testament, The Book of Revelation" by Robert H. Mounce. Vastly superior to anything CES has to offer.
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Steve, it sounds interesting and I will purchase it. Thanks for the tip.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
You're welcome, oldies!
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
A few more words on Revelation. In fact, a few of Schoenheit's own.
Regarding the "harsh" tone of Christ in the book of Revelation (this from one who discounts Romans 11:22 as due to Paul's mistaken "Jewish mindset"), Schoenheit said, "...which again adds, you know, more evidence for the fact that the entire book of Revelation was written to the people of the time period of the future. Now John obviously had to send the book of Revelation which he penned in its entirety to somebody to keep. But why not believe that those people would understand that this book was written for a future time period?" (emphasis added - Steve).
If what Schoenheit said is true, then John would have had to send to the churches, along with copies of the book itself, an oral tradition to the effect: Don't pay any attention to this book, because the rapture hasn't happened yet.
That would flat out contradict the words that were read aloud in the churches toward the end of the first century, "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand" (Revelation 1:3).
Schoenheit continued, "Why not believe that there is some book written to the people that will be going through this tremendous and horrible time of tribulation and wrath to keep them firm and help them out?" (again, emphasis added - Steve)
Now, English usage includes a number of stock formulas that give clues to the readers or hearers as to the nature of the words following the formula. If we hear "once upon a time", we know that the following words are a fairy tale. There was an idiomatic usage of the phrase "this is a no-s**tter" when I was in the Navy which meant the speaker was about to tell a tall-tale regarding his experiences at sea.
The phase "why not believe that" indicates the speaker is about to state a proposition for which there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE. If there were EVIDENCE to believe the proposition, the speaker would CITE the evidence. When a speaker uses the phrase "why not believe that", he is admitting that there is NO EVIDENCE TO CITE.
Schoenheit's interpretation of the book of Revelation is NOT founded on scriptural evidence. It is founded on an unquestioning acceptance of man-made, dispensational tradition.
Who is the book of Revelation addressed to? He who hath an ear, let him hear.
Love,
Steve
By the way, regarding the quotes from John Schoenheit in this posting, I transcripted them from CES' six-audiotape set, "The Book of Revelation", Indianapolis, 1995.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mj412
oh boy this is what makes me sad.
I listened to the rev tapes I never finished them . See I would like someone to teach me and I would like to walk around and say I KNOW this is what the bible says is true!
because I believe God wants us to know and I desire to know.
but then this kind of agruement happens and I get very sad.
who do we believe? it seems far to complicated ya know?
I think John is giving the idea it could go that way Steve// and maybe not as you say.. but these type of bible wars really hurt everyone do they not?
John often teaches with his scope of the bible verses he has studied in mind as do I , I build on my learning in every subject something I learned last year can be added to something I see today to make a lesson clear. I think John is doing that in these tapes. How much liberty or trust is ok is up to the individual to decide I guess.
If you think your debate is valid have you told them your idea ? what is their response they just ignore you?
I think it is dangerous to start taking somone eles scope of learning for granted and assume he must be right because he has studied the bible for a career tho.
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.