Dennis On "And try to use a 'yes' or a 'no' in your answer!"

"And try to use a 'yes' or a 'no' in your answer!"

 

I was sitting in the Ambassador Auditorium, in Pasadena, California at a Bible Study, in the early 80's, on the Nature of God given by the then resident Greek scholar and thinker. He really was a very intelligent teacher and I always enjoyed, to a point, hearing from him. At times, it was an exercise in going around and around but never quite landing anywhere.

 

The fact that I have yet to understand the true nature of the true God and how He/She/Him/Them relate is irrelevant. It was all pretty heady stuff for my denomination's ministry. I'm sure I was not privy to the half of all the drama being played out behind the scenes between those that were teaching and those that thought THEY should be teaching, but I suspect it would have been much like the Council of Nicea back in 325 where being on the wrong side could have serious consequences.

 

But the most hilarious moment came from a simple question in which the questioner, after trying to frame an intelligent question for this very astute teacher on this profound question, said... "please try to use the word 'yes' or 'no' in your answer."

It was a moment of sheer enlightenment. "Please try to use the word 'yes' or 'no' in your answer." I laughed to tears in that way that is much deeper than the comment warranted because it struck at the heart of what many who repeat the mantra, "God said, I believe it, that settles it for me." are incapable of doing---using a yes or no in an answer to a sincere question about obvious contradictions, impossibilities and inconsistencies of scripture.

 

So let's take play Yes or No. Take your time but you MUST pick a yes or no for the answer. No yeah-buts. While we are well aware that the Bible speaks of three kinds of leaders in the NT (the Pharisees, the Sadducees and the But-u-sees) try to leave them out of it.

 

From Matthew 1 and 2

 

Yes or No: It is interesting that Matthew includes a victim of incest (Tamar), a prostitute (Rahab), a foreigner (Ruth) and an adulteress (Bathsheba) leading up to Mary's birth of Jesus, rather than four upstanding women of Israel in Jesus' lineage.

 

Yes or No: With Matthew and Luke showing that Jesus' REAL father is not literally Joseph, but rather literally God himself through the Holy Spirit, the idea of Jesus being related through Joseph back to David and Abraham is broken and irrelevant.

 

Yes or No: If the Holy Spirit is a entity of himself, the Holy Spirit is Jesus father.

 

Yes or No: If God did not wed Mary as the father of Jesus, Jesus was born of  divine fornication?

 

Yes or No: While in the context, Isaiah 7:14 predicted the child would literally be named Immanuel, Jesus was never literally called Immanuel.

 

Yes or No:  Isaiah 7:14ff  indicates the child to be born would not know the difference between right and wrong until taught it.

 

Yes or No: Following a star from Iraq/Persia that rises in the East to a specific home West, five miles south of Jerusalem is not literally possible.

 

Yes or No:  Stars,comets and meteorites and planets in the sky can stand over a specific home on earth until you get there.

 

Yes or No: It is odd that Herod and his astrologers could not see the star and could not follow it themselves.

 

Yes or No: When the Magi arrived, (perhaps up to a year after Jesus birth) Mary and Joseph lived in a house with no mention of a home in Nazareth or a need to go back to another home in Nazareth where they had just come from.

 

Yes or No: According to Matthew, lots of children in Bethlehem and the region paid for Jesus birth with their lives so that Jesus as an adult could die for their sins.

 

Yes or No: The angel told Joseph it was safe to go back to Israel but then changed his mind and told him "oops I forgot about Herod's evil son", so Joseph returned to live for the first time in Nazareth.

 

Yes or No: All gift shop angels are female and all Bible angels are male.

 

Yes or No: I can't find any place in the Old Testament where it says a Nazarene is a person who lives in Nazareth and foretells Jesus would be from there. In fact, I can't find Nazareth mentioned as a city in the OT.

 

Yes or No: Quoting a verse in the OT about Israel exiting Egypt is not much of prophecy of Jesus going home from exile in Egypt.

 

Yes or No: Matthew knows nothing of homes in Nazareth, taxes, mangers, shepherds, staying in Jerusalem 40 days for Mary to be purified according to Moses, turtle doves (offerings of poor people) and the long quiet trip home to Nazareth.

 

From Luke 2

 

Yes or No: Making everyone return to their city of birth to be taxed sounds like a formula for empire wide chaos.

 

Yes or No: If Jerusalem was able to care for the tens of thousands who came each year to the three great Festivals, one might think there would be more than a few places to stay comfortably especially if one was a young pregnant girl.

 

Yes or No: Mary having to give birth in a stable indicates the people of Jerusalem at Feast Time were inhospitable.

 

Yes or No: It seems odd that Joseph would take a nine-month pregnant Mary on the dangerous trip to Bethlehem when it was not necessary for her to go.

 

Yes or No: It seems odd that if Zechariah was a Priest in the area of Jerusalem, they might not have thought to let Mary and Joseph stay with them. Mary had just been to see them three months earlier when finding Elizabeth to be six months pregnant.

 

Yes or No: It is interesting that angels and the heavenly host went out into the fields to sing and witness to a few shepherds who then had to find Jesus and tell everyone else themselves what had happened.

 

Yes or No: Heavenly Hosts can't sing for the whole town.

 

Yes or No: The Shepherds seemed to know just where to find Jesus without the star.

 

Yes or No: Eight days after his birth, Jesus was circumcised in Jerusalem.

 

Yes or No: After 40 days, a time of ritual purification for Mary, they walked peacefully back to Nazareth, to their home, with no mention of fleeing to Egypt.

 

Yes or No: Living in Bethlehem in your own home, having Magi bring expensive gifts including gold and causing you to have to flee to Egypt for your lives as Herod slaughters all your neighbors children, is not the same story as trekking to Bethlehem to be taxed, giving birth as if no one knew you, and hangin' out for 40 days to safely return home to Nazareth.

 

Yes or No: If Nazareth was a safe haven, fleeing all the way to Egypt seems unnecessary save for Matthew's need to find more OT prophecies about Jesus.

 

OK, OK, enough! This "yes" or "no" game can be played with many many Biblical references. Just a few more outside of the Birth Narratives to illustrate.

 

Yes or No: If in the beginning, there was only Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel, (Seth was called the third child of Adam and Eve after he was born after Abel's murder), it seems strange that Cain was worried about those that would kill him if God banished him to wander the earth. There was no one else. Was he waiting for Seth to grow up, marry an as yet unborn sister, and hunt him down with his kids? Did God forget there were no others out there to hunt him?

 

Yes or No: Jesus overturned the money changers early in his career as John said. (Jn 2:13).

 

Yes or No: Jesus overturned the money changers just prior to his arrest and crucifixion as Matthew said. (Matt 21:12).

 

Yes or No: John names turning water to wine as Jesus first miracle.

 

Yes or No: Matthew, Mark and Luke never heard of it.

 

Yes or No: Paul seems to know nothing of the Gospel accounts of Jesus real life, and says he was simply born of a woman like everyone else.

 

Yes or No: Paul was converted, wrote all the meaning of Jesus and died before the Gospels, which seem never to have heard of him, though he was "a Pharisee of the Pharisees" and "above all my fellows,", were ever written.

 

I would like to think that had I been asked these questions when pastoring, I would have at least said, "That's a great question."  I have sat in on nerve wracking sessions with some HQ type coming to my area to straighten out some member who asked the wrong questions or came up with different answers from those given.  Seems both were wrong when it is all said and done!

 

Sometimes, most simply don't even know what questions to ask.  It never dawns on someone to even wonder how you can flee to Egypt for two years AND simply leave town and go home to Nazareth after 40 days. 

 

Instead of "apologizing" which I know is a sincere defense of scripture as presented, the ability to think for oneself and come up with a yes or no is also an excellent exercise in being honest with a presentation. 'Nuff said....the birth narrative realities are my way of asking us to think about what we have always been told by others and honor your own observations about the Bible, without fear what your minister or organizations might think or do.

 

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Dennis On: "It is Appointed Unto All Men Once to Die...."

It is Appointed Unto All Men Once to Die....

 

One of the hallmark traits of the COGs is that somehow "we" are unique to the history of humans dying.  When I was a pastor, I taught the "we who are alive and remain," concept.  It was very nice knowing that of all the times in history where humans have come and gone by dying, I was NOT going to have to experience that.  Of course, that was bullshit.

 

EVERY COG minister teaches and inspires by telling the faithful that they are unique in the history of mankind and will not have to die.  We live in "awesome" times.  We are the special, the chosen  those who will not have to die as billions have before us.  We will be changed, and "in the moment, a twinkling of an eye," shall be changed. 

 

Of course, Paul was very very wrong.  The Apostle Paul, 2000 years ago, 2000 YEARS!, was wrong.  He finally had to give in to , "I have fought a good fight..." etc, but he was toast.  He had told others to think "time was short," but had to finally admit it wasn't. 

 

Much of the motivation behind the COG "time is short," is the absolute fear of death.  Everyone dies.  If you agree to show up, you agree to leave.  I would love to think that somehow I was living in a time and in touch in such a way as to never die.  I'd love to think that , "we shall not all die, but we all shall change, in a moment, in a twinking of the eye.."  but, alas, we do all die.

 

The idea that humans  can know the future is terribly flawed.  Prophecy makes us feel as if we are special and not subject to the common fate of all those before us.  The COG guru's teach as if they will not die and will live over into some kind of amazing change not common to men.  But they are wrong. 

 

Roderick C Meredith will die before Jesus returns.  David C Pack, will die before Jesus return.  Gerald Flurry will die before Jesus returns.  Joseph Tkach will die before Jesus returns.  Ron Weinland will die before Jesus returns.  We ALL will die as it is the nature of agreeing to show up! 

 

In hindsite, I realize I wanted to be special.  I wanted to be excluded from the common experience of all human beings before me.  I wanted to feel special as to being called of God.  I wanted to feel that I was among those that would not die but would be "changed."   The reality is that no one is special and that all of us will die.

 

How motivational is the idea that "you won't die as others,"  But it is a lie.  The Apostle Paul spent a few years thinking he was special in this regard.  He said, "we who are alive shall be changed," yet ultimately had to admit he was wrong.  He finally had to admit he had fought a good fight, finished his course and was going to die. 

 

Dying sucks.  But it is what ALL humans experience.  There is no way out of this biological demise.  Cells can only replicate so many times and old age is a function of the failure of cells to do this efficiently.  All life form get about the the same number or breaths.  A mouse lives about 3 years and breathes about the same number of times as a human does in 70 years.  An elephant that live 125 years breathes about the same number of times as a human at 70 years.  Life and cells last only so long.

 

So give up the idea that some COG minister can get you out of this experience.  Dying is good for our soul.  We are not, then we are, then we are not.  That's how it works.  Fighting it is futile.  Thinking that some church or religious view can free us from this reality is vain. 

 

Jesus died.  The Apostles died.  The Apostle Paul, who thought he'd not die, died. All gurus died.  HWA died.  GTA died.  Gerald Waterhouse died. Raymond McNair died.  All will die is just how it is. 

 

Learn to live now as now is all you have.  Don't give in to the "just around the corner," or "soon" types.  Reject them. Live your life in the now. Enjoy and learn as you go. 

 

The whole idea that those in the COG "know" how it all will be are wrong.  They are afraid of dying just like everyone before them and misuse the Bible to get them off the hook. 

 

NO ONE gets off the hook.  Live in the now.  Forget the past and do not speculate into the future for you will probably be wrong. 

 

Amen.

 

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

 

Dennis On: We're All a Little Haunted...Or Alot!

We're All a Little Haunted...Or Alot!

 

 

Whether one likes or agrees with the term or concept, we all have that little ghost in the machine that comes out when the addiction to keeping up with this or other blogs having to do with the experience of the Wild World Church of God needs to feed or process itself.  Eckhart Tolle calls it the "Pain Body" and that term works fine for me.  I certainly see it in myself and know when it wants to feed.

 

It's the pain body in us all the gets cheeky, critical, sarcastic, tell it to me one more time or yells, "shut the hell up!"  It's the pain body that challenges and tells the stories of the past with more anger and more bitterness in them than ever.  Its the pain body that wants to feed on every topic that comes up like an addiction.  If you don't believe me, drop commenting here on this blog about anything that comes up.  See if you can.  Or if you merely lurk here and have you're own "this is my story and this is MY belief" blog and can feed the pain body there, try dropping the need to do that.  Mostly it won't work. 

 

I dropped Face Book a few weeks back.  So far so good.  I realized that most of the friends there were merely electronic ones and I'd never really interact with them in any real life.  Did I want to know or need to know when they got up, or what they had for dessert?  Did I really feel that posting this or that would help anyone much?  No, it didn't.  The only comments I got on FB was when I showed a pic of Chewy the Shih Tzu or told a story about  how hilarious she is.  Politics?  Religion?  Great You-tube video on the universe or some positive way to think or be...not much. There were people keeping track of me for their own sense of something, but those people never actually talked to me or communicated, and so I put an end to it.  Everything in me wants to go back!  Part of me needs to feed on it!  At least I managed to avoid getting suckered by and time wasted playing Farmville!!!  I did have to laugh when a friend got really pissed at everyone because they no one would help her "build a barn."   The barn did not exist in space and time.  The anger towards friends falsely so called was real as were the angry comments directed towards them for not helping.  It was rather sad.  I wrote her and mentioned that she's really angry at real friends over a really imaginary barn.  She got mad at me for bringing that up.  

 

Farmville was where her painbody played.

 

Banned HWA is where my painbody plays.   I also am grateful for when I can keep that ghost under control as Banned HWA also allows me to process the experience and share a bigger view of the Bible and the story that I have allowed myself to study since. However, I have also seen that sharing a bigger view of Bible Origins, errancy issues, astro-theological realities of the book, the politics of the New Testament and how Peter, James , John and Paul all got along (not) are not topics pain bodies care much about. 

 

I will always have an interest in theology no matter my personal view or practice of it.  I want to know what I did not know about it all.

 

So here for your consideration and perhaps for a little introspection is the best definition of the Pain Body I can find.  I do appreciate the teachings of Eckhart Tolle.  Others I know do not and that's ok.  Tolle emphasises living in the now which is really the only moment we really have.  The past is where our anger and depression lie and the future provides us with plenty of anxiety.  We might notice that the COGs live more in the future with everything "soon," "just around the corner,"  "3-5,"  and "we are living in the last days,"  I figure at my age, I'm living in the last days no matter if we all are or not.  My last days..."   Perhaps we hurt ourselves as much by foaming about the past and about "my story," as they do by living in some eternal anticipation that may just disappoint and find them going to the grave like the billions before them.    I'm just sayin...

 

For your consideration. This just seems right to me...

 

"There is such a thing as old emotional pain living inside you. It is an accumulation of painful life experience that was not fully faced and accepted in the moment it arose. It leaves behind an energy form of emotional pain. It comes together with other energy forms from other instances, and so after some years you have a "painbody," an energy entity consisting of old emotion.

It lives in human beings, and it is the emotional aspect of egoic consciousness. When the ego is amplified by the emotion of the painbody, the ego has enormous strength still -- particularly at those times. It requires very great presence so that you can be there as the space also for your painbody, when it arises.

That is everybody's job here -- to be there, to recognize the painbody when it shifts from dormant to active, when something triggers a very strong emotional reaction. At that moment, when it does take over your mind, the internal dialogue, which is dysfunctional at the best of times, now becomes the voice of the painbody talking to you internally. Everything it says is deeply colored by the old, painful emotion of the painbody. Every interpretation, everything it says, every judgment about your life, about other people, about a situation you are in, will be totally distorted by the old emotional pain.

If you are not there as the space for it, you are identified with the painbody and you believe every negative thought that it is telling you. If you are alone, the painbody will feed on every negative thought that arises, and get more energy. That's why it's become active -- after it does that for a while, you can't stop thinking, at night, or whenever it is. The painbody is feeding, and after a few hours, it's had enough. You feel a little depleted. And then it happens again a few weeks later, or few days later.

The painbody would feel even better if it could feed on somebody else's reaction. Your partner would be a favorite person. And it will, if there is somebody around, or family situations. Our pain bodies love families. And it will just provoke this person, your partner or whoever it is. The painbody knows exactly what the thing is that will trigger a negative response. Then it says the thing that is going to really hurt you. And of course, if you are not absolutely present in that moment, then immediately you will react. And the painbody loves it! Give me more drama, please!

Both painbodies are now awake, and feeding on each other. Then, a few hours later, or the next day, the painbodies no longer need it. They are full, they have replenished themselves. And you can look at each other and say, "What was that all about?" In some cases, you may not even remember how it all started. This huge drama started somewhere, and then one thing led to another. Wasn't it the same two weeks ago?

 

Can we be present and see if next time we can catch it at its early stage, so that we don't get drawn in totally?

 

Can we both endeavor to be present for each other, and for ourselves?

 

See if we can see the first signs of the painbody -- either in ourselves, or in the other. Immediately realize it, be the space for it, and if possible -- even voice it to your partner and say "My painbody got triggered when you said that."

 

Often, little situations trigger enormous reactions. Be there, present for it. Your partner will find it easier to see it in you, and you will find it easier to see it in them. Whether or not you can tell your partner that his or her painbody has become activated depends on the degree to which your partner has already been taken over by it. If you catch it at a very early stage, then some remnant of Consciousness will still be there in your partner and that remnant will be hearing you when you say, "Could that be your painbody?" It has to be phrased very carefully. You may want to add, "Do you remember our agreement?"

 

If there is still a remnant of Consciousness then that will be listening to you, and your partner will be able to be there as the space for his or her painbody. If there is no remnant of Consciousness in your partner, you will be talking to the painbody, and the painbody does not like to hear about the painbody. Of course, it will deny any such thing. "My painbody? Look at yours!"

So, what do you do? Can I be the space for that? While the partner is there, be the space for that. When you are the space for something, it does not necessarily mean that you have to stay there. You can be the space, and then remove yourself. Self observation - this is why being in the body is an important part of this. Feel the inner body as often as you can. When an old emotion arises, it will be easier to be present as it arises.

If you are present, the painbody cannot feed anymore on your thoughts, or on other people's reactions. You can simply observe it, and be the witness, be the space for it. Then gradually, its energy will decrease. "

Living in Presence : An Evening With Eckhart Tolle

Dennis C. Diehl
DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Dennis On the "Schizo-God?"

There are more and more Christians around the world that question a God that is of such violence in the Old Testament vs the God of the New Testament that dwells more in grace and love. They question how they can reconcile the God of violence with the God of grace and love they promote to the world around them.  When they are called on the carpet for that, they do not have good answers.

Sure there is the standard response, but the people of the world do not care for "standard responses" but want a reason in light of the troubles in the world today as to how it relates to their lives in the 21st century. 

Armstrongism has always been attracted to the god of violence over the God of grace. It seems like the church has always been attracted to a god that metes of violence and punishment for all that disagree with them. In fact many COG leaders [Meredith, Flurry, Pack, Weinland] want to see the world suffer, by having the world suffer proves them to be right.  The want to see "pagan" Christians tortured and killed, they want to see their enemies punished severely.  Just look at Malm's tirades against "love."

What Dennis has written is something to think about and perhaps kick start your thinking about what kind of God you believe in - if you do.

Schizo-God?

The Jesus of the New Testament loves little children and reminds the adults in his crowds that unless they become like little children, they shall never see the Kingdom of God. In the New Testament, Jesus blesses little children and chides the adults who try to run interference between him and them. Jesus even raises children from the dead in compassion for them and their grieving parents.

In Church I learned to sing, "Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world. Red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in his sight. Jesus loves the little children of the world."

I also learned to sing that "Jesus loves me, this I know. For the Bible tells me so. Little ones to him belong. They are weak but he is strong."

I also learned, over the years, that we were only talking about the Jesus of the New Testament, minus the Book of Revelation and a few other rather threatening comments by Apostles in the name of Jesus, towards humans contained in various books of the New Testament. Since most Christian churches teach that Jesus is God and "the God of the Old Testament," we do have wonder what brought about Jesus' own repentance over the hideous things that He, as God in the Old Testament, is recorded to have done.

The New Testament clearly teaches that Jesus, somehow, is considered to have been God in eternal reality before he was Jesus in the flesh.

John 8:

56 "Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he
saw it and was glad."
57 "You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you
have seen Abraham!"
58 "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I
am!"
1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things
came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ,
through whom all things came and through whom we live.
Philippians 2:5 Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God
something to be grasped,
7 but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being
made in human likeness.
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all
creation.
16 For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth,
visible and invisible,
whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were
created by him and for him.
17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

These are among a few of the New Testament scriptures that equate the man Jesus of the New Testament with being God of the Old, Creator and Sustainer of all things from the beginning. So by default, this would  be both the Jesus who first killed with abandon "all the little children of the world" who got in Israel's way, including the women, unborn babies and animals on most occasions, and the Jesus of the New Testament who simply loved all the little children of the world, red and yellow, black and white. They are precious in his sight." Truly a God in the flesh that had changed a lot.

The Jesus of the Book of Revelation goes back to his people killing ways. The Jesus of Revelation wipes out whole swaths of humanity who get in his way and the in the way of his chosen ones. He drips in blood and loves to have it so.  Run children run!!! A familiar Old Testament theme. Why does God or Jesus never hold seminars on their existence and plan for humans that we can all attend without all the drama and slaughter to get us all to obey? Oh well, I'm not God, that's for sure.  There is a way that seems right to me, but my ways don't count.

Some would argue that Jesus was God the Son, the second part of a three God Trinity, that is really only one God and that God the Father God was responsible for this slaughter. It is one God in three aspects, which is hooey but the New Testament Jesus would never have understood it either. If Jesus was the Lord of the Old Testament, he certainly has morphed into a nice guy since then. The God of the Old Testament was one cruel man, woman, child, suckling and animal killing freak. The Sabbath School song of the God of the Old Testament would have been, "Jesus hates the little children, all the children of the world. If they ain't from Israel, He will send them all to hell. Hacking-whacking all the children of the world," instead of the Sunday School one we know so well evidently.

Let's take a look at how Jesus , as God the Son perhaps, treated all the children of the world back in the Old Testament

Jericho is destroyed by Jesus as God:

Joshua 6:20,21

20 "So the people shouted, and the trumpets were blown. As soon as the
people heard the sound of the trumpet, the people raised a great shout,
and the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city,
every man straight before him, and they took the city.
21 Then they utterly destroyed ALL in the city, both men and women,
young and old, oxen, sheep, and asses"

Way to go! Jericho was a real estate need that the Israelites had and young men and maidens, old men and children, and let's throw in the animals too, had to go. Butchered all. Jesus loves the little children! Let's keep looking.

The Kingdom of Sihon destroyed by Jesus as God. 

Deuteronomy 2: 33-35

33 "And the LORD our God gave him over to us; and we defeated him and
his sons and all his people.
34 And we captured all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed
every city, men, women, and children; we left none remaining;
35 only the cattle we took as spoil for ourselves, with the booty of
the cities which we captured."

So here we have Jesus as God killing all the humans but now allowing the sparing of the cattle for booty. This topic of booty is going to get even better as Israelite men become discouraged over killing everything in site, including the babes. It seems the rules of engagement changed as the women got better looking, but the children always got the axe.

Now it gets better.

Deuteronomy 20: 10-17

10 "When you draw near to a city to fight against it, offer terms of
peace to it.
11 And if its answer to you is peace and it opens to you, then all the
people who are found in it shall do forced labor for you and shall
serve you.
12 But if it makes no peace with you, but makes war against you, then
you shall besiege it.
13 And when the LORD your God gives it into your hand you shall put all
its males to the sword,
14 but the women and the little ones, the cattle, and everything else
in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as booty for yourselves; and
you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the LORD your God has
given you."

Here's a deal that Jesus God of the Old Testament offers during war. Surrender and you can be our slaves and do forced hard labor for us forever. If you don't surrender, then all the men get the axe, but new rules for women and children. Now the children go into forced labor, no doubt and the women get kept to enjoy! Shake your booty!! The rules are a changin!

Numbers 31:14-18

14 And Moses was wroth with the officers of the host, with the captains
over thousands, and captains over hundreds, which came from the battle.
15 And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive?
16 Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of
Balaam, to commit trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, and
there was a plague among the congregation of the LORD.
17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every
woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with
him, keep alive for yourselves.

We have to assume here that Moses is speaking for Jesus and passing on the ways of God to the men of Israel. He's a bit ticked that he's caught the men not killing all the women as instructed and so Moses says, with Jesus, Lover of little children's permission, to kill all the "little ones," and the non-virgin women. How one figures this out I guess we don't even want to know. At any rate, good news! The guys can keep the virgins for themselves as sex partners! Yeah Jesus, lover of all the children of the world! With grateful hearts, no doubt, they can now kill and have great sex with the booty. We have to assume the term "women children" means little virgin girls. Ewwww... Oh well, these are Jesus God of the Old Testament's rules of how we "suffer the little the children to come unto me, for of such is the Kingdom of heaven," at this time in history, so NO arguing.

It seems that the God of the Old Testament, Jesus before his incarnation was not so much against abortion as long as the fetus had actually been born first and started life as someone's dear child. There are scriptures of commands to kill women with child, but I spare you. I don't think there was any discussion in these times as to when life began. It was all about when and how to end it if it got in the way of the progress of God's chosen people.

Even in the New Testament, where Mary, mother of baby Jesus is told to flee before Herod kills all the children under two years old, she just leaves town with Jesus saying nothing! Do these people not know how to warn their neighbors! Did Mary saunter out of town with baby Jesus singing, "I know something you don't know..Have a nice last Sabbath." I guess only your own Bible babies are important and others can just go fish.

Not very pleasant stuff. Somewhere along the line, Jesus changed from a killer without conscience to a lover of little children, commanding his disciples to " forbid them not, for of such is the Kingdom of Heaven." Perhaps the story of Jesus coming to John the Baptist for baptism unto repentance has meaning after all.

Christians puzzle over this as the perfect Jesus of the New Testament would never need to repent of anything to be baptized of John. So as the texts evolve, we see that it finally ends up that Jesus was not really baptized for his sins unto repentance but merely did it for our example of what WE should do. I never killed thousands however. From Mark to John, one can see the evolution of the text and how this embarrassment of anyone thinking that Jesus had to repent of anything and be baptized for his sins was dealt with.

But maybe Jesus knew (I don't personally believe he thought he was God in the Flesh) something about his own past? Perhaps being the merciless infant, child and woman killer as God of the Old Testament, got to him after all. Of course, I am being a bit theologically off here and a bit tongue in cheek, but maybe Jesus as God did feel a need to repent so as to be able to explain the change in his past behaviors. There is no record of anyone in the early church asking him or the Apostles about this change from killer God to Jesus loves all the children of the world God. Perhaps he said, "ask me that again and I'll kill ya." End of discussion.

This Jesus God of the Old Testament might explain a few things that seem pretty common in our modern era. Killing old men, women and children has not changed much in the land of the Israelites. I think the armies that once got to keep the booty still get to feel women and children are fair game when it comes to killing what gets in the way of their progress and real estate needs. In the same way, Christians with certain leanings seem to forget the Jesus of the New Testament Gospels and revert to the Jesus of the Old or at best the Jesus of the Book of Revelation to conquer in his name, those pagans who get in their "Go ye therefore into all the world" way. So there is a God for every taste and need it seems yet today.

Actually it's pretty darn difficult to explain why the Bible is the "best book ever written," when in fact it is one of the most violent, repulsive, clannish, cultish and bloody books ever written. The rules of engagement never favored the innocent and certainly not the non-Israelite, and we would have to admit that if indeed the Jesus of the New Testament was the "God of the Old Testament" before he came on the human scene, he has changed a lot in the text and in his behaviors. Perhaps endless war and killing does that to a God.

Be nice if it did this to humans.

Dennis C. Diehl

DenniscDiehl@aol.com

So...How Did You Come Into the TRUTH? ...and is it possible you may have missed some?

So...How Did You Come Into the TRUTH?

...and is it possible you may have missed some?

I grew up in the Presbyterian Church and I don't believe I ever heard anyone use the words "the truth" when speaking of their beliefs. It was just beliefs. You know, the ones passed on from generation to generation and being Presbyterian, no one in the local church ever would think to question any of it. It didn't matter. Behind the scenes, one could believe what they wanted and it was all so generic and nice that I can honestly say I never remember one issue coming up that maybe needed to be looked at, or anyone uttering the words, "new truth." Old truth was just fine and who cared.

When I discovered, as a teen, the really true Church of God, that seemed to me to be concerned with the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, that's all we heard about. People were asking each new member "So how or when did you come into the truth?" It was a nice way to say ask how long they had been in the church and from what error had they arrived. The word "truth" was thrown around a lot by that church. Everything had to do with "the truth." We kept the true sabbath, the true holydays, understood the truth about being born again and the truth about unclean meats and how to have a happy marriage. There were the true seven ways to be happy or be a leader or study your bible. You could be called into the truth and you could be dismembered for falling away from the truth. There was the truth about tithing and the truth about not tithing. There was the truth about who God has chosen and who He had not chosen and who He now loved and who he was pissed off with. There was the truth about the end times, which of course, we were living in and Jesus second coming simply has to be in the very near future. In my lifetime in fact! We evern knew the Plain Truth about everything from trade wars to crime and queer men. Never heard much about the truth of queer women though.

If you wanted to know the truth, just ask the Church, preferably on the local level by way of the minister, who knew all the truth there was. We knew the truth about evolution and the truth about the flood. Often we knew the "plain truth" which is the truth stripped down to the really core truth of the truth and was so simple to understand. However, simple as the truth might be to understand, God still had to open your mind to the truth, or you were never going to understand or know the truth. But it was simple after that. I later found out that "God has to open your mind," meant that one who came to the same conclusions as the Church and leadership had indeed had their mind opened by God. Those who disagreed or only saw some of it were still in the grip of Satan or at best had a bad attitude.

Gosh, we knew the truth about life and death. No one knew how consciousness or quantum physics worked, but all things God, just ask! We knew where you went and where you didn't went. We knew when you went to where you were going and how to get there and who wasn't going along with you because they had yet to discover the truth. We knew when they would discover the truth and, while not as good as when I discovered the truth, it was not bad at all. What's a thousand year difference compared to eternity? Nuttin! We knew who was in the right Church, which would be us, and who would be in the wrong Church, which would be all not us.

We knew the truth about the God of the Old Testament and why he was so freaking mean and loved killing both animals and humans. We knew the truth about the New Testament and how the Son of the Old Testament God was the nicer of the two and canceled all the stuff His Dad liked. We knew that the truth was that this bachelor son lived alone with His Father, after everyone that loved him the week before killed him. We knew they lived somewhere and the Father never had a wife or female to keep him company. But that was just the truth. God was a He and if you were a she, then you still had to be a "son of God" just the same, because that was the truth. Of course, I was uncomfy with me, a male, being the Bride of Christ, ewwww, but that was the truth too, so I had to rejoice in it.

Wow, we knew it all. Just ask! But once in a great while we discovered "New Truth." I can't tell you how amazing new truth is to discover. Now I may have been hoping that we would have discovered the new truth about the actual origins of man and the evolution of life over millions of years as opposed to the truth of everything being around 6000 years old, the story of Noah's Ark and the Tower of Babel, but that was not up for discussion. I thought maybe there was some new truth on why so many of the stories in the Old and New Testament are either scientifically incredible or historically impossible and unprovable, but no luck there either. I thought maybe some new truth might have to do with how the Gospels aren't harmonious eyewitness accounts of Jesus life, nor written by the men whose names appear on the books. But no banana there either. I thought maybe we'd get some new truth about why Paul never mentions Jesus' life, teachings, miracles, life events, birth or stuff like that, including why he never quotes him, but no, wrong again.

What really would have been nice would have been some new truth on how the local minister was just a guy too and didn't know everything and that was ok, but nope, nothing like that either. And it really would have been nice if, as a minister, I could suspect there was such a thing as "new truth" out there that maybe those in charge had missed to, but whoa baby, don't even think about it! New truth had to come from the top down and only agreement came from the bottom up. That's the way all churches area really. Top down, not bottom up. Bottom uppers are an endangered species in any church.

Recently a friend of mine told me the guy at the top of her church made a really good point in her church. Seems the minister fired the music director of 25 years without permission from the people. He said he was the guy at the top and it was his call. One guy at the bottom asked to speak and was given permission to do so. He reminded the minister that that is now how things are done and that he was wrong to do this firing on his own. Then the really good part comes up. The son of the minister walks up the isle and decks the guy opposing his father's actions. Police are called and it's all good! The bottom uppers won because decking the good guy never pays. I love the truth!

Once in a great while New Truth did come to the Church of "all Truth all the Time." But alas, it was always something like, "The New Truth About Make-up" or "The New Truth About Divorce and Remarriage." I learned these truths came from God when leadership was being  given a hard time about make-up by God's leading wives or some of God's leading wives left their leading husbands and the leading husband wanted a new leading wife. We did have the New Truth about Healing as well as leaders aged, needed care that they didn't need when younger and rethought the idea of only trusting God for healing etc. I'm glad that was old truth to me but I managed to keep that to myself and members in my care who asked.

But over all, New Truth just doesn't make it's way into Churches very often. They don't love to tell the old old story for nothing! As Mark Smith says in "Damn the Truth."

"Christians, unlike scientists, hate any and all evidence that goes against their theories. Theologians have a very hostile and oft times irrational attitude towards any evidence that would even suggest their theories need to be changed to fit the facts. To a Christian, a faulty theory is like an old member of the family whose mind has seen better days- something to warmly embrace and shield from all criticism. Christians, rather than being disinterested seekers of truth as they oft times pretend to be, are thus shown instead to be preachers of established dogma, opinions firmly set in concrete, with their minds already made up for them two thousand years ago by a Jewish rabbi. To a fundy Christian, there is no "new truth" to seek out or be discovered. So rather than seeking out new truth, they instead only seek out new ways to defend their old "truths". This is the reason you'll never see a "Research and Development" department within a school of theology. It is also the reason why, in defense of Christianity, no argument is too circular, no appeal to emotion avoided, and no straw men are left unconstructed."

He goes on to ask if a genuine new Gospel of Jesus were ever found, would it be added to the current New Testament? The answer is, of course, "NO" because all the truth there is, is already in the Bible. Besides, they have already found really great new Gospel writings, but one says the Disciples got miffed at Jesus for kissing Mary too often on the lips. When they asked Jesus why he loved her more than them, he came back with, "why does she love me more than you?" Great answer!!! Lousy Gospel. You'll never hear it in church.

One of the other problems out there when it comes to "The Truth" is that it gets suppressed a lot when someone who knows finds it. After all, it did take the Catholic Church 450 years to apologize to Galileo for noting that the sun was the center of the solar system and the earth revolved around it, not it around the earth. I personally think that 450 years between learning the truth and applying the truth is too long and certainly too long between apologies. Now the Catholic Church is not so sure about unsaved babies going to Limbo and may, in fact, get to go to heaven like baptized babies. Cool huh? Like they know, but isn't that amazing how something that was so much "the truth" for millions in the past, is now probably not after all...oh well.? This is great news for babies, if retroactive which I suppose it is or at least we can hope. Now those who thought one thing can think something else more comforting. Gosh, I hope this new truth does not only apply after a certain date. Bummer! All kidding aside, that kind of truth is just opinion because of questions raised about the state of certain categories of humans that die in certain states of being according to the Church. Don't mistake any of that for truth. We must not forget that Church Father's of the past were not above adjusting the truth to fit a real need. As Gibbon noted,
"The gravest of the ecclesiastical historians, Eusebius himself, indirectly confesses that he has related whatever might redound to the glory, and that he has SUPPRESSED all that could tend to the disgrace, of religion...(he has thus) so openly VIOLATED one of the fundamental laws of history." (On Christianity, Edward Gibbon, Prometheus, Buffalo, New York, 1991 pp. 131, 132)

Even Paul made a big deal about being duplistic. He would be a Jew to a Jew, a Gentile to a Gentile etc. which always left me wondering just what and who Paul really was. He said so often in the New Testament that he wasn't lying, I wonder why he felt he had to say that so often? Sounds like lots of folk thought he was.

So ask yourself, when was the last time my church found out there were more truths to understand than the ones they have in all their booklets and tracts? And I don't mean the Plain Truth About Eating Out After Church! I bet you'll have to say never. Church's don't really deal in truth as much as tradition and control of how those traditions are defended and apologized for. Church apologetics really are that you know. They are apologies for the fact that there are those times when we can see that something about the Bible or a "truth" as explained by a Church just does not fit the facts as we know them in this day and age, and yet we will not examine them. Sorry, the old truth is THE truth and we simply are not admitting any new ones at this time. Churches don't do new truth, but are good at doing new ways to defend old truths, which might not really be true.

This attitude of all churches and religions really should be your first hint that something is very wrong with it all and perhaps it really is all about tradition, not making waves, money, control and keeping the old old, yet inaccurate story alive so we all feel better. Most are afraid they or others will be disillusioned if "New Truth" rears it's ugly head, but when it comes right down to it, do you wish to live your life based on illusions? Actually many do which is why they never question anything.

Dennis C. Diehl

DenniscDiehl@aol.com

Dennis On: "Oh Me of Little Faith" James 5

^{James 5}

¹⁴ Is anyone among you sick? Let them call the elders of the church to pray over them and anoint them with oil in the name of the Lord. ¹⁵ And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise them up. If they have sinned, they will be forgiven. ¹⁶ Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.

 

^{Ok, let's get right to it.  While this teaching, so plainly stated and seemingly unambiguous is not directly that of Jesus, it is by James and includes Jesus name as the talisman that brings results.  One can proof text themselves all over the Bible from Genesis to Revelation to find what one thinks this REALLY means, or how it REALLY is to be understood, or how one REALLY is to understand it, but I am taking each questionable teaching in it's given context without all the apologetics that get hunted down to explain why this teaching will work if properly understood.}

 

^{I think it goes without saying the misery and heartache this simple teaching has caused sincere Bible reading Christians all over the planet and in all ages since it was uttered is without parallel.  All humans get sick and sickness leads to death at times.  We will all die for lack of breath at some point and as we have seen in past postings, God evidently knows and has planned the hour of our deaths anyway.  So I suppose I even question why we would ask for healing since if it is time, it is time.  If it is not time, then I will get better anyway right?}

 

 ^{Sometimes I think one author in the Bible is oblivious to what other authors say and can't match their teachings into one coherent teaching.  I guess that's why we proof-text until we find the answer we need for ourselves and can say, "the Bible tells me so."}

 

^{As well, I know how tempting it is to blast WCG or any church that teaches divine healing, anointing and prayer as per James 5:14-16.  I know the horror stories. But we need to back up a bit and realize it is the BIBLE , the APOSTLES and the EARLY CHURCH that teaches this.  We are just reading it as the inspired word of God, so to speak, and trying to figure out how to apply it and what it means.  Does it mean get anointed, trust God, avoid medical care because it is either or and cannot be both, or what?} 

 

^{Does our standing with God depend on our faith in such matters?  What does this scripture expect Christians to really do and not do?  And since we KNOW in our heart of hearts that the implication of this is IF you do A the B will happen.  When it doesn't, then we agonize over the reasons listed in an earlier posting as to why God did not answer our prayer.  No matter...it is OUR fault and never the fault of the Deity.  He wanted to help but we just didn't hold our mouths right when we asked or something so the answer is no.}  

 

^{Also, I am pleased for those who can feel or know that God healed them of this or that.  A minister distracted me once with a job offer that caused me to miss a flight from LA to Boise Idaho. The plane I missed was hit by a fighter Jet and all died.  Luck?  "Intervention?"  I don't know, but it sure was a cruel joke to save me to go through the rest of the WCG minister experience.} 

 

 ^{Anyone who gets better after asking for healing is not going to dare not to credit the prayer of faith and such with the healing.  We are happy for you.  You can't prove to us you did not luck out or get better anyway.  After all, most don't die anyway each time they get "sick."   I was often asked to anoint for colds and such which of course I did but didn't want to.  I never got anointed for a common cold.  You know the cycle.  I would only get anointed if I felt my sickness could really get out of hand and after all, I was young and did want to live!  I'm still here.} 

 

^{The faithful tend to die in such times and stinkers live forever...}

 

 ^{I had a ministerial assistant once, who announced to the Church during a sermonette that he would either anoint you for sickness OR visit you in the hospital but not both.  I made him take it back and told him he'd be doing both if he was going to work with me. If not, we could arrange for him to work elsewhere.  I always did both and sent many a person to his doc, ER or Hospital for help that was readily available.  I guess my Presbyterian background saved me from some of the more profoundly stupid mistakes others made having grown up in a much smaller theological box as they must have.}  

 

^{However, my point is and what I want to point out is not "how could we be so stupid as to believe Armstrong on this issue," etc...but recognize that it is a very bad teaching of the Bible itself.  It leaves little to interpretation really even though many denominations teach it every way from being a nice idea and quaint to absolute Bible truth that God will judge your faith over.  But it is in the Book.  It is not a confusing statement.  It seems to say what it says and mean what it means.  James does not tell us if that is all we do or just a part of doing all else we can do.}   

 

^{So, to me, and having seen the hurt, fear and shock this teaching not being so as stated has caused, I vote this a bad teaching.  By its fruits I believe we can know it...}

 

Dennis C. Diehl

DenniscDiehl@aol.com

 

Dennis On: "A Scriptural Rewrite Maybe?"

A Scriptural Rewrite Maybe?  

Matthew 10

34“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

Well this is just great!  Whatever happened to "Peace on Earth, good will to men," or " to men of good will," ???   Depends on which Gospel you read.  If this is Jesus goal on earth, he can just run for President!  Humans already have the no peace/sword thing down to a science.  Personally we don't need this kind of teaching as humans will use it to justify all kinds of religious chicanery and deceit. Besides we can't tell the Jesus wars from the human ones.  

 35For I have come to turn

“‘a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—

 

36a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’^e

 

Just great!  Whatever happened to lions and lambs and little children leading them?  Why did I sing , "Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so. Little ones to him belong. They are weak but he is strong..." if he is going to destroy my family and make us all hate each other!   I thought Jesus "loved the little children of the world!?"  

Besides, we don't need anyone causing MORE of this stuff.  We need something that causes LESS of it!  And I thought you said I wasn't suppose to have any enemies I didn't love?  Now you tell me I am the one, or you are the one Jesus who makes my enemies for me and those from the people I love!  You ain't right.

37“Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me;

38and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 

39Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. "

Why can't we love our parents AND be worthy of YOU?  Didn't your Dad say something to us about Honor your mom and dad so we can live long?  Did I miss something?  Do you and your Dad get along?  I'm only asking because in our last "bad teachings" discussion we should note that Paul said your Dad ordained all the kingdoms and the leadership in this world as his agents for good, and yet in Revelation, you set out to take down these guys and make them do it all your way.  I'm just sayin.... Seems we have a Father/Son disagreement here!  Hey, is that why you feel this way?  You are at odds with your own Father so think we all have to be too to follow you?  Am I psychoanalyzing you too much?   Ok, sorry....

Anyway....

Dear Jesus,

Do you understand how much trouble this is going to cause in the gabillion denominations, sects, cults, schisms, splisms, slivers and splinters your "we are not divided, all one body we," churches?  Men will use this to cover justify all kinds of narcissistic control and supply for the nut case pastors who demand the people do just this.  These words, badly used, will cause all sorts of heartache and chaos in human lives and families and for no good reason.  Whole armies of the spiritually retarded will go to war and not care if they live or die because they die for you...or so they think but we know better don't we???  

Here, let me rewrite this for you...

34“Know you that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I came to bring peace, cookies and milk.

 

35  I have come to turn

“‘a man back  to his father,

a daughter back her to mother,

a daughter-in-law back to her mother-in-law—

 

36a man’s closest and most loving relationships will be the members of his own household.’^e 

37“Anyone who loves his father or mother imitates and loves me; anyone who loves his son or daughter imitates and loves me;

38and anyone who does take his cross and follow will be well pleased .

 39 In this love you will find your life and lose it not.  In as much as you have done it unto the least of these dear people, you have done it unto me.   Amen

There...that's better.  :)

Dennis C. Diehl

DenniscDiehl@aol.com