10/4/97
             As I waited in a physical therapy session for my wrist, I was handed a
        newsweek a couple weeks ago.  It featured a story about  a petition being
        issued to the Pope, calling him to infallibly declare that Mary is Co-Redeemer.

     The Newsweek article, I was amazed, said "this would seem to
contradict NT scripture which states that there is only ONE redeemer"
etc. How amazing that the world seems to be able to see more clearly
than 4.5 million people calling themselves "catholic". I'm only thankful
they didn't call themselves followers of Y'shua or something, because
there is enough confusion about what that is.
     I don't mean to sound like I'm saying that there are not people
who associate with the catholic organization who don't love Jesus with
all their heart, and I'm quite certain that the spirit will lead them
into truth regarding this matter quite easily....since it is most CENTRAL
to the nature of our salvation, which comes ONLY through the blood of Jesus
Christ, who said "who are my brothers, sisters, mother? (Mark 3:32) This
scripture destroys the stronghold the enemy would build against the true
Gospel. Read it carefully if you doubt.
     There is no other way to view things. Jesus taught that his mother
is most CERTAINLY blessed.....and anyone who does his father's word is
EQUALLY blessed, to such an extent that he calls them his "mother, brethren,
etc."  So let's just see what happens in the next months regarding this.  I
pray that many will be called to the purposes of the true gospel through
the unveiling of this wickedness.  Here is a discussion which seemed to
end here with a fellow in rec.music.christian.  Why do you suppose he chose
to stop here?
=------------------==-------------------==-------------------==---------------
 

On Thu, 11 Sep 1997, David Wang wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> I agree that Mary should not be worshipped.  She is a person just like us.
> However, I disagree that she was not specially chosen.  Elizabeth called her
> "blessed amongst woman".
Absolutely.  In the respect that she got to raise the son of God....real
blessed.  But what does being blessed have to do with being "exalted"?
What I'm saying is that God could have just as well selected any woman
who was seeking after his heart, and gotten the same result.  I think
if THAT point was driven home, perhaps a lot of the people getting confused
by the issue wouldn't.
>
> This is my logical reasoning and I have never been able to see the flaw in this.
>
> Premise 1:  Jesus can never honor Satan or in any way be subject to him
> Premise 2:  Jesus never sinned as he was God
>
> These premises are the only thing I will will assume.  I hope you agree that it is
> reasonable
>
Of course.  You've seen me write enough to know that I'd think...
> Now, from scriptures:
>
> 1. Jesus came to fulfill the law and not to do away with it (Matthew 5:17)  Thus, the 10 Commandments still defines what sin is.
>
  Yet people can follow them and still be in sin...except for the one about
"worshipping other God's" I believe. :-)  That one is tough.
> >From these 3 points, it follows then that:
>
> Jesus never sinned implying He cannot ever violate the 10 commandments.  Thus,
> He is bound to honor His father (the Holy Spirit) AND His mother (Mary).  Now,
> if Mary is sinful, she is at least partially under Satan's dominion.  Thus,
> Jesus, if He is sinless, must honor Mary which means that Jesus must honor
> Satan.  This contradicts Premise 1.  Thus, Mary cannot be sinful.  (Proof by
> contradiction).  From Romans 3:23, "All men are sinful and fall short of the
> glory of God".  Obviously, there are exceptions to this.  Jesus is one.  One can
   We have some missing parts here.  First of all, let's define sin clearly.
Sinful acts we all can define.  But sin itself is in the heart.  When a person
seeks their own path, that is sin.  The original sin was the decision to "Taste
of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil"...or "what is 'good and evil
for me apart from God's input'" it would seem from context eh?  Obviously,
since we are to seek the lord's direction in all things, rather than trusting
in our own understanding, sin is where we turn to our own understanding.
    Next, we must note that Mary did this on a few occasions.  She was asking
Jesus to do things that he didn't see fit to do.  Other times she would say
"Just do whatever he asks".  But Mary was growing in faith.  YET, God could
see that the bottom line in her heart was that she would follow him, which
is why he chose her in the first place, AND according to hebrews 10:14, why
he saw her as PERFECT.  No sin in God's eyes, even though she would struggle
with things in her fleshly mind and work through them.
     Now, regarding honor.  Honoring a person simply means that we think of
their best interest and act in that.  WE CAN HONOR A SATANIST!  (By having
nothing to do with them until we see an opening to plant a seed of truth
in their hearts usually) WITHOUT giving honor to satan.  Thus, your logic
is flawed I believe.  Comment?

> also argue that Adam and Eve were also, prior to the fall.  The proof above implies that, unless we allow Premise 1 to be wrong, we must also allow for Mary
> to be sinless.
>
Like any other saint, "God sees as forever perfect those who are being made
holy".  So what's the big deal with mary?  She was blessed more than any other
woman.  Soooo, regarding merit, wouldn't that seem to exalt more those who
just follow God and don't get blessed so much? :-)  Obviously not.  God
sees our heart and values each of us equally, and all of US should treat
each other in that same way.  Sound cool?  -Bob
 
 
 

Evaluating the "bible code"
 

    Beware of those who teach about this. A "Start at 'y' and Skip 'n'" algorithm, combined with searching for a variety of keywords which might sort of describe a historical event...or an imaginary one for that matter... will usually yield a result it would seem to me.  Someday when I get time I'll write some c code to do this and prove my point...or if someone has it e-mail it to me and I'll compile it and go to work.
(Update.  I don't think I'll ever "get time".  It really isn't a priority, as I said below.  If people start descrambling things and asking me to believe them, I'm going to the spirit with it.  If I don't get a confirmation FROM THE SPIRIT, I'm going to assume it's because HE doesn't think it pertinent, or even possibly true.)
    It should be obvious to us that something is funny though, if we read the section on predestination.  There are certain details which the bible code supposedly reveals that I would question whether they would appear in prophecy.  AND, the method of playing "word scramble" to get what you want out of the bible is a common enough practice without taking it to this level.
    However, if God really has hidden some things to build up the faith of people in this day, that's fine.  I have no need for it.  The bible tells me that the SPIRIT will lead me into all truth, and I've chosen to believe that.  Thus it's real hard to get motivated toward figuring out if God hid secret messages.  I know that if he wants me to find truth, it will be by seeking his spirit for direction.  I can't verify that the spirit didn't lead the guys who discovered the bible code to it.  Ask them if the spirit led them, or if they just had this neat idea....
-Bob
 
 




Who is my authority?




                I see a lot of confusion in this area going on, so let me take a moment to share my heart on the matter.  First of all, let's look at Romans 13:1, which says

"Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.  For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God."

Sound pretty straightforward?  I believe it can be.  After all, it's pretty obvious to anyone with any kind of understanding about God's nature that he IS in control.  He's not going to allow his children to be subject to anything he is against.  However, he has allowed wicked people to rule over nations of wicked people throughout history.  In these environments, we see righteous people standing out like a like in darkness.
    Let's consider Daniel for a moment.  He stands against the rulers of Babylon.  Were these men "higher powers"?  The world would say "yes!".  Why?  Because from THEIR perspective, these people have ultimate authority over their lives!!  Yet over Daniel's life, they had none.  They could not make him bow down to their decree and they tried to feed him to the lions as punishment.  However, Daniel recognized that God was his authority, and God was against these people!  Daniel stood with God and God delivered Daniel from the "perceived authority" these wicked people had.
    I live in a wicked land.  I have a president who justifies his fornication, and deceives at every turn.  Is he my authority?  The people of this wicked land would say "YES"!  And even Jesus spoke of giving taxes unto Caesar, a wicked ruler.  He also spoke of giving to any person who tries to take from us though.
    There is no clear formula.  It's like anything else.  The spirit will lead us into all truth.  There is a time when God will allow someone to come unto us to steal from us.  He may do this to chasten us, or he may do it to testify to that person that we are not affected in the least.  They cannot steal our joy in Christ, and our trust in him as our provider.  We don't trust in what we've accumulated, so HERE!  Go ahead and steal it!  See if it brings YOU joy.  :-)
    There may be other times when we need to stand and take God's authority over what he has given us and say "YOU have NO authority here.  You are deceived in thinking you have any, and now God is going to show you that he has given me authority over YOU".  We must be in his spirit to tell what he is doing.  There are too many unseen variables to write a formula for it.... and who would want to anyway?  After all, while we are off using our calculator to figure out what we should do, we'd be missing the relationship God made us for.  His voice is there if we listen.
    In this land, there are options.  We are a democracy.  "A government BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE".  I have been DECLARED as an AUTHORITY here.  I have a choice to either submit myself to people who would POSE as authorities, when in fact they themselves are REBELS against those principles, or I can take the authority previously affirmed and cast the rebels out of my life!  If others want to follow the rebels, that's their choice.
    We have a choice in this land in many areas.  We need to make Godly spirit led choices.  Do I want the corrupted "perceived authorities" to run my savings account, or do I want God to be my provision even in my old age?  I have a choice.  The social security office says so!  Do I want to pay voluntary taxes to them when they are using it to fund abortion and promote ungodly values all the way around?  I think I'd rather volunteer out of such a system.  If God gives them authority to extract taxes, by all means, I'll submit and pay them.  Or I'll just stop working all together so they have nothing to take if he leads!  It doesn't matter.  God is my provider.  I will not buckle to pressures of these false authorities.  I will follow God.  If he sees that giving to these people will somehow help them see that they can't steal my joy, then by all means I'll just give to them.  But if I buckle because I fear I'll get sick and have no one to take care of me, or that I'll get too old to work and have nothing, or that I won't be able to find work if I don't do what everyone else is doing, then I am making EGYPT my TRUST!!!  I will trust in the Lord most high.
 
 

                          Laying Down the LAW!
 

        When people refer to the biblical "law", they might be talking
about many things.  There are groups, for example, who believe that
everything written in the old testament is obsolete, as they proceed to
take everything they can glean from the new testament which might sound
like a law, and place it on their own set of stone tablets.
        In truth, we know that there were laws set into place for various
purposes.  Some were in reference to matters of health; rules for living
safely in a fallen world.  (Careful here.  Don't assume that simply because
a law appears in this category, that it doesn't overlap into others also)
Next, there are laws which had to do with the establishment of a physical
model of the SPIRITUAL KINGDOM God sent his son to establish.  (And indeed,
when Christ said "it is finished" the need for that model was finished.)
Thirdly, there are laws which will never change regarding moral conduct.
When we walk in the spirit, there is no danger of breaking these laws, but
people who do not have a relationship with the holy spirit break them
continually....and occasionally they might notice that their actions don't
line up with the laws that were expressed in the ten commandments and in
other places.
        Some would argue that the sabbath doesn't fit into the second
category.  In a way, it obviously fits into the third, since it is only
keeping with what is good for our bodies to rest from our labor one day
a week.  But there is a very interesting twist here....and most of us
are aware that this has always been a favorite topic for "pharisees"
throughout the ages to evolve doctrine from.  Here's why.
        It's obvious to even the youngest in Christ why we don't continue
to offer sacrifices for sin.  Jesus sacrifice was sufficient!  It was
the very sacrifice that ALL of those previous sacrifices were MERELY a
REMINDER OF!  Therefore it would be utterly anti-christ to continue
offering up those sacrifices.  NO!  Rather let us show the world the
good change that sacrifice has made in our lives.  We are free!!
        In a similar way, think about the sabbath with me.  The sabbath
law, as it says in Hebrews 4, was merely another physical reminder of
a spiritual rest we have been called into.  That is a "rest from our
own dead works".  And when do we rest from those works?  When we get
to heaven?  I tell you today, that if you do not enter into that rest
now, you will not enter into heaven at all.  A relationship with Jesus
Christ demands that rest!   There is no way we can come to him with an
attitude which says "you can save me jesus, but I'm going to continue
directing my works"....works which will remain dead, because they lack
his direction.  Such a heart is rebellious, and God will not be mocked.
Repentance must happen.  (The baptism of John prepares the way for the
lord.  The lord will not enter into our heart until repentance happens.)
Once repentance happens, there is no longer a blockade against God's will
in our lives, though we will go through a "fire baptism" which will gradually
renew our minds and make our heart consistent in calling to him and being
humble before him.
        Therefore, if we truly come to relationship with Christ, we will
enter into his works, which, according to Jesus, were his "sustenance".
In other words, it was rest for him to be doing God's work, which is why
he could heal on the Sabbath without truly breaking the law of God.  Praise
Jesus!!  We also can enter into this rest here.  It should be our one all
consuming goal!  There is no other standard to reach for.  All we do much
be immersed in prayer, trust, thanksgiving, and the purpose God lays on
our heart as a result, backed by his power to accomplish all things.
        So this sabbath now.  If we continue to teach people to keep a
particular day, are we not doing EXACTLY the same thing as if we taught
people to keep offering sacrifices?  IS NOT the life Jesus has given us
sufficient ALSO to deliver us into his rest NOW?  Should we not show
ourselves to be free from the need to keep up the form of the one day a
week day of rest, since Jesus has already fulfilled all that is needed to
bring us INTO THE REST THAT THE WEEKLY SABBATH WAS SET UP TO BE A REMINDER
OF?
        Of course it is good to rest the body, and we who are spiritual
should do so....as often as the holy spirit leads us to.  Otherwise, we
are going to get tired because we work to hard on a Wednesday, and we
are going to hurt our bodies, and God is going to destroy us for it, as
he promised.  But if we don't harden our hearts, and we hear his word,
and we repent of all the wicked things we have used to exalt ourselves and
tear down others....then he will turn his anger away and heal us.
        Anyway, I hope this point has been well taken.  Regarding the
laws of health, some may still apply.  Certain fabrics make me break out.
I'd say follow those laws.  The foods have been made clean, if God has
made them clean as per Peter's vision.  The basic rule is once again to
be sensitive to the spirit.  You are free to eat whatever the spirit tells
you is clean for you.  Simple, huh?
        Regarding the other laws, nothing has changed.  If you worship
idols, you will die.  You can carve a piece of wood out, and hang a sign
that says "Jesus" around it, but it's just an idol.  It serves no purpose,
because God seeks a people who will seek him and worship him in spirit and
in truth.  Anything you create which is an attempt to portray Jesus in the
physical realm will be flawed, and will certainly not bring you any closer
to him.  What will?  Prayer, heart searching, obedience, seeking and studying
his words (in whatever way he might reveal those to you....whether creation,
the history of his interaction with Israel and the forefathers, prophecy that
is truly from God, etc.)
        Many people form idols in their hearts of course.  They actually
teach "another Jesus" and "another Gospel".  God will be known by his
character, perfect love.  He will not be mocked by people who say "I know
Jesus", as they carry in their heart a totally warped, self conceived
edition of Jesus Christ.  God is always trying to break through our walls,
but if we maintain such a false God in defiance to his efforts, we will
SURELY be judged with the idol worshippers.
        In conclusion, Jesus said "I came not to abolish the law, but to
fulfill it".  Indeed he fulfilled it.  He obeyed the laws, out of his
very nature of perfect love.  (And it is that nature which MUST compel
us to do what is right, lest we be "self-righteous"....which is actually
an oxymoron, because God has said "No, there is NONE righteous, no not one"!)
He also did the work which had been promised, which many of the laws were
set up as mere "pointers" to.  Don't be deceived.  If a group tells you
that you must attend certain meetings to be saved, or to give money to
certain people, or to worship in a certain way, or to confess you sins to
certain people, to dress a certain way, etc., etc., etc.....rest assured
that you may, with all the authority of the living God, tell them to get
a life...a real one....not the kind you get out of a religious system. -Bob
 
 

                     The Mark of the Beast
From: Bob Weigel
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 92 15:09:14 PDT
(Revised, 9/13/93)

Subject: 666 and bar codes
                                                              12/09/89

 Bar Codes and Man's Number

              I had heard for some time that 666 is the "natural choice"
      for use in bar codes.  I had never had anyone explain it with any
      clarity at all, so I figured it must be silly talk,...like the code
      someone figured out which would make Ronald Reagan equivalent to
      666.  After all, why would anyone put the same number on every bar
      code?!  Were not they designed to carry information?  How could
      putting the same number on every bar code convey any information at
      all, except maybe to say "this is an approved bar code, unless it
      is a forgery".  However, I recently discovered that there are
      reasons for including such a number,...in fact this exact number,
      within all bar codes.

              When a bar code scanner is confronted by its target, it
      performs some fairly complex and unnecessary to understand
      functions for the course of our discussion. (i.e.. things which
      allow bread wrappers to be slung across at arbitrary angles and
      still get read properly.  These things may not apply to, for instance
      a scanner which is passed across the skin, since here, the orientation
      of the scanner and code is much more predictable. ) The important things
      we must know are:

              1) Laser light reflects off the bar code pattern to a
                 sensor, which is able to distinguish between light and
                 dark lines, and just how many consecutive ones are in
                 a given light/dark space.

              2) Due to a variety of effects, (dirty or damaged stickers,
                 dirty scanner window, sensor calibration, etc.), the
                 computer attached to the scanner could be passed bad
                 information, were it not for some "built in" error
                 checking features of the bar code itself.

              3) These two principles have "analogies" in any kind of
                 pulse code reading system, whether optical, magnetic,
                 etc.

           This error checking varies, depending on whose bar code we are
      looking at for now.  The UPC (universal product code) stickers now
      in use have two lengths of lines.  The shorter lines are the
      product data, and the longer lines are the error check lines.  From
      the literature I have seen, both of these have been known to vary,
      depending on the application and era.  All these factors are beyond
      the scope of this paper, which is written simply to help people
      understand what a good structure might be for those error check
      lines,... which from all I can reason, should eventually become
      totally standardized.  (If there is a best way to make a scanner,
      there must be a best way to check to see if it is reading right.)
              The first error checking trick is called parity.  Parity may
      be either "even" or "odd".  Even means that all the "1's" and "0's"
      (ones and zeroes are the only numbers available for digital devices)
      add up to an even number, such as 11000, or 10111.  Odd, then would
      be as in 10110.  In schemes I have seen, such as UPC, the bar code
      is divided down the middle.  All data is encoded such that the
      information located on the left side of the "median" will always
      have a given parity, (e.g.. odd), and data on the right will have the
      opposite parity.  Also, on one side of the median, 1's are dark
      lines, while on the other side, 0's are dark lines.  This may seem
      a bit confusing, (pardon the digital pun), but this feature helps
      detect errors which would otherwise go unnoticed.
      (Only select line combinations are used, so that if the number gets only
      slightly garbled, which is probable, it will resemble a "nonexistent"
      value, and the error will be detected.  If one number happens to get
      totally garbled, there is a good probability it will actually get read
      and the bad data go undetected....but that's why people design things
      like UPC codes with very long lines in relation to their width, so that
      the probability of a "mutant" appearing are negligible).
               Ok, I'll hope that gives everyone enough background about
      some of the more significant things to consider about bar codes.  Now
      let me give some details about the things that I discovered when I began
      to make my inquiry.  The thing which floored me right off was the fact
      that the UPC codes use that "median" or central reference point, and
      that dark lines mean "1" on one side of that point, and "0" on the
      other.  The binary representation of 666 is 1010011010.  If you will
      study that number, with respect to its center, (between the two
      consecutive zeros and ones), you will notice that a UPC computer will
      interpret these two halves as THE SAME NUMBER!!!  Unless you are
      totally lost at this point, this fact should spark some curiosity.
      If you are aware of facts like "this phenomena has nothing to do with
      the redundancy of 666, since numbers like 444, 999, etc. don't work",
      it should make you more curious.
                 At this point, I began to ask myself "If I were trying to
      select the ideal number to check the performance of a scanner, while
      maintaining the 'mirror image' effect, what would I come up with?"
      I realized that the 'mirror image' number is most practical, because
      the computer needs to ask only "does the number on the first half of
      the median equal xxxxx?"  "If yes, then we must be reading data forward,
      but if not, does the number equal the INVERSE of xxxxx?"  This way, the
      computer need read only one number from memory, then ask the most concise
      questions to discern whether the code is being read properly, and which
      direction the scanner is attempting to read the code.
                 Since it is basically our objective to find a code which,
      using the minimum number of lines, can check every common problem the
      scan system might experience, it would seem most logical to just lay
      out those things and see what number(s) result, rather than saying
      " ok, how can we make 666 fit into this thing so that we can thrill
      everybody".  I'm afraid the latter approach has been used all to often,
      such as with Ronald Reagan I mentioned earlier, and the Pope.  I imagine
      that, given the number of "codes" which seem fairly simple to the public
      which one could pump a name into, the chances of making any given
      celebrity's name come out 666 using one of them is pretty good!  I also
      wouldn't doubt but what Satan has specifically directed many of these
      revelations to distract and deceive people, while he goes on about his
      real plan!
                 So, as I was saying, I would want the scanner to be able
      to recognize a white line between two dark lines, and a dark line
      between two white lines.  A scanner whose contrast threshold is drifting
      might be able to read two consecutive white lines, but fail to read a
      single one, so this is a must.   Next, it must be able to discern the
      difference between one consecutive line of either shade, and two.  This
      check is only a basis, as some kind of problem could arise where errors
      occur, due to some kind of mechanism problem, reading long consecutive
      1's or 0's.  Since the data itself is also "parity encoded", such errors
      will usually be caught in a short time.  There is no better practical
      way to detect them to my knowledge.
                 I don't know of any other checks which would, in the code,
      be useful to incorporate.  Any malfunction which cannot be seen using
      a scan code containing the four combinations above will probably be
      fairly difficult to check for at all, since these check for all common
      optical and mechanical problems.  Electronic problems are usually
      checked for at the hardware level (internal parity checks, etc.), or
      they make themselves known through system failure, ( complete lockup,
      smoke, etc.).
                  There is one other feature which would be nice.  Rather
      than having to draw a median, it would be nice if it were part of
      the code.  Using two consecutive dark lines next to two light ones
      would provide a median which, a scanner which was just about to fail
      one of the optical checks would still find.
                  Well, you people who know how to work binary numbers are
      probably already scribbling them down, but let me just say that the
      shortest number which incorporates all these features is going to be
      8 bits in length, the number 10110010.  The decimal equivalent is
      178.....a little short of 666.  The only problem with this number
      is that parity on both halves is the same. (odd)  The shortest code
      which has all the features discussed herein, is 1010011010, or 666
      in base 10.  In viewing the revelation prophecy, it seems very unlikely
      that these facts are mere coincidence.  It seems that most cashiers
      know that a cashless system is being rapidly made way for.  How simple
      for the next step to be put into place?

                                                        -Bob
 

                              Origins of the Universe

        This topic has been a favorite of philosophers for many centuries.
     Of course, I can't say "since the beginning of time" because if there
     was anyone there to observe it, they wouldn't be discussing it.....
     unless they are like people today, in which case they would probably
     be busy discussing alternative interpretations of what they saw until
     the accepted theory was totally askew from the actual event. :-)
        Well, there are some absolutes that we can fall back on.  Logic
     tells us some very important things:

        1) If the 2nd law of thermodynamics is what  it still appears to
           be, then there is a point at which something operating outside
           that law, and no doubt the other laws of nature, set the physical
           universe into being.  (otherwise, a condition know as "heat death"
           would currently exist, according to the 2nd law, and the fact that
           we are currently at time t=infinity on our universe clock without
           such a point in time)

        2) The fact that people seem to want to teach things that conflict
           with this reasoning, WHILE having no evidence to support their
           teaching, would indicate that there is a desire in the heart of
           mankind to be self deceived about the origin of the universe.
               Possible motives for this desire are not difficult to imagine.
           If a person can "prove" to themselves that they originate from
           "cosmic sludge", for example, they need not worry about being
           accountable for their self-centered life that harms others.  It
           has always been and will always be a great temptation for us
           to believe that we are in some kind of "competition" with others,
           and that the "winner" is the one who dies with the most toys.  To
           get the most toys, you simply take them from others in most cases.

        3) The universe appears "designed".  It is impossible, for instance, to explain
            how the planets contain 90% of the angular momentum of our solar system!
            This DESTROYS theories that the planets precipitated from the Sun's mass,
            for example.  There is no conceivable process by which all the momentum
            could leave the sun and go into the planets.  And there is no way they could
            have come from OUTSIDE, or they'd have orbits like comets, rather than the
            nice elliptical ones nearing circular in some cases!  No.  The only known
            explanation that works with known physical laws, is that something non-physical
            simply PUT THEM in PLACE, and then they began orbiting.

        The more I walk with God, the less I want other people's things, the
     less I want to just live as an autonomous being, and thus the less I
     am concerned about explaining away the things I see around me as
     something other than the creation of the God I know and love.
        To get a more clear picture of what I'm saying, read history. What
     happened in the garden of Eden according to the Genesis record?   When
     Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of the "tree of the knowledge of good and
     evil", they hid from God!   Those who desire to generate alternate
     theories for creation are doing exactly the same thing.  They fear what
     might happen if they have to give up their "autonomous perspective".
     They fear submitting to the God of love, who calls them to give their
     life away, rather than building a kingdom for themselves here on earth.
        I will now include a reply to some newsgroup discussion related to
     this topic.  Enjoy, -Bob
Newsgroups: alt.christnet,alt.atheism,alt.religion.scientology,alt.magick,alt.satanism,alt.skinheads,alt.pagan,alt.rock-n-roll,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.bible,alt.mindcontrol,alt.zen,alt.psychoative,rec.music.christian,alt.censorsh
Subject: Re: God is just one 'thing' that defies logic
References: <31954B07.3F76@sgi.net> <4n82t7$7au@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3197B5CB.1969@is2.nyu.edu>
Organization: Oregon Public Networking: Eugene Freenet
In article <3197B5CB.1969@is2.nyu.edu>, PanDuh!  wrote:
>Conradyay wrote:
>>
>> God is logical.  God cannot do anything against His character.  The correct
......
>> where did we get all we see now?  from nothing?  not logical huh?
>
>Ahh yes, so god can be self-existant but our UNIVERSE can't huh? Verrry logical... but then again
>all you lack opposable thumbs on your grasp of logic.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  To begin with, what kind of grammar is this? "...all you...."  I saw the
far side joke, but I don't get this statement.  No surprise though, because...
   This is stupid.  Who says it is "illogical", or "impossible" for God
to have ALWAYS existed?  Now,....were I to say that the "physical universe
has always existed" AND "there is NOTHING outside the physical universe"....
that would be stupid....and illogical.  (They are the same, but I just
want to make sure everyone knows what I mean.  It is stupid to be illogical,
and a lack of logic makes you stupid.)
     MY LOGICAL BASIS?  simple.  The 2nd law of thermodynamics is still the
most proven law in the physical universe.  It says that at t=infinity, the
universe will reach a state of maximum "disorder" called "heat death".  (Which
is actually quite cold, in terms of the energy density of the known universe)
So.....fact is, we aren't there.  Thus, we are NOT at t=infinity,....or anything
near that.....so the physical universe has NOT always existed....in terms of
what we know currently.
     Making unfounded assumptions like "Oh, but somewhere there is a place
where the 2nd law doesn't operate" or the like is also stupid.  There is
no indication in the physical universe that such is the case.  There is a
testimony that God created it all.  That God doesn't claim to be bound by
the laws of the physical universe.  Therefore, the logical choice would be
to give that consideration with your heart, rather than waste time arguing
unproveables....and looking stupid in the process.  Now will whoever started
this also stop posting this to newsgroups where it doesn't apply?  (I'm
allowing this "shut you up forever" post to crosspost, because I don't know
where the thing originated.  Forgive me please.  -Bob
 
 
 
 
 

                                    The Temple
 
 
 

        (NOTE: this was a letter I wrote on the date below.  I added a few
        notes to cover things I found out since.  I use abbreviations for old
        and new testament frequently.  "OT" and "NT".  The letter was met
        with disinterest, and false promises to "look into the matter".  I'm
        sorry that those who shepherd can't do so with integrity.  "I don't
        have time to look into this" is better than promising something and
        leaving it on the shelf until the end of time.  I appreciate those
        who, to this day show a genuine interest in discussing the things
        of God, and encouraging one another into the truth. BW)
                                                       7/9/88
        I would like to begin this letter by dispelling a false teaching which
has crept into,...or should I say been welcomed into the 20th century church.
I have shown some pastor's I am acquainted with these notes, after hearing
them use certain scriptures to help motivate people towards building programs.
If anyone can see an error in what I am teaching, please help to correct
this misled one.  Otherwise, let us accept the truth of God's word as it is
written.
        The text is II Samuel 7, I Chronicles 17 and 22, and Hebrews 1:1-5.
The first two Old Testament passages have never, to my knowledge, been
preached as a prophecy of Christ.*  The passage in Hebrews, however, TAGS THEM
as being one.  (At this point you should be finding your Bible and confirming
that...don't set there and blindly accept what I am saying as most of you did
when II Sam.7  was preached to you with a different meaning.  If the people
receiving this letter would commit among themselves to checking every teaching
against the word of truth, stuff like this would get confronted as it was
being preached.  I seriously wonder why many of you go listen to teaching,
when you don't even put any effort into checking its validity!  This is what
the Bereans were commended for in the book of Acts; so let us also be proved
"commendable".)  Ok, you should be in agreement with me at this time that
whatever it is that is written in II Samuel was a "foretelling", or prophecy
of Christ Jesus.
        Let us now turn to the Old Testament book of II Samuel.  Read chapter
7, then turn to I Chronicles 17 and compare with what you read in II Samuel...
These are records of the same event, as we can quickly see.  Most frequently
these are taught as "multiple event prophecies" about BOTH the building of
Solomon's temple, and Christ.
        I would strongly disagree with this position, as we clearly see that
God, in his opening statements, is going on about how he has "never asked
that someone build a house of cedar...".  He then notes that rather HE will
build a house for David.  Then he goes on to describe the one who will
build a "house for [his] name".
        In other references, we see that God was not pleased with the temple
of Solomon, and it was finally destroyed.  In Zech. 6, God once again tries
to point people toward the "one who will build the house for his name".  He
points to a priest who happens to be named Jeshua, and says he is the one.
But that Jeshua never built a physical temple.  Thus, God destroyed any
possible mis-interpretation through context.  He was always talking about
only Christ.
        Also, we note that in the 2 Samuel version of the event, 7:14 has
a statement that doesn't appear in the Chronicles version.  This verse has
been used to perpetuate confusion.  The authors of the New International
Version wrote "When he sins..." in reference to the "son" figure in the
prophecy.  KJV says "If he commits sin...".  It is interesting to see that
the NASB agrees with the NIV here!!  In any case, it should be obvious
that there is some uncertainty in the grammar here, and it is possible
that it is not well understood what the Hebrew text is trying to communicate.
        Jesus Christ "took on" the sins of the world.  Is it possible that
THIS is what the grammar was trying to communicate?  Could it be that the
writer was saying "If there is sin found upon him"?  I certainly would
think, given the context, that this MUST be what the author was saying.
       Put yourself in David's position, as a person living on the other
side of the cross.  What would you think if you had heard this prophecy
concerning one of your seed?  I often find myself deeply moved when I read
the words of God "I will build a house" and "He shall build an house for my
name" from II Samuel 7:11 and 13.), and the love that is available in him.  I
will refrain from detailing any further and move to destroying the foundations
upon which this whole deception is built; the (mis)-interpretation of
1 Chronicles 22.
        Many events of this chapter are not contained in the II Samuel 7
rendition of this time period, and no NT writer ever makes note of them.  What
transpires is quite simple; someone writes down what David was saying to
Solomon about building the earthly Temple.  He referred back to the word of
the Lord in I Chronicles 17; He did, in fact, cite most of the points of that
very prophecy in his talk with Solomon.  There are two main additions in
David's "personalized edition" to his son Solomon.
        1) David says in verse 8 that he can't build the house because God
says he is a "man of blood"; one who has shed much blood in wars.  This is
most certainly how David interpreted Nathan's prophecy, but, alas, it is not
part of the prophecy.  It is instead the words of a man named Shimei, who
pelted David with stones as he walked along in II Samuel 16, calling David a
"man of blood".  Shimei later repented and David let him live,...until he was
about to die, at which time he advised Solomon to kill him.  I believe that
David was quite free to do that which Nathan had originally suggested, (go
ahead and build the temple), and which, in a very practical aspect, he did.
From the prophecy, we can see that God was challenging David to examine his
motives for wanting to build, but David basically missed the point.  I will
not get into this right now, because it is not in line with the purpose of
this letter, but if you will read seeking understanding from the Holy Spirit,
I believe each of you will see what I am saying.
        2) He names Solomon as the son God spoke of.  This was a bad mistake,
but not unlike many others David had made right around that part of his life.
(Like having the people counted, and angering God so that he "smote" Israel.
(This occurred in chapter 21 my friends!!!)  The projection of these prophetic
expectations upon Solomon probably made his reign go much smoother in some
ways, (especially since the people were united in a project), but this was
also the source of a great delusion which led God to speak through later
prophets such as Isaiah, saying, "..where is the house that ye build unto
me?",(Isaiah 66:1), and Zechariah, "Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH;
and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the
Lord: (Zech 6:12).  It is also the delusion which persists today.
        My point is not that David was a bad king, because he was one of the
greatest.  When God convicted him of an offense, he saw his error and turned
around, which allowed God to say "He has a heart after God".  My point IS
THIS:  God did not label Solomon as the son of Nathan's prophecy, but rather
David did...because the context says so.  Therefore, let us begin to regard
this as the prophecy of Christ that it is,  and stop allowing men to use the
passage for giving scriptural "beef" to back building programs.  Much like
Nathan, I am not set against building a building  but I am VERY OPPOSED to
using un-Godly techniques to secure funds, etc.  God did not want David's
attention to drift off from the glorious house that he would build through his
own Son!  The church of Jesus Christ!  This is why God answered David as he
did, and why I write.  Let not any men suspect that any of us would have our
attention on anything but  our Lord and savior, AMEN?  The question is,
who will have a heart like David's, who seeing his errors repented and sought
after God's will?  Let those who will hear, hear and act.
* since writing this, I found that a few bible handbooks, like "Halleys" do
support the contextual truth in regard to prophecies of Christ.
 
 
 
 
 

                                 The Tithe Today

        How can we determine what the tithe means today?  If a person is
to believe all of the bible, as I do, they must examine it in it's full
context to come up with an answer that reflects that foundation.  I have
gathered enough information to know that I have done that MUCH better
than most "Pastors" whose teaching I have sat under through the years.
(Not to sound boastful.  Most of those men taught error, for some reasons
which will become obvious as we proceed.  It is certainly no great credit
that I am able to see an obvious conflict.  I fear too often, it is the
complexity of people's hearts that keeps them from seeing the obvious.)
        I recently went a few rounds on this topic, with a pastor who
was teaching some related things that I knew were heresy.  (Leading
people into covenants, which were meant to start a "good works club".
One of the works was tithing, which I decided to explore a bit with
him.)
        We began, as most pastors do, with an attempt to teach that
"THIS is a NEW TESTAMENT principle, because Jesus told the Pharisees
'you should have done the latter things, while still keeping the former'".
(Referring to their meticulous keeping of the tithe).  The fallacy in
this thinking is not difficult to see.  Jesus lived DURING "Old covenant"
times, though his teachings appear in the Gospels which are placed in
the NEW testament.  (I once had some people from a certain denomination
trying to tell me that "rightly dividing the word" meant the division of
Old and New Testament.  I almost laughed in their face, knowing that
were this so, ALL of the bibles we carry around are in CLEAR violation!!
They should be divided RIGHT where the veil in the temple is torn!  Amen?)
        In reality, God has never changed his way of dealing with man,
though there are certainly different manifestations at different times.
But God has always desired to have a personal relationship with his
creation.  No man, according to Hebrews and other references, has ever
been able to attain that relationship through following the decrees of
the "old Covenant"....because that Covenant is only a "foreshadow of
things to come".  The following of the temple regulations, etc. was only
designed to show people a picture of what God intended, so that they
might, THROUGH FAITH, ACTUALLY ENTER INTO A RELATIONSHIP!
        All that to verify that Jesus spoke quite accurately.  The Pharisees
were still bound to those regulations, because (though few of them actually
got to enjoy the benefits) they were a picture of what was YET to come.
When Jesus died, the sins of the world were put upon him, and the promises
of God were fulfilled.  "It is finished".  The most impactful words I can
think of in all time.  The complete character of God, who is love, laid
out for all to see.  What an awesome God I serve.
        Back to pastor D. Zaster...oh, I didn't mention his name did I?
:-)  Well, his next passage, of course, comes out of Malachi.  It reads
"...and you say 'how do we rob you [God]?' By withholding tithes.....Bring
the full tithe......and see if I will not open the floodgates of heaven"
To this I respond "But sir, I am a priest.  I am a relative of the high
priest.  Why would I want to put God to the test?  Who was this written
to?"  It should be obvious.  It was written to the people whose hearts
were far from God.  He USED the tithe to prove to them his faithfulness.
But, it is demeaning for me, a priest, to be told to "put God to the test".
And, in fact, true priests didn't need to be issued this challenge, because
they WERE already obeying the laws regarding tithing...which brings us to
the next challenge DZ issued.
        "So, you are a priest huh?  Well, look here in Numbers 18.  I says
'The priests are to give a tithe of the tithe....'  So there."  And then
I reply "But wait sir, let's read that WHOLE verse together to make sure
we aren't missing anything...hmmmm.  It says they give it to the High
Priest!  Not the "storehouse" which you have defined yourself to be."
        Thinking back, I recall the time in my life I figured that i
wasn't quite getting the straight scoop from my "pastors of the past".
One day, after getting robbed, hitting Ice with my car, etc. a dear
close relative came to me saying "Well, I know why this is happening.
You aren't tithing."  I said "Huh.  I always knew that's why they
passed that plate.  So that people can see who is giving what!  But
I read the bible as a youth, and it said 'let not your left hand know
what your right hand does [in relation to giving]".  Thus, I never told
her that I had tithed on every penny I had ever made in my life until
that time....to a building called "the church".
        Anyway,  I had learned to tithe in my heart.  It led me to get
into people's lives by opening up mine.  Instead of turning the needy
away, as the "church" of our day is accustomed, I began to talk to them
and ask the Lord to help me discern their needs.  Because of my own
pride, I wound up getting burned sometimes.  Other times, the Lord would
show me exactly what to do, and I would catch a thief right in the act
of "biting the hand that feeds them".  After the incident of the previous
paragraph, I was beginning to understand.
        So, there I was, not quite seeing how the scriptures tied together
to tell me to give my tithe to the poor.  But then IT HIT ME!!  As I was
refuting this "pastor's" final assertion, I realized that there was a
verse which provided the backbone to what I had come to understand!  It
came out as I was telling the pastor this.  I said "but...wait.  Jesus
said "AS you do to the least of these, you HAVE DONE UNTO ME"  NOTE: He
didn't say "it's kind of like doing it to me"!  HAHAHA!  God's word is
SO perfect!  The grammar of that scripture tells us POSITIVELY what our
job is as priests.
        The world pays us a salary for doing, whatever.  If we are truly
a priest of God, we "minister day and night in the house of the Lord"!
Therefore, everything we receive is, a "tithe".  (The old tithe was, like
many other things in the OT, a "foreshadow of things to come.) A
tithe from a heathen people, who are putting God to the test!  Isn't
that cool?  Doesn't THAT alter your work ethic!  Each of us should take
joy in the job God has given us!!  Our employer should feel blessed that
he has "given God a shot" by hiring us.  (You did tell your boss you are
a Christian, didn't you?  It's certainly a lot more important than your
hobbies, and I think it should appear on the resume somewhere.)
        Meanwhile, we give a tithe of that tithe to the 'least of these'
Jesus was talking about, and that is EXACTLY EQUAL to giving to him,
the ONE AND ONLY High Priest!  Praise God!  How could it be more clear?
I pray that this teaching will be liberating to all who read it.  -Bob
 
 
 
 
 
 

                                     The Pastoral Heresy
 

                I am often amused when I hear people tell me that some person,
        who is known as the "pastor" of a 1,000 member fellowship, is "their
        pastor".  I guess that's because I've come to understand more of what
        a pastor actually is over the past few years, and the thought of a
        single human being trying to pastor 1,000 people, or even 100 people
        is just utterly absurd.
                The biblical reference to "pastor" is, as many know, synonymous
        to the word "shepherd".  Now, it is not unreasonable to think that a
        literal shepherd could take care of 100 sheep pretty well.  After all,
        he only needs to make sure that they don't wonder to far from a certain
        physical proximity, and to occasionally ward off a predator.  But this
        is child's play compared to the job that faces a pastor.
                A pastor in the church of Jesus Christ has a great number of
        responsibilities towards each individual they are pastoring.  They
        must go beyond issuing a "blanket statement" each week from a pulpit.
        They must become personally involved, using their "hook" to help guide
        each individual sheep.  Some seem to think that they can rally their
        sheep with a bulldozer, in mass, but I've seen the results of this.
                A man, whose name everyone reading this knows, married a girl
        some years back.  I sat and listened as the "pastors" assured us all
        that they were utterly confident that this was the Lord's doing.  They
        noted how deeply they had gotten to know both of the participants over
        the years, but something in my heart yelled out "plastic".
                A few months later, the wife had left, saying "marriage wasn't
        what I expected it to be.".   I feel sorrow for this couple.  They were
        duped into thinking that they were involved in the body of Christ
        through the leadership of people who had no more insight into their
        lives than a total stranger.   They were not given good counsel.  When
        the 'body' is that loose knit, it is not the body of Christ.
                A pastor oversees the spiritual growth of people.  I've been
        pastoring, to a great degree, up to 5 people at a time for some years.
        I manage a house for Christian guys.  I do not "Lord authority", but
        I do take a firm stand on real issues, and I involve myself in the
        affairs of these men during the week.  While working, this is TOO MANY!
        I can't imagine any person truly pastoring more than this number.  Note
        that Jesus worked with 12.  He did it full time.  He did a much better
        job than I have done, though I give all credit to him for the perfect
        things that have happened of course.
                Jesus spoke to, and more loosely interacted with many more,
        I also have done.  But he was the shepherd, or pastor, of those twelve
        while on the planet earth.  His plan was that they would all become
        shepherds, as he commanded Peter "...then feed my sheep".   We see the
        apostles working to delegate authority in the book of acts, so that
        they would be free to go about doing what was most important for them.
        They were the last people the world would be witnessed to who had been
        directly discipled by the Lord himself!!
                Today, due to the influence of religious institutions through
        the ages, a very heretical model of pastorship has been adopted.  It is
        the single most inhibiting factor to the progress of Jesus' Church
        today, in my opinion.  If you are reading this, challenge your
        friends with these facts.  Each of us needs to be accountable to the
        other in the body of Christ.  But we cannot call someone our pastor,
        unless we let them see enough of our life so that they can tell when
        to guide us!!  So next time someone asks "who is your pastor", don't
        lie!  Either refer them to a person or people who qualify, or admit
        you don't have anyone like that in your life.
                Also, remember that a person who preaches isn't necessarily a
        pastor.  Preaching can serve many purposes, but the body of Christ
        should be aware of and standing behind that purpose.  When Peter spoke
        to the thousands, they were unbelievers.  They responded because the
        words were given for them by the holy spirit.
                Today, people try to imitate Peter too often I'm afraid.  The
        body of Christ would become much more effective, if people would share
        their words in a TEACHING environment, where the "class" can interact.
        This keeps the teacher from falling into error, unless they've totally
        surrounded themselves with people who desire a word to tickle their
        itching ears.  (I usually scratch an itch...doesn't tickling it just
        make it worse?  :-)  )   There is no hope for such, unless the Lord
        sees fit to send someone from the greater body of Christ to confront
        them.  This usually isn't received, but then neither were the prophets
        of the past.  If there is any seed of hope, God is faithful to send
        his correction to a situation like this.  -Bob
 

                          Lord, Help me do your will!
 

                I've often found myself praying this prayer.  I've come to
        realize how silly it must actually sound to God.  I understand now
        how I was subtly using God's seeming "failure" to answer that prayer
        as an excuse to continue sinning.
                The works of God have, in regard to our lives, provided seeds
        for our faith to sprout forth from.  God does not manipulate our faith.
        (i.e.. go into our spirit and force us to believe one thing or another.)
        He does, however, leave man "without excuse" as Paul writes.  The Holy
        Spirit, which convicts the world of sin, also "bears witness in my
        conscience" Paul writes.  God has done his part to make a perfect
        relationship with man possible once again!
                Therefore, with faith complete, a person will not sin.  After
        all, "no one hates their own life" Jesus said, and it would certainly
        be such if a person performed an act that they truly knew was self-
        destructive.  Rather, the enemy cleverly uses the imperfect faith in a
        heart, and leads us to believe that a self-destructive act is ACTUALLY
        the best thing for us!
                Thus, when we sin, it is as James wrote.  "...are led astray by
        our own evil desires....".  Those evil desires are what must be dealt
        with.  God has provided the seeds of faith, through the deeds he has
        done in each life since Adam, and through finally fulfilling his word
        by sending his son to die.   In doing so, he has left no excuse for us
        not to believe that he loves us.  Every command he has given is meant
        for our own good, and if we truly believe, we will not do evil.  (Read
        Hebrews 3 and 4,...and the whole book if you aren't familiar with it.)
                Therefore, it is absurd for us to pray the title of this.  WE
        should rather pray as David prayed "Lord, I have purposed in my heart
        to do you will"!  Then do it.  We must discipline our hearts, as we
        respond in faith to the discipline the Lord issues us.  Read also the
        first chapter of Isaiah, where the Lord speaks to the people of Israel
        saying (v.15) "When you spread your hands out in prayer I will hide my
        eyes from you, Yes, even though you multiply prayers, I won't listen.
        Your hands are covered with blood.  (16) Wash yourselves, make your-
        selves clean. Remove your evil deeds from My sight.  Cease to do evil."
                Clearly, the Lord is not going to do these things for us.  He
        has already made provision for cleansing.  There is a fountain which
        can cleanse us, but we must make the choice to use it.  We must go
        there ourselves.  God isn't going to drag us.  Therefore, do what he
        said in verse 16 above, for the people of this day are no different in
        their hearts.
                Then, we can truly pray "Lord, LEAD us not into temptation,
        but deliver us from evil."  Of course he will be faithful to do that.
        But he will not tamper with our decision as to whether to sincerely
        desire to go on that path.  But if we do go, we will find he is
        faithful to lead us into good works that will truly have an eternal
        impact.  We, with Jesus, will be able to say "I have food you know
        nothing of....Doing my father's work is my sustenance".   -Bob

                            The "Futility Theorem"
 

                The futility theorem as I like to call it, makes note
        that if everything in the universe is ultimately governed by a
        set of laws and/or "randomness", then human beings have no free
        will.  They AND all of their actions are merely the result of the
        state of all matter at some point in time, and the mathematical
        equations which govern those interactions.  (And possibly, again,
        "randomness".)
                "Randomness", first of all, needs to be broken down to
        terms, so we can see exactly what we are talking about.
        Scientists, like myself, refer to many events for which the
        mechanisms of stimulus are not clearly understood or perceived,
        as "random".  Atomic decay is a great historical example.  At one
        time, none of the mechanisms for this were understood.  The
        energy released from a particular atom was observed to occur at
        completely unpredictable times.
                As man has probed deeper and deeper into studies of
        atomic structure and the mechanisms of decay, the processes which
        cause a particular atom to emit energy become more an more clear.
        Being able to actually gather enough data to predict precisely
        when a particular atom will decay is still a ways off I would
        guess.  But the FACT remains....Sub-atomic particles DO NOT have
        "free wills".  They can't just "decide" "Ohhh, I think I'm going
        to decay now!  BYE BYE!!!"  Something stimulates them.
                 For some studies, it is sufficient to accept the seeming
        "randomness" with which atoms decay.  If there are a few billion
        atoms, each one having a half life of an hour or so, the meter on
        a geiger counter is probably going to stay nice and steady for
        some time, showing us that, averaged over a few seconds, the
        energy emission rate is "constant, and exponentially decreasing".
                 But let us not confuse the facts, when relating this to
        free will in humans.  Randomness is not free will.  (However, I
        suppose a person with free will could, hypothetically, choose to
        act randomly.  I'm not sure they would succeed though.)

                So, logically, one must consider what would happen if we
        had a huge computer which could store the state of every particle
        in the universe at a given moment.  The processor is, of course,
        is simply a logic network that follows the laws that govern the
        universe, and could calculate the future state of all matter and
        energy from this information.  Well, we all know the absurdity of
        doing this in practice, but just the fact that it hypothetically
        could be done makes us to realize that we are NOT in control at
        all under such a theory.  EVERYTHING I say and do is the result
        of history, equations, and,..perhaps that silly randomness
        thing...but I'm still not in control of ANYTHING!! HAHAHAHHA!!!
               Well, there it is, from the mad scientist to you.  The
        Bible, of course, tells us about "wills".  A "will" is possessed
        by God, and those made in his image.  They are not bound by the
        properties of the physical universe, and they are volatile.
        Their nature is completely un-knowable, for it is like trying to
        understand the nature of God who created us.
                It was a choice of the will which led Adam and Eve, and a
        third of all heaven to rebel against their creator; a creator who
        is Love.  A creator who set the standard for Love by dying for
        this race of self-made controllers, and who hopes they will come
        to understand that their only hope is to die to their own lusts
        by choosing to humble themselves before him.  Jesus Christ was
        God in the flesh, and when you choose to turn from your desire to
        control your own life, you will finally find life in him.  I
        anxiously look forward to talking to you when you have done this.
                                                        -Bob Weigel

                    The question of predestination

                Predestination.  What does it mean?  Note first, that the
        root word is "destiny", or "destination".  Let's examine some of
        the logic concerning the use of these words to gain insight on the
        word predestination.
                When a destination is selected for a trip, for example,
        does that in any way guarantee that the destination will be
        reached?  Of course not.  In contrast, when an almighty God selects
        a destination, he will arrive at it, because there is no power in
        the universe which can prevent this....or is there?
                There are several example in the bible, where God selects
        a "destination", but later changes his mind and selects a different
        destination.  (e.g.. Destroying the people of Israel during Moses
        leading, Nineva in the time of Jonah, and the explanation of this
        entire character trait in Ezek. 33).  Thus, it seems most straight-
        forward to believe that God operates on a knowledge of what is
        currently in people's hearts to do, and that he does not know the
        future free will choices that people will make....choices that will
        establish their character forever.  However, let's examine some of
        the theories which would contradict this point of view, in order to
        absolutely establish it as the only logical viewpoint.
                First, let's look at the a scripture which is often used
        to prove beyond the 'shadow of doubt' that God knows ALL the future
        choices we will make, and thus knows who will go to heaven, and who
        will go to hell before they are even born.   Turn to Psalm 139,
        where David notes that God knows the current state of his being.
        In verse 4, he says "Even before there is a word on my tongue, behold
        oh lord, thou dost know it all".  Many argue on the basis of this
        verse that the Lord knows everything we are ever going to say....
        however, these people are guilty of adding to the grammar.  The
        grammar does NOT specify how long before we speak a word God knows
        it.  Thus, it is possible that he only knows it the instant before
        our brain actually starts sending the instructions to make our lips
        move!
                In verse 13, David begins to speak about his pre birth
        relationship with God.  In v. 16, he says "...and in thy book
        they were all written, The days that were ordained for me, when
        as yet there was not one of them."  I ask "what book".  People
        often reply "Why, the book of life of course!".  And I say "So,
        you are saying that my SINS are written in the book of LIFE!?"
        After an uncomfortable pause, the answer "no" comes back.
                So, does God write literal "books" for his use?  Of course
        not.  His memory is infinite.  Why would he need to write notes
        to himself?  He only says that to help relate the concept to us,
        who can't remember unless we write it down.
                This scripture allows for a few interpretations.  It does
        NOT specify whether the "book" is a "permanent record", or whether
        it might be "revised", or totally rewritten many times during our
        lives.  On the basis of things to be discussed next, I assume this
        "book of destiny" DOES get altered many times, and that God is
        always "working things out for the best of those who love him",
        despite the fact that our choices often "foil" his perfect plans
        for us.
                Let's say, hypothetically, that God does know all the future
        free will choices we will make.  First, for choices to be truly
        "free will", they CAN NOT be determined from aspects of the creation
        of the universe.  (Read the "futility theorem" for an extensive
        discussion of this.)  If God, from his infinite knowledge of the
        processes of the universe he created, were to calculate our "free
        will choices", then it isn't truly free.  "Complex will" is a much
        more honest term for this kind of will.  In other words, under this
        model, we are all no more than a bunch of highly complex computers.
        I reject that theory altogether on the basis of the knowledge I do
        have about how God has made me.  If anyone reading this wishes to
        adopt such a view, I pity you....as I'm sure you do me.  Only
        difference?  I'm making a viable act of will when I choose to pity.
                Assuming we agree, God can attain information about our
        future free will choices from only one place: actually traveling
        into the future, viewing what has happened, then reporting back to
        himself.  The logical evaluation of this shows us that God must
        be everywhere in the future, all the time, and that all events are
        continually being played over and over with infinite resolution....
        forever!  Talk about futility.  Which is worse?!  I'm not sure.
        But I don't believe this is the God I serve.
                The Jonah incident is most insightful in removing all doubt
        for me.  God told Jonah, in 3:1-4, that he was going to overthrow
        Nineveh in 40 days.  (Unless we want to speculate that Jonah didn't
        properly relay what God said.  Verse 10 disproves this beyond all
        doubt if the bible is authoritative.)  So the fact remains that:
        1) God selected a destiny for the city, and spoke it.
        2) God changed his mind.
        3) If God had previous knowledge that the city would repent,
           then he is a liar, because he specifically cited that he
           would perform what he PREVIOUSLY had knowledge that he would
           NOT perform.
        4) God does not lie.
                Once again, I challenge people to read Ezekiel 33, and
        pray that God will reveal his character to you.  Not a "sci-fi"
        God, who operates "outside of time", but a God who simply exists
        IN TIME (which is nothing more than the progression of events)
        WITH us.  Because of his infinite strength, he KNOWS he will endure
        forever, the "alpha and omega".  Because of his infinite wisdom,
        and the fact that there will always be plenty of selfish, hate filled
        people to go about doing the predictable, he can predict future
        events with pinpoint accuracy.
                Also note that God never prophesied about people who were
        not yet conceived, except for two.  Jesus, (because God knew he
        would be his very own spirit in the body of a man, and the spirit
        contains the "character", or "cemented decision making template"),
        and John the baptist.  (Who Jesus said WAS the Elijah to come, and
        so I assume was really the "pre developed spirit" of Elijah.)
                Each of us, when we are conceived, enter into a process.
        We are born apart from God because of Adam's sin, but God is right
        there trying to have a relationship with us.  God is "willing that
        none should perish", and the only way not to perish is to have a
        relationship with him.  I therefore logically state that he is
        always trying to have a relationship with us!  Praise God.
                But there are people who, like the people in Noah's day,
        become totally darkened in their hearts.  There is no longer any
        hope that they will have a relationship with God, and they become
        reduced to "tools", or the "creatures set aside for destruction"
        spoken of by the author of Romans.  God sees the heart, and knows
        when this point of "conscience searing" has been reached.  I don't
        believe he will ever allow a person to die until they have either
        come to relationship with him, or have totally closed themselves
        off to the possibility.
                I pray this teaching will give people a hope for today.....
        and that the bonds of futility will be snapped.  God has a great
        hope and purpose for each of us.  Let us not become futile in our
        thinking.  Every decision we make has importance, and God has so
        much invested in each of us.  Let's not let him down.  -Bob

                       Time Travel, etc.

    Here is an excerpt from an "off topic" newgroup discussion.-Bob
Newsgroups: alt.2600,alt.atheism,alt.bible,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.censorship,alt.christnet,alt.christnet.bible,alt.culture.internet,alt.culture.usenet,alt.fashion,alt.magick,alt.mindcontrol,alt.nuke.the.USA,alt.pagan,alt.parents-teens,alt.psychoative,alt.religion.scientology,alt.rock-n-roll,alt.satanism,alt.skinheads,alt.society.anarchy,alt.zen,rec.music.christian
Subject: Re: How do you know the Bible is the truth?
Summary:
Expires:
References: <-1903960421310001@iynx.esnet.com> <4v7mtp$pl4@epimetheus.algonet.se> <321EA456.3FAC@zianet.com> <321F49F2.206F@skyinet.net>
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: Oregon Public Networking: Eugene Freenet
Keywords:
Cc:
In article <321F49F2.206F@skyinet.net>, ac  wrote:
>Mattias Johansson wrote:
>
>> x@apocalypse.org (Xochi Zen) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <4t8g86$782@morse.ukonline.co.uk>,
>> >paul.kaczmarek  wrote:
>> >>cdm@megalinx.net (Charles Marshall) wrote:
>> >>>Why should  God have to prove His awesome power to you? ISN'T IT ENOUGH THAT
>> >>>HE CREATED THE WORLD IN 6 DAYS!!!
>>
>> >Bzzzt! If God subsists outside of space and time, and is omnipotent,
   "Outside of....space and time"?  Exactly what did he mean there.  Hmmm.
The COULD mean
1) God gets information about the future by...actually visiting it...ie. the
logical conclusion being that EVERYTHING is CONTINUALLY going on ALL THE TIME,
from God's perspective.  I think this is one of the stupidest, most unfounded
teachings on the planet right now.
2) God is not bound by the laws of the universe (is "outside space"), and
   is NOT capable of any interaction INSIDE "space"....:-)
3) 2), except God IS capable of interaction inside "space", and in fact
   created all that we observe as being space.
4) God is "outside time" in terms of being able to slew through an infinite
number of events in no time....ie. his creative interaction over creation
is not bound by the laws inside creation.  This is the biblical testimony.
You can make up your own if you like, and I testify that you will be judged
on the basis of all the unfounded assumptions nested in your argument.
   Anyway, that's not a comprehensive list, but those are the most important
ones for discussion right now I would think.  1) is a logical absurdity.
There is nothing in the bible OR in science which would indicate ANYTHING
can "time travel". (you can dilate time, according to Einsteinian physics,
but you can't go back once you're in the future...duhhhh...because the
events have already taken place.  They are no more.  They never will be
again, no matter how fast you travel, or whether you are God.  God does NOT
live outside reality.
     2), meanwhile is silly also, because there is nothing to indicate
God isn't involved in the physical universe.  I continually see things
that can't be explained in terms of the physical universe alone, like
people being healed....I mean how many doctors want to look that stupid...
"Ahem....I'm sorry mam, your daughter is going to be a vegetable at best".
But then God allows her to heal and graduate from High School and continue
on in life.  "vegetable"?  No.  Faithless, hopeless doctor.  God is quite
involved in his creation still, leaving 3) as a much more logical selection
between those two.
     4) is simply the biblical testimony about God.  It comes from many
authors, describing God's interaction with man and his universe.  He is
able to do whatever he wants with creation, in whatever amount of time
he wants it to take.
  NOW...back to our original question.  How can you know what is really
true here?  Science tells us things about creation, and science itself
currently testifies that there IS a creation time.  (Else wise, we would
currently, at time t=infinity since the [non]beginning of creation, and
the laws of physics call that time "heat death", where no further entropy
loss is possible...as in "game over dude!")  BUT science tells us NOTHING
directly about where creation came from.
  Thus, a person is left to either:
1) make up something
2) sincerely desire to have a relationship with the one who created it
    all, in hopes that they created us all for a good purpose...and that
    they will then help us know what is really true.....whether something
    already testified of, or something totally new!
3) blindly believe someone else's story.
  I recommend two, and...GUESS WHAT???!!!!!  So did Jesus.  John 7:17 says
"If anyone wants to do God's will, he will SEE whether these teachings
come from me, or whether they are from the father in heaven".  COool, eh?
  The bible, as I hinted, IF read as an authoritative historical text,
portrays a God with flawlessly coherent character.  (Read, for example
Ezekial 33 for a brief synopsis of how his character will ALWAYS interact
with mankind.)
  The free will of man is a critical element in this whole scenario.  Many
believe that God knows who will go to heaven and hell before they are
conceived.  I do not.  I believe he creates us in his image; a spirit, and
houses us in these physical bodies where we can learn to come to love him,
rather than living to fulfill our body, which is OBVIOUSLY going to perish,
thus making our lives amount to NOTHING.
   This stuff is not rocket science,...unless the heart is hard.  Then it
gets real tricky, because the flesh can blind your spirit.  Pray for
God to open your eyes if you are reading this and have doubts.  I love
you and I know God does too. -Bob
3)
 
 

                           The question of abortion

                One of the touchy topics of our day is, of course, one
        of those looked at with the most emotion, and the least amount
        of sound reasoning.  It has been a long time since anyone has
        argued with me on this topic, because I don't like to argue
        about things that are not nailed down, WHILE things which are
        go undiscussed!
                The abortion "issue" is so childishly simple at the roots,
        that people don't seem to be able to grasp it for the most part.
        After all, the question we are really discussing here is two part.
        First, we must rediscover the definition of "murder".  (A child can
        often skip this part).  Then we must ask if abortion fits under
        that definition.
                Many argue that murder is, as some dictionaries put it,
        "unlawful killing".  Haha!  Well, if that's our working definition,
        then I guess Hitler wasn't a murderer, until he started killing in
        other social systems!  After all, he MADE THE LAWS.  The killing he
        did in his own country was QUITE legal.  He legally exterminated the
        Hebrew people who happened to be citizens of his country.  What a sick
        definition.
                I appeal that we modify our definition of murder back to God's.
        Murder is, logically, when we intentionally take an action which keeps
        a person from being among us, who, were said action NOT taken, would
        possibly be living among us.
                Does abortion fit under this definition?  Of course it does.
        So each of us must make a decision.  Will we believe that Hitler and
        Stalin, Mao and Chou(the two greatest murderers of all time) were not
        murderers?  Or will we begin to call people who promote abortion what
        they are?  Murderers.
                Even the most vile offender can be made clean by the blood
        of Christ.  But woe to those who do not call them to repentance.
        Woe to those who rationalize murder.  Woe to those who make up
        hypothetical instances where it "might be right".  God is not
        pleased.  He wishes that we would trust him, rather than playing
        God and deciding who should die.  Often, even in cases where the
        mother's life appears in jeopardy, healing could take place if
        people would turn to God in prayer, rather than taking matters
        into their own lives and shedding innocent blood.  -Bob
                "5 months early, you survive.  Until, you're born,
                 you're not alive."  -Julie Miller "Dangerous place"
 
 
 
 
 

                            Yer basic sex talk....

(  Here is an excerpt from an answer given to a question which includes
some of the basic teachings on the topic guaranteed to make your life
a whole lot less miserable, now and forever.  )

Subject: Re: Where does which Bible condemn Homosexuality?
    First of all, the bible is very clear about one thing.  "Spiritual
wisdom" seems like stupidity to those who don't have a personal
relationship with God....so, rather than arguing about things which
can easily get clouded by all kinds of partially rooted philosophies,
let me ask "do you have a relationship with the spirit of the living
God?"  If not, there is no reason I should say anything, because it's
not going to be perceived in the context of ultimate truth.
    If you do, then the nature of things will quickly teach you. Listen:

1) God created all things for a purpose.
2) Man often twists those things into evil (e.g.. God made rocks to stand
   on, not to bash your brother over the head with)
3) Marriage, as Paul states, is to be a picture of Christ's love for
   the church.  therefore:
  a) pre engagement is symbolic of the time before we come to Christ.
  b) engagement is symbolic of our time here on earth, apart from Christ
     physically, but in faith knowing that he has "gone to prepare a
     place for us" and will some day "return for his bride".
   c) the wedding day is symbolic of our union with Christ....including
       the ultimate symbol of union in sex....from which the possibility
       of new life being created exists.
    So, to end our basic sex talk here, there are some logical conclusions.
  1) Don't lust.  Go to God for cleansing and let him purify your mind
     so that you are in control LISTENING to him. (If you can't get past
     this step, nobody can help you.  You need to desire God more than
     a "fix" for you physical appetite, because someday, you are going to
     be in eternity...WITHOUT that body you spent your life serving!)
  2) M-M or F-F marriages do not fulfill the symbology God designed
    marriages to fulfill.  Therefore, marry someone of the opposite
    sex if you marry.
  3) Don't have sex before you are married.  This also destroys the
   picture God is trying to portray through your life.
  4) Don't be controlled by lust AFTER you are married.!!! (Yes, God
   still wants to be part of our lives, and wants to work good things
   in our lives even after we are married...like "Duh!" :-)  )
  5)...in which case we don't need to worry about taking pills, using
   stupid methods to control pregnancy, etc.  BECAUSE GOD is in control.
   God doesn't lead us to have sex for no reason.  God doesn't cause
   that act to result in a baby for no reason.  God has good things in
   mind for those who love him.
Praise God there is forgiveness and cleansing even when we don't follow
his ultimate plan, and he is quick to construct a NEW plan which is
the best for us right now...and that's real good!  I'll see you at
the foot of the cross!  -Bob
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

                               Who Gets into Heaven Anyway?

        I'm often asked about various cults, and whether it is possible
     for members of such to get into heaven.  This brings up some very
     fundamental questions, which the bible provides sound answers for.
        First, our relationship with God is personal.  "Behold, I stand
     at the door [of your heart] and knock.  If anyone will open the door,
     I will come in and eat with them".   Communion with God begins when
     we open up our heart to him.  John 10 gives a very good explanation,
     from the words of Jesus, of the terms of our relationship with God.
         He describes himself as a "shepherd".  Some are his sheep.
     Unlike regular sheep, who have little choice in whose sheep they are,
     we have a choice.  It says "My sheep hear my voice.....they will not
     listen to the voice of the thief, for they do not know it".
         Anybody can become his sheep.  But it requires a decision.  A
     decision to favor the voice of God over the voices of people.  A
     decision to believe that he loves you enough to desire a personal
     relationship with you.  The writer of Hebrews speaks of the sin of
     the people of Israel.  It was because of their unbelief, in Hebrews
     4, that they did not enter into his rest.  Thus, each of us is saved
     by putting our faith in what God has said. (Hebrews 4:3) Jesus said
     "to do my Father's work is my sustenance".  For us also, doing the
     work of God can be a light burden.  Our own works make us weary, but
     the work of God is a delight to our souls!
         Therefore, I say that anyone can go to heaven, until they have
     so seared their conscience that there is no hope of repentance.  If
     you repent, then you know you are NOT this person.  (Hebrews 6).  I
     believe there are many people who are involved in some sort of cult
     but they will be in heaven because of their relationship with God.
     (Eventually, because of that relationship with God, they will probably
     either leave the cult, or be thrown out, or they will be instrumental
     in the destruction of the cult.)
         Christian cults are characterized by their claim that the doctrine
     of the historical Jesus is being taught, while in reality they have
     added to or taken away from the literal grammatical text available from
     archeology and copied texts passed down through the centuries.  Their
     doing so is no accident in most cases.  There are rare cases of cults
     which may have legitimate confusion at their foundations.  (Shakers,
     for example?)  In most cases though, a demonic conspiracy, aimed at
     putting people in bondage for the profit of the conspirators is more
     likely the foundation.  People who basically name themselves as deity
     right alongside the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are obvious examples.
     (Joseph Smith of Mormonism, for example.)
         Many people teach that even Catholicism is guilty of this, and by
     the admission of their own leaders, it appears they are.  They teach, as
     law things which were spoken by past "church" leaders.  They have
     taught that the pope is incapable of error, which I suppose forms the
     foundation for most of this..
         Even their first pope, Peter, erred according to Acts.  The
     disciples who were filled with the spirit knew enough to correct
     him, and restore him.  The popes, historically, have had no such
     luxury.  They have been thrust into a position that God has meant
     no man to take.....a position above accountability.  Too bad.
          I hear the recent pope has finally denounced the decision of
     some of the early leaders to launch the crusades.  That's a nice
     gesture, but it doesn't keep catholicism from fitting the cult
     category.  Forming a formal man-made priesthood hierarchy, where
     the biblical picture only allows for ONE high priest (Christ) and
     a nation of priests (the church), is another fine example of how
     they have served to mis-represent the heart of God as an organization.
          YET, I know many catholic people that I believe will be in heaven.
     They work within the boundaries of a corrupt organization, and are
     able to actually minister there I believe.  I don't try to compel them
     to avoid all catholics, because, in reality, it is no less of a snare
     than the majority of "organized religion" today.  I do urge them to
     be involved with a group of people that love God, and, preferably,
     are working with different groups on Sunday.  (To avoid the appearance
     of divisions in the church!)
          Reading some of my other works, you will see why other groups are
     no less off biblically.  Any group that teaches that there must be a
     "head pastor" has added to the bible.  I see no such teaching.  They
     are guilty of teaching heresy.
          All groups which teach that you must give your tithes to a particular
     man have totally missed the bibles' teaching on stewardship.  They are
     guilty of teaching presumptuously.  They need to read the bible within
     it's entire context, and pray that the holy spirit will help them
     assemble the pieces that are setting right there in bold print.
          God's Church is invisible.  Nobody can see my heart.  Nobody
     can see yours.   Except for God.  Therefore, only he truly sees the
     church, yet we are to attempt to assemble together!  If we desire that
     in our heart, he will fit us together for his purposes.  Not just to
     sit there every Sunday, get what we call "recharged" (which I call
     re-diluded),  then go out and work all week.  Hebrews 4 says "There is
     a Sabbath rest for the people of God....a rest from their OWN DEAD WORKS"
          Please consider this carefully.  Are you doing what God has truly
     motivated YOU to do?  Or are you just following a pattern somebody
     taught you?  Please consider this carefully, because I don't care if
     you call yourself a Pentecostal, Mormon, Jehovah Witness, Bahai, or
     a prophet of Satan himself.  I want to see you in heaven.  I love
     you.  God loves you.  You are on this Earth because he still sees
     a hope of establishing a relationship with you.  Please don't let
     the teachings of people get in the way.  Open your heart to him now,
     and let him guide you through the scriptures as you have never seen
     them before.  God is faithful to lead you if you will just submit to
     becoming one of his sheep.  And he is the only GOOD shepherd.  -Bob
 
 
 
 
 

                  How does he Church Assemble Together?


          "Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together,
  as some are in the habit of doing."  This scripture is often
  used to compel people to attend various meetings, but, I am
  often very skeptical about something.  I must ask a question.
  Just because you are meeting with some people who claim to
  be doing God's will, does that mean you are "assembling" as
  the scripture in Hebrews 10:25 says?
          God gives us all very diverse gifts.  I think that's
  his way of testing our love for one another.  It would appear
  that today, most prefer their particular gift, or ways of doing
  things that might be related to that gift, over each other.
          Before we can truly assemble in a unit of service to God,
  we must have all the right parts present.  The apostle compares
  those parts to eyes, ears, feet, hands, etc.  Very different
  parts.  The only thing they have in common is their flesh
  covering.  Their purposes and forms are completely different.
  Yet they need to be connected to one another to work.
          Many people have asked "why aren't we seeing the power
  of God manifest in the church today".  I think the answer is
  pretty obvious.  A great portion of the church has allowed itself
  to be controlled by people who glorify SCHISMS.  A schism is an
  ungodly division, which violates the clear command of 1 Co. 1:10.
  They divide themselves from others, who, when prodded, they will
  even admit are also in the body of Christ.  (To avoid humiliation)
          And on what basis are these divisions formed?  Oh,...
  nothing REALLY that important....only the VERY things God is
  depending on being JOINED TOGETHER for a true "assembling" to
  happen!  Yes, it is very wrong.  I pray that those who read
  this and understand will join in the fight to bring unity in
  the body of Christ.  If people will not hear you, then treat
  them according to Matthew 18:15, and eventually, the body of
  Christ will emerge in power!
          In order for assembly to happen, impure elements must
  be cast out.  They are like defective parts in a gun.  When you
  fire it, and the barrel explodes in your face, you think twice
  before you try using that gun again.  Therefore, sin must be
  confronted.  Those who repent will be restored and strengthened.
  Those who are offended are not part of the body of Christ anyway,
  and so their removal strengthens the body by removing parts that
  don't work.  Otherwise the body will not function, but will rather
  self destruct when asked to perform.





                         Who is Y'shua?


          The name "Jesus" is a phonically modified representation
  of a man's name who walked the earth about 2000 years ago, and due
  to his actions, has become the most famous person in the history
  of planet earth.  "Y'shua" is actually a closer representation of
  his name, so I often use it.  After all, how many of us appreciate
  having our names mis-pronounced?
          Of course, in the case of this man, having his name mis-
  pronounced is the most trivial of offenses.  After fulfilling all
  that the prophets, (whose words were held so dear to the religious
  people of the day), regarding the long awaited "messiah", this man
  was nailed to a wooden cross, which was then dropped into the ground
  so that he might be publicly humiliated between two thieves as he
  died.  Those people still wait for a Messiah today.  
          This comes as no surprise, because those same prophets had
  spoken of the masses, saying "You are forever hearing but not 
  perceiving..."  Blinded by their own selfish desires, these people
  completely misunderstood who their Messiah would be.  They looked
  for someone who would deliver them from the Romans, in those
  particular days.  Ironically, it was a Roman government that the
  Jewish leaders pressured into crucifying their messiah.
          This man claimed to be equal to the God of creation, which
  the Jews attempted to stone him for.  They did not understand that
  God had planned to put his very own spirit in a man, because nobody
  but God himself is worthy to be a "spotless lamb" that can be offered
  up as a sacrifice for our sins.  ANY other spirit would have sinned
  at some point, and THEMSELVES become in need of cleansing from sin.
  But God is himself Love by his very nature!
          This is why the apostle John writes "God is love.  Anyone
  who knows God, knows love.  Anyone who does not know God, does not
  know love."  This is also why the prophet Nathan shared God's words
  in 1 Chronicles 17, regarding the building of the temple.  (See the
  study on this topic).  God shared that "I will be the one who will
  build a house for you", in response to David's desire to build a
  house for God.  Then he said that one of David's own seed would build
  the house!
          Peter clearly teaches that this "house" God kept referring to
  (Again in Zechariah 6, in case you doubt it) is the "structure" that
  results when a bunch of people get filled with God's spirit of love,
  and begin to function together with the diverse gifts he gives them!
  (See the teaching on  assembling together. )


(Ian Chai speaking on pronouncing the Lord's name)
      The reason for the variations is that we're transliterating from
  different languages. The original name is Y'SHUA in Hebrew. When
  transliterated to Greek, and then with Greek grammatical rules applied,
  this becomes IESOUS. ("UA" is not a valid ending for a Greek noun
  nominative. Greek nouns have different endings depending on what part
  of speech they are in.) This was then transliterated to Latin as IESUS
  (I think) and then to German as JESUS (pronounced "yay-soos") and then
  English kept the spelling but changed the meaning of the letters so
  that it comes out "gee-sirs" which is horribly far from Y'SHUA...
  but as you pointed out, I'm sure the Master of the Universe is far less
  concerned about trivialities like this than whether our hearts and
  minds are given over to HIM! 8-)





                    Being Led of the Spirit


        I quote once again one of my favorite scriptures, John
7:17.  "If anyone wants to do God's will, they will see whether
my words are my own, or whether they come from the father in heaven".
This scripture contains all the truth a person will need to start
their way toward eternal life.  You might ask "what about John 3:16"?
        "For God so loved the world, that he sent his only begotten
son, that whosover shall believe in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life".   John 3:16 tells many good things.  It tells us
that God loves us, and actually sent his son [to die for us].  It
expresses God's intent that we have eternal life.  But within itself,
it doesn't lay the foundation for the attainment of that.
        John 7:17 lays a powerful foundation.  It tells us that

1) faith in the TRUTH, is dependent on OUR decision to do God's will.
   He will not twist our arm, and, of course, through history, allows
   people who refuse to desire his will to go on to their destruction.
   God, willing that none would perish does absolutely everything he can.
   He warns them, pleads with them, then finally when there is no hope,
   allows them to be "creatures of wrath, prepared for destruction".

2) When we do decide to lay down our own life for God's will, we see
   that Jesus words, which include "the spirit will lead you into all
   truth", are TRUE!  Jesus, the way, the truth, the life.  Often, this
   is a process (or always).  But a true seed of faith will grow.

3) God waits for ANYONE to invite him into their heart.  What prevents
   him from entering in?  Our own stubborn will exalted over his.  If,
   in the core of our being, we have intent to keep our own agenda in
   this life, God sees that.  SINCE he assures us that he will complete
   the work he begins, that means he won't BEGIN until he knows he can
   complete the job.  More specifically, he won't enter into a "temple"
   that is filled with foul stuff.  Each of us are the "temple of the
   holy spirit", when he enters in.  God will not share that temple with
   an evil spirit.  He sees when he can enter in, and immediately
   does.  (By this, as it says in Romans, many have come to know God by
   the witness of his creation, etc.  They have never heard of Jesus, but
   they understand his character, and DO come to the father through him,
   by the revelation of that character God gives each individual.)

        So being filled with the spirit is not hard.  It just takes a
heart that wants to do God's will.  (And given that we have all wanted
to do our own, which is the nature of sin; a perversion of God's creative
intent that we be in constant fellowship with his spirit, it takes true
repentance to come to this point.  This is symbolized by the baptism of
John.  Thus it is written "through baptism are ye saved" in the writings
of Peter.  For without that baptism of repentance, the holy spirit, who
is truly the nature of our salvation can't enter in.  Yet many receive
John's baptism and never understand that God wants to dwell in fellowship
with them, and they fall right back into sin.)  -Bob



My summer raft trip



(Excerpt from an old e-mail of mine, recounting a relevant experience)

   Good article!  I  can certainly relate, though I think I'm finally 
getting over some of the bumps....kind of like when I chased my raft
down the river the other day.  I was alerted by my friend who had bare
feet, and I "hoofed it" to an intercept path....which wound up being
the long way, because it took me through some rapids with zig-zag
rocks underneath....arghhhhh!  I got a little scraped up in my attempt
to make time there, as the raft continued to leave me behind.  Finally,
when all hope was lost, I felt large pebbles, and I got up and ran fast
once again, catching the thing right before it got into deep water.  (I'm
not at all buoyant, and can't swim a lick.)
    If I had only known, 15 feet to the left was a very easy course I
could have followed to the same point, where I could have just waited
for the raft to get there....oh well. :-)  That's how relationships
have been I guess too for me....in some ways.
    Of course, in relationships, the course changes at random.  Any more
I just figure "this is going to be a ministry thing".... If the Lord does
bring me a wife, that's fine and dandy.  That's what he did for Adam, and
that's the way it will have to be for me.  There's no way I can find her
without his leading.  I'd waste so much time "knocking on doors" that I
would get nothing done for the kingdom of heaven.  (See my home page for
some lyrics on the topic, http://www.efn.org/~baw)  Good to hear someone
else having a similar perspective on these things.  God bless, -Bob






              Ho Ho HOooold on there big fella!


     In Romans we are told that one person may consider a day special.  If
he does that unto the Lord, fine.  But he shouldn't look down on another
who considers every day the same and does that unto the Lord.  (Rom 14:5-6)
     We should be alerted though, that many are in bondage to holidays.
They do not celebrate them out of the spirit's leading, but out of some
kind of compulsion.  Upon examining the foundations of the holidays set
apart by society, it is not surprising to find that the days were pagan
celebrations.  Perhaps we have examples of this in our own society.  Read
this submission and decide for yourself.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mary's Dream

        I had a dream Joseph. I don't understand it really, 
but I think it was about a birthday celebration for our son.
It was called "Christmas" sometimes.
        The people had been preparing for it about six weeks.  
They had decorated the house and bought new clothes.  They'd 
visited their local merchants many times, and had purchased
elaborate gifts.  It was very peculiar though, because the gifts
didn't seem to be ones most people would give to our son.
        They wrapped them in beautiful paper and tied them with 
lovely bows and stacked them beneath a tree....yes, a TREE Joseph!
Right there in their house!  They decorated the tree also.  The 
branches were full of sparkling ornaments, glowing balls and glitter.
On top was a beautifully crafted figure which bore resemblance to an
angel.
        Everyone was excited as they gathered around the tree.  They
passed gifts to one another, and lights flashed as children tore open
the gifts!  They were for each other Joseph!  Not our son!!  I don't
think they even knew him.  They never made mention of his name, and
their children were disrespectful to each other, and even fought over
the gifts they had been given.  One child began to throw a tantrum
because he thought another child had his gift; not realizing that the
other child had been given exactly the same thing.
        Doesn't it seem odd for people to go to all that trouble to
celebrate someone's birthday if they don't know Him?  I had the strangest
feeling that if our Son had gone to this celebration He would have been
intruding.
        Everything was so beautiful, Joseph, and everyone so full of
cheer, but it made me want to cry.  How sad for Jesus - not to be wanted
at His own birthday celebration.  I'm glad it was only a dream.
How terrible, Joseph, if it had been real.


-Original author unknown.  Slightly altered, 12/26/97

--------------
    Very interesting thoughts.  Another you might consider.  Last year (1999) a
friend showed me a book he'd gotten.  The author did extensive research to, as
exhaustively as possible, identify various "elves" and "gnomes" that had been
considered as possibly real characters in different societies.  MANY had a 
character who resembled the elf-like Santa.  The most noteworthy similarity,
other than appearance, and joviality, was the fact that the character would
issue rewards/curses based on people's performance.  (The "lump of coal" comes
from one of these.)  Now, isn't that Satan's gospel?  That we can EARN our OWN
salvation?  Perhaps "Satan clause" is a better name.  Just a thought.  -Bob



                    What is the Church?

    Many seem to think the "church" is a particular organization with a
building and a head office probably somewhere.  Often, these are referred
to as "different bodies".  This language greatly troubles me, because I
think the world is confused enough.  Why do we have to portray the body of
Christ as some multiple entity?
    We don't and Jesus didn't either.  He only referred to HIS church.  The
greek word eklesia is used and is translated in our language as "assembly".
The "assembly of God" organization made good on this fact when selecting
their name.  Yet, just because you get the name right doesn't mean everyone
in your building is in Jesus' church!  Not even in your leadership in fact.
    The simple truth is, Jesus taught the Woman at the well that we are to
worship God in spirit and in truth.  We are the temple of God if we are his
people.  Peter tells us that we are each "living stones" in that temple.  Each
one has an important place.  Consider that next time you refer to something
as "church".  Is it really?  Do the others there consider YOU invaluable?  Or
are you just a person who they wouldn't really miss much, unless you regularly
drop in a big chunk of money?
    Jesus is the one TRUE head of HIS church.  There is no "head office" other 
than him!  Each servant is directly accountable to him AND to each other.  
there is no leadership heirarchy where a man assumes ultimate authority over
another person.  Rather, if anyone perceived as a leader turns the wrong way,
it may well take someone who isn't perceived as such to help correct them.  If
they regard themselves above correction by such a person, then they have allowed
their head to swell, and God will turn his face away from their prideful state.
    Beware.  There are functionally many more "cults" than you might imagine.
If a man greets you with "welcome to the house of God", it's good to ask why.
Is he saying the building is God's house, when we KNOW the truth Christ wants
to get across is that his PEOPLE are his house?  Or is he saying that God's
house is only assembled when it's in the stupid building?  What is the
significance of that sentence?  Ask next time you hear it.  Let me know what
they tell you.


                    Will He find faith?


    The question should haunt the minds of anyone who has read the bible.
It refers to Jesus' return, and the state of the world at that time.  The
question is a valid one if we look at history.
    Today, I spoke briefly with a mockerous fellow in a chat group.  He was
raving about how evil God was because he ordered the people of Canaan put to
death.  Women, Men AND Children.  Why would a God of Love do something like
this?
    Like most people, this man thought he knew much, but in reality, knows
very little.  He doesn't know the state of people's hearts, and how completely
they can choose to turn to wickedness in a way that God cannot cure.  God gave
us free choice.  When we exercise it, it's out of his control....hence the use
of the word "free".  Even children exercise it, and begin their path towards or
away from God at a very young age.  
    He also doesn't realize that Children might turn towards God, and he might
use that time of destruction to finalize drawing them to himself.  Thus, some
of the children might be saved because of this; whereas if God had just allowed 
them to be raised by the evil society, it might have just been a source of
discouragement living among those people.  
    We're all going to die sometime to these fleshly bodies.  If we are ready
to go to heaven, that's a good thing.  God is willing that none would perish,
so he works all things to bring as many as possible to himself.
    Back to history as a whole though.  Very few seem to turn to the Lord.
A few Godly men like Enoch lived before the flood.  But only Noah was found
to be a man after God's heart amongst ALL of the EARTH!  Now, Methuselah
the oldest man to live was STILL ALIVE the year of the flood!  Think of 
that.  These guys were having at least 10 kids average probably with a 30
year turnaround rate.  That's about 30 generations living, and maybe half
had died already, though I doubt it.  Anyway, something around a 100 or
so MILLION PEOPLE!  And...one decent guy among them.  "Only evil all of
the time" in the hearts of the REST!  Isn't that...STAGGERING!  Ouch!!
    God's chosen people, Israel.  Jacob the heel grasper struggled and
God finally won out in his life.  Some mighty men of God came from his
lineage.  Certainly higher than the odds we'd seen previously.  But still,
when the chosen people endured their captivity which God attempted to use
to contrast walking as slaves, and walking free in him, most didn't learn.
Only two men named Caleb and Joshua rose to the occasion and trusted God.
The rest died in the desert and never saw the promised land.  
    They utterly destroyed the inhabitants of the land, who had fallen into
idolotry.  There were no people after Gods' heart among them.  Back in
history a ways, we see where Abraham asks God "would you save the city if
there were found x righteous there?"  God would save the city if there were
a measly few because as long as they haven't killed them,there must be hope.
    So, God destroyed the city after removing Lot, and even his wife looked
back because of her affection for the wicked place.  God takes no pleasure
in the death of the wicked, but with man's sin he will not strive.  In other
workds, he will work with us when there is hope.  But some people choose to
become "creatures prepared for destruction"; people who will not allow a 
seed of hope to be planted, watered, or to sprout forth to face the heat
the world will apply.
    I hope this lends some perspective.  God is greatly pleased to be able to
turn his anger away, as in the case of Ninevah for a time.  Occasionally, 
people respond to his ultimatums.  It is rare though.  In history, Jonah's
story is a very unique one.  In modern history, there have been revivals that
are usually on a much smaller scale, though some have been rather large.
In a place like America, it is very hard to tell how much actual change
has happened in people's lives though, or if they are all just swept into
an emotional situation where everyone around them seems to have something
going on, and they don't want to be left out.  We can tell by the fruits.
A real relationship with Christ will lead to good fruit.  I see this in the
book "Bruchko" where a savage tribe came to Christ and their whole approach
to others was altered to the degree that they were martyred.  I see it in
the lives of individuals amongst some of the modern revivals, but seldom
among the people.  It usually just pans out into another division in the
body of Christ, rather than an earth shaking statement about God's love.

-Bob