Forum

Replies

• 

  Ric Cox February 6, 2014 at 3:21pm

  Check your email.
• 

  1athm5naxhclo April 6, 2010 at 7:37pm

  I may be too late to jump into this conversation, but I'd like to try...
  
  Your veses above, from Galatians, take on a different tone, when translated from the Masoretic text, and as such, speak specifically to Israel, who were servants, but due to the work of Yahushua (Jesus Christ), now become sons:
  
  "But when the completion of the time came, Elohim sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under Torah, to redeem those who were under Torah, in order to receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, Elohim has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, “Abba, Father!” (The Scriptures, 1998).
  
  Just to clarify...Gentiles were NOT under Torah, only the children of Israel were under Torah. That is the significance of Peter and Cornelius in the Book of Acts.
  
  I think if you consider what happened during Acts chapter 2, you then solve the riddle of this whole thread. The difference between what the children of Israel had available to them, and what was sent on the day of Shavuot, was in-dwelling spirit, which was not available to anyone on a permanent basis until that day, except in Yahushua. Now I believe it IS permanent, but there are those who will cite a verse in Revelation and other places in the Epistles (I can't remember where right now and it's time for beddie-bye), which refer to those who were once enlightened, who fall away, and then try to return...that it is impossible to do so...and that they crucify Yahushua anew...working those verses would lead to further understanding I believe on this topic...
  
  My two cents...
  
  YHVH Bless Us All!
  Kate
• 

  Michael Prahm February 24, 2010 at 5:06pm

  Sandy,
  
  Yes, by all means details should be scope and they do.
  
  1. Eve, is not named until after the promise of the coming one, as the name of the woman, Eve, is in reference to the promise of life that was coming, Eve's mistake is all about Cain, (I have gotten a man from the LORD), and the subsequent activities of Cain.
  
  You are referencing two events. Theres the garden-The woman. Theres Cain- Eve. They are two separate incidents, and must be handled as such. One speaks to the fall, the other to the promise, of which if not rightly divided, we miss the impact of what the scriptures says. The woman, an aide to the loss of spirit, Eve, the promise of the Father.
  
  But when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth his son, made of a woman, made under the law. To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption(sonship) of sons. and because you are sons, God sent forth the spirit of his son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father. Gal. 4:4-6
• 

  Samuel (Sandy) Sanders February 24, 2010 at 4:44am

  Hopefully by now you have seen my error with ophis and opsis.
• 

  Samuel (Sandy) Sanders February 23, 2010 at 12:40pm

  Michael:
  
  What interests me in this back and forth is scope and detail. The responses I have received so far are about scope rather than the details I have mentioned, i.e. "serpent" being opsis in the Corinthians scripture.
  
  Dr. Wierwille provided us with a scope in Power For Abundant Living to frame our perceptions of the scriptures. That scope has acted as a filter against anything different. I find that difficult for a ministry that was about research, first, and teaching, second.
  
  I don't care to convince anyone of anything. Just, perhaps, open a dialogue to further in-depth study...which is what was offered in the Way Corps. The original question to this thread was about Dr. Wierwille's references concerning body, soul and spirit. How about we take what he gave us and move ahead?
  
  No man should have the authority to give unparalleled scope, without further opportunity. I don't think that is what he had in mind at all, though I have never been in his mind. But, the Way Corps training offered us tools to go beyond his work to discovery on our own. It is the choice of every Way Corps individual whether or not to use those tools.
  
  What I have read here seems to have defense to it. The consciousness (tree) of life needs no defense...only the consciousness (tree) of knowledge ascertained through seeing (optics) belonging to beauty and malignancy. Duality will always require offense and defense. The written words in the Bible are part of knowledge ascertained through seeing. The sight is what beguiled Eve in the reference, not a serpent. Check it for yourself.
  
  Details should build scope, not the other way around.
  
  Best regards,
  Sandy
• 

  Michael Prahm February 22, 2010 at 4:31pm

  Sandy,
  
  i do not believe for a minute, that leaving king james as it sits was his intent. David is a workman, and I urged him to post here to clarify some matters. Dancing with language is always fun, but then it comes to the point of intent. what is the meaning. What is said, what is the point. Forgive me if i missed it, but clarify for me, please. It seems from your post, that somehow the Christ in,(anthropos) just needs to be awakened. You said the stories are metaphorical, is that not true? We have been advocating, the stories are literal, are true, and the serpent, who was simply the unemployed angel of light in the garden, gained the rulership of this domain, our world. Had it not been for the foreknowledge of our God, and the pre-existing revelation in the stars, then by what legal means should have we been redeemed? I can think of none. the legal basis for the redemption of man rest solely on the shoulders of the coming one. that is why it is grace. When with Moses it is said, by faith he kept the passover, but there is a problem, in that the law is not given until after, therefore the passover, belongs to and pertains to that which is the origional revelation given in the heavens. It precludes the law. Further, then the significance of the bread and the wine of Gen. 14 not used again until the night the Lord was betrayed, speak volumes, of which no concordance, no word study will yield the fruitful result. Only scope, context, and where it was used before. No my brother, Power for Abundant living, stands, as a testament, as surley as circumcision stood. That which is born of the Spirit is spirit, and that which is born of the flesh is flesh. the flesh can do no good thing. Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which livieth and abideth forever.
• 

  Samuel (Sandy) Sanders February 21, 2010 at 12:50pm

  Sorry. It's not "ophis" it is opsis. Like optical.
• 

  Samuel (Sandy) Sanders February 21, 2010 at 4:25am

  Hi David.
  
  Interesting statement above about returning to the days "of the Catholic Church...for the vast majority..." etc.
  In the same breath, it seems to me, you are saying let's let those who translated it tell us what God has to say.
  
  In the early years of American education, students were taught, Greek and Latin. Then, such education faded away. People were smarter because they had the opportunity to translate for themselves.
  
  I suppose the term "workman of the Word" which Dr. Wierwille taught us is a lazy workman, one that shows up just to draw a paycheck, one that watches the clock waiting for time to be off.
  
  So, how about this? Let's just stop using words and language and books and meanings and understanding with language and just LIVE.
  
  If not, then: look closely at the Hebrew and find the tree (consciousness) of the knowledge (seeing knowledge) of good (beauty) and evil (malignancy) was not IN the garden, but just outside it where the serpent (the whisperer), a beast of the field is found.
  
  "In the midst" (of the garden) only refers to the tree (consciousness) of life. The serpent was a beast (animation) of the field. It could not have been in the garden, because the word garden implies a hedge of protection from that outside it.
  
  The word "simplicity" in your reference above means "singleness." The consciousness (tree) of life is a singularity. The consciousness (tree) of the knowledge (from seeing) of good and evil is a duality.
  
  The word serpent in your reference is ophis which comes from orao which according to Moulton is "a sight; the face, visage, countenance...eternal appearance."
  
  Craftiness is panourgia from panourgos meaning "ready to do anything."
  
  What I'm getting at with these is this: without grasping for original meaning before English, the reader will not find the principle of living, only thinking of external things, leaving understanding to a cast of characters long ago. The Word is living and real, not a story. The "words of the Word" are representations of that living.
  
  We are living the Jesus, the Christ. So, let's return to the singular consciousness of life, leaving the duality of animation.

  Site Maintenance
• 

  David Mogan February 21, 2010 at 2:57am

  In Genesis chapter 3 the adversary communicated a lie to Eve, "ye shall not surely die." In coming to the place that man did not really lose holy spirit, but rather it simply went to sleep, is to communicate the same lie to a whole new generation. When they ate of the fruit, they died. In "dying ye shall surely die" or, in dying spiritually, you will die physically. Consider and work the two-fold death of Jesus Christ.
  
  As for Cain and his remorse, he had none.
  
  When God approaches Cain to help him correct his mistake in his offering, He brings to Cain an animal to sacrifice. The only plan God has going at this time that is revealed to man is the animal substitue for the covering of sin. Abel offers the right sacrifice and in so doing acknowledges his need for a Savior. Cain however, offers his veggies and proclaims his pride.
  
  It is after God speaks with Cain that he becomes the first man with wrong seed, see 1 John, and then kills Abel. His response to God, after his murder, "am I my brother's keeper" is a direct attack at God's care for Abel. God does not kill Cain becuse God ISN'T into death. Death is an enemy.
  
  If we can only understand the Word of God with an in-depth knowledge of Hebrew, Greek, or Aramaic then we are back to the days of the Catholic Church having their priests tell us what God has to say, for the vast majority of people will never have a knowledge of these languages.
  
  On the other hand, we have been given God's gift of holy spirit, so that we can know. The keys and principles that Doctor Wierwille taught us help us stay with the simplicity that is in Christ.
  
  2 Corinthians 11:3
  But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
• 

  Michael Prahm February 19, 2010 at 6:01pm

  Sandy,
  
  Its late, and things have to be done at work tomorrow, but:
  
  The bible is not a methaphorical representation. I have spent many many hours placing the Book of Job in time, in place, and to whom the cast of characters were. It is literally true, it is historically accurate, and speaks to the time before the written word. To the time, of the promises contained in the constellations of heaven. To these we must also give account, as it was said of Abraham concerning his son, Isaac, "That God was able to raise him from the dead" Where did this concept come from? Or that God said his seed would be as the stars of heaven, Was this then in number, or quality? Was his seed to possess, the character and quality of these primitive promises contained in the heavens? Interesting point on Grace, that in the first uses, it is always used in the same structure; "IF I HAVE FOUND GRACE" If, an uncertainty, found, a happen chance, grace, divine unmerited favor.
  
  By the way, I have read God secretaries. One great problem I see, is we are still fighting the same fight we have been fighting since the third century, When Jesus Christ was elected God, an office foir which he did not run, and whose duties he will not fulfill. The reformation stalled on this point, and every subsequent move will stall on the same, until this rampart is breached.
  
  But back to the point at hand, when it says in the written word, that day unto day utterth speech, night unto night sheweth knowledge, is this not a reference to those manifold and great promises first penned by the hand of God in creation itself?
  Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.
  
  Primitive promise;
  The hill where Isaac was offered on, was the place where the lord was crucified.
  The passover, the time of the year.
  The host of the writings of David, of which i would not call Psalm, but letters to my son, His Son.
  And of course the wise men, from whence did they arise, and why.
  
  And when moses says in Heb. 12:21 And so terrible was the sight, that Moses said, I exceedingly fear and quake:
  
  Was that not because he saw his his sufferings? Did he not understand a prophet like unto me shall the Lord God raise unto you, and him ye shall hear?