I'm not ignoring....
surfkrow
hearing about. "Hanging with Benny hinn ("if true) grovaling with
God when he was facing his own mortality (If true) Making the
congregation applaud the broads as he paraded them out (IF true)
Saying mellissa scott was the only one that got it (if true) and not
taking the neccessary steps to ensure that his teachings continued on
with out interuption or take over after his passing (the way he
himself even said he intended).......
I will not defend these points if they are true. He has to answer
to Jesus for this. As all belivers do for thier failures
Thing is From 93' till Jan 05 , I lost touch with current
affairs. here in florida could only get short wave which sucked! My
life was in a tizzy the whole time. During that period i listened to
tapes and my tithing was spuratic (offerings damn near impossable.)
I was just to unsettled then. Then in Dec. 04 I was fed up with the
world the flesh and the devil getting the better of me to Gods shame,
drew a line and took my stand in faith!! Wasn't till end of febuary
05, While listening to Short wave which still sucked! that i realized
Doc had passed. I wept hard. but at least i had the satisfaction of
knowing I got it right for no other reason then the fact that it was
the right thing to do. What I mean is that it did not take Dr.Scotts
death for me to take the message seriously. When I get to heaven I
want to be able to look Dr.Scott in the eye and not at my feet in
shame! As Jesus says "well done thou good and faithfull servent...
Celestias
I'm not so sure he didn't take steps to ensure that his teachings
would continue. I think somebody stepped on his steps. I'm not too
sure why though.
Emmett
Emmett writes:
What makes you think Dr. jean is in heaven???
H8N S8N
Mrs Benny father from way back.
And because of that friendship?
He also knew his friends daughter.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
How 'bout if we talk about that snot-nosed
punky-kid, always causing trouble in the
back of the church, in is youth:
John Ashcroft
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ashcroft
H8N S8N
What makes you think Dr. jean is in heaven???
H8n:
CLEAR sign=>Celestias was Never There!
Never Staff
Never sat in the studio
Never attended a Sunday Service
Never Staff
(yes, I included that 2x)
Doc told everyone to sell their house, and?
Send me your MONEY!
He ain't no Prophet
He ain't no healer
He's just a 2-bit......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FOfSQFQCDc
Anyone (here) who refutes that?
(guess what?
Was NEVER There!
And for the record:
Mr. 120 hrs-pr-wk, sans paycheck?
Knew a retired woman, who drove a
Honda Civic, did exactly what her loving
Pastor ORDERED us all to do!
Retired + Woman + Homeless =
"You just have to trust God, and your pastor"
This did not end very well.
She left many messages, just to see if
"She could get some kind of help"
(after she followed pastor's orders)
"When I get to heaven I
want to be able to look Dr.Scott in the eye"
H8n note:
Try and die with your gloves on.
If you see him after you die?
He just might let you share in his long-term
assignment in HVAC Maintenance.
(please ask my why the gloves)
As For me?
I'm H8n S8n!
Celestias
> Emmett writes(wrote):
> What makes you think Dr. jean is in heaven???
>
> H8n:
> CLEAR sign=>Celestias was Never There!
>
> Never Staff
> Never sat in the studio
> Never attended a Sunday Service
> Never Staff
> (yes, I included that 2x)
>
> Doc told everyone to sell their house, and?
> Send me your MONEY!
>
> He ain't no Prophet
> He ain't no healer
>
> Anyone (here) who refutes that?
> (guess what?
> Was NEVER There!
>
> And for the record:
> Mr. 120 hrs-pr-wk, sans paycheck?
> Knew a retired woman, who drove a
> Honda Civic, did exactly what her loving
> Pastor ORDERED us all to do!
>
> Retired + Woman + Homeless =
> "You just have to trust God, and your pastor"
>
> This did not end very well.
> She left many messages, just to see if
> "She could get some kind of help"
> (after she followed pastor's orders)
>
> "When I get to heaven I
> want to be able to look Dr.Scott in the eye"
>
> H8n note:
> Try and die with your gloves on.
> If you see him after you die?
> He just might let you share in his long-term
> assignment in HVAC Maintenance.
> (please ask my why the gloves)
>
> As For me?
>
> I'm H8n S8n!
WHY are you dragging ME into this???? Everyone knows I was never there.
rpbc
rpbc:
"I'm not ignoring some obvious contradictions in Dr.Scotts behavior
that i am
> hearing about. "Hanging with Benny hinn ("if true) grovaling with
> God when he was facing his own mortality (If true) Making the
> congregation applaud the broads as he paraded them out (IF true)
> Saying mellissa scott was the only one that got it (if true) and not
> taking the neccessary steps to ensure that his teachings continued on
> with out interuption or take over after his passing (the way he
> himself even said he intended)......."
Hanging with Benny Hinn... I don't know if it's true, I only heard
Gene Scott say it live when I was there answering phones during
festival. Groveling with God when he was facing his own mortality(if
true)... I don't know what is meant by groveling but I saw and heard
him doing what seems like the definition of groveling watching Sunday
Service and live festival on the Internet. Making the congregation
applaud the broads as he paraded them out (if true), and I'll add,
in.... I know that's true because I was there every Sunday for a
number of years when he did it, and threatened anyone with banishment
who didn't rise to the occasion hands clapping. Saying Melissa Scott
was the only one that got it (if true).... I know that's true, I heard
him say it during Sunday service and on festival. And not taking the
necessary steps to ensure his teachings continued on with out
interruption or take over after his passing (the way he himself even
said he intended)..... I don't if he did or not, I only know that
years before he spoke of taking those steps but never said what they
were. I do know there were no visible signs to me of him having done
it. I do know Craig Lampe and a few others who had the interest and
ability to do such a thing were eliminated by Melissa soon after Doc's
death, with the ludicrous charge of mass downloading free achieves
from the web site, which became the excuse for taking down the
achieves.
matt2442
Matt2442:
I'm not sure what he means by groveling either. If it means pleading
with God for healing, I don't know that I saw anything like that.
Demanding healing, yes. I don't know if that has anything to do with
what surfkrow or you are referring to.
> Making the congregation
> applaud the broads as he paraded them out (if true), and I'll add,
> in.... I know that's true because I was there every Sunday for a
> number of years when he did it, and threatened anyone with banishment
> who didn't rise to the occasion hands clapping.
Matt2442:
I can vouch for that. Evn though I was no longer attending, it was one
of those times that I periodically tuned in on Festival and heard him
talking about it. He said it started as a spontaneous thing amongst
many people who desired to show their solidarity with their pastor.
However, many people didn't join in and Doc took exception to that,
saying that he would not tolerate any pockets of dissention in his
church. Basically the same thing as with the horses. You didn't stand
and applaud the girls as though there was something special about
them, you were banned, the implication being you missed the boat and
are out of the Kingdom because of it
> Saying Melissa Scott
> was the only one that got it (if true).... I know that's true, I heard
> him say it during Sunday service and on festival.
Matt2442:
I did too.
> And not taking the
> necessary steps to ensure his teachings continued on with out
> interruption or take over after his passing (the way he himself even
> said he intended)..... I don't if he did or not, I only know that
> years before he spoke of taking those steps but never said what they
> were. I do know there were no visible signs to me of him having done
> it. I do know Craig Lampe and a few others who had the interest and
> ability to do such a thing were eliminated by Melissa soon after Doc's
> death, with the ludicrous charge of mass downloading free achieves
> from the web site, which became the excuse for taking down the
> achieves.
Matt2442:
It does seem odd that given his huge ego, that he wouldn't have done
something to insure that his voice would still be heard after he was
gone. The problem was, he trusted Melissa to do that. Craig Lampe
probably would have done what some here think Melissa should have, and
that is continue to broadcast unedited raw Doc teaching in its
entirety.
Jim Spinosa
>
> - Show quoted text -
Craig Lampe also shared Gene Scott's interest in collecting old and
rare bibles. I always felt that Melissa banished Craig from LAUC
because she viewed him as competition for the pulpit.
Celestias
CL sells old rare bibles. I tried to contact him but he never wrote
back
studio
surfkrow, I was the FOH audio engineer for The Cathedral from around
'93 until '98.
If there is anything that is true in your aforementioned post is that
you seem to be in denial that any of those things were said by doc.
Well, they were said and we are not here to bullshit you on any level.
If we seem rather harsh in our approach, it's to get through to guys
like you who never saw it from the inside out.
We are not here for our health, nor do we have any hidden agenda
but just to set the record straight and expose all the Godshow TV
fraud and manipulation that took place there.
H8N S8N
but just to set the record straight and expose all the Godshow TV
fraud and manipulation that took place there.
H8n:
DAM STRAIGHT!
You know what?
I'm gunna say it again!
DAM STRAIGHT!
Your delusional if you think ewGene Scott went north!
Everyone who worked for him went months
"Sans Paycheck" (quoting H8n)
He flaunted a lifestyle of fornication that was so bad?
It made Reverend Jessee fugg'n Jackson BLUSH!
This happened at the ranch! Matter of public record!
He cursed the God who rules the sky, and cursed him
with fist uplifted high! (Worship Series # 25)
you-know-who writes:
When it was his fathers time to go?
God flipped the switch? And he was gone!
When it was time for The King of Mean to go?
God chose to have Doc die a slow, painful,
public, and EMBARRASSING death!
He went out a scrawny, liver-spotted,
cancer-filled, old man who could barely get
around in a wheelchair!
Why would God do that, you ask?
"If God does not heal me, He is a Liar" !
***note:
please enter all comments in section below
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
he preached the gospel and rightly didvided the word. restored
worship (the giving and praising aspect) to its rightful place. and
delivered souls to God. :)
surfkrow
> Emmett writes(wrote):
> What makes you think Dr. jean is in heaven???
>
> H8n:
> CLEAR sign=>Celestias was Never There!
>
> Never Staff
> Never sat in the studio
> Never attended a Sunday Service
> Never Staff
> (yes, I included that 2x)
>
> Doc told everyone to sell their house, and?
> Send me your MONEY!
>
> He ain't no Prophet
> He ain't no healer
>
> Anyone (here) who refutes that?
> (guess what?
> Was NEVER There!
>
> And for the record:
> Mr. 120 hrs-pr-wk, sans paycheck?
> Knew a retired woman, who drove a
> Honda Civic, did exactly what her loving
> Pastor ORDERED us all to do!
>
> Retired + Woman + Homeless =
> "You just have to trust God, and your pastor"
>
> This did not end very well.
> She left many messages, just to see if
> "She could get some kind of help"
> (after she followed pastor's orders)
>
> "When I get to heaven I
> want to be able to look Dr.Scott in the eye"
>
> H8n note:
> Try and die with your gloves on.
> If you see him after you die?
> He just might let you share in his long-term
> assignment in HVAC Maintenance.
> (please ask my why the gloves)
>
> As For me?
>
> I'm H8n S8n!
H8nS8n says
Never Staff
Never sat in the studio
Never attended a Sunday Service
Never Staff
(yes, I included that 2x)
no i just searched out what he taght and found out it was true :)
h8ns8n says:
Doc told everyone to sell their house, and?
Send me your MONEY!
When did he do this? He prompted giving in response to the hearing
of the gospel which he preached and taught by rightly dividing the
word. Dr.Scott recognized the message of the alabaster box and Jesus'
own attatchment of memorializing her act of worship wherever the
gospel is preached as paramount because
Dr.Scott's emphasis on this matter was in light of its neglect by the
rest of the church world in his time. God gave him the right message
and the platform to take it nationaly (and world wide (via satilite
and shortwave) like it or not.
H8nS8n says:
He ain't no Prophet
He ain't no healer
He's just a 2-bit......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FOfSQFQCDc
Dr.Scott never claimed to be a healer or prophet. He was a teaching
pastor and the evidence of this was in his ability to rightly divide
the word. I witnessed this with my own eyes and internal witnessas as
he led me through Gods word. "No interpretation of scripture is a
private interpretation"
H8nS8 says;
Retired + Woman + Homeless =
> "You just have to trust God, and your pastor
Mr. 120 hrs-pr-wk, sans paycheck?
> Knew a retired woman, who drove a
> Honda Civic, did exactly what her loving
> Pastor ORDERED us all to do!
please further elaborate on this matter so i can have a complete
understand what you are saying. If you mean he taught her the same
worshipful response to the gospel then he was doing his what Jesus
said to do. And i remind you of the widows might.. Did jesus stop her
from giving it?
H8nS8 says:
This did not end very well.
> She left many messages, just to see if
> "She could get some kind of help"
> (after she followed pastor's orders
could you elaborate please :)
H8nS8 says:H8n note:
> Try and die with your gloves on.
> If you see him after you die?
> He just might let you share in his long-term
> assignment in HVAC Maintenance.
> (please ask my why the gloves)
surfkrow says:
I am gonna punch him in the nose for hangin with benny hinn and
gravling like a wimp when facing his mortality on an international
platform!!!
H8nS8n says:
How 'bout if we talk about that snot-nosed
punky-kid, always causing trouble in the
back of the church, in is youth
Dr.Scott? If so then:
you attacked his youth because u could not fault his teaching..
pethetic and dissappointing i would axpect better from you:(
Weatherman
>
> When did he do this? He prompted giving in response to the hearing
> of the gospel which he preached and taught by rightly dividing the
> word. Dr.Scott recognized the message of the alabaster box and Jesus'
> own attatchment of memorializing her act of worship wherever the
> gospel is preached as paramount because
>
> Dr.Scott's emphasis on this matter was in light of its neglect by the
> rest of the church world in his time. God gave him the right message
> and the platform to take it nationaly (and world wide (via satilite
> and shortwave) like it or not.
WM-Several things here. Are you trying to say that the primary reason
God took Gene worldwide was becouse he made a point out of remembering
what this woman did?
Also, Gene did talk about it more than anyone I have listened on a
regular basis but he wasnt some guy that rescued this from oblivion.
Many pastors mention this enough that anyone in thier congregation is
exsposed to it often enough. I had heard this story many many times
before being ten years of age.
>
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM says:
Several things here. Are you trying to say that the primary reason
> God took Gene worldwide was becouse he made a point out of remembering
> what this woman did?
No. I am saying that God took GS world wide Because He was willing to
preach the gospel AND because he was faithfull in rightly discerning
(through Gods word ) the appropriate response which is discovered in
the message of the alabaster box.
surfkrow
sorry WM i was'nt finished.
WM says:
Also, Gene did talk about it more than anyone I have listened on a
> regular basis but he wasnt some guy that rescued this from oblivion.
> Many pastors mention this enough that anyone in thier congregation is
> exsposed to it often enough
surfkrow says:
Dr.Scott had an unction (in my opinion) A gift to go into gods word
"put flesh and blood on it" People did'nt just learn principles they
IDENTIFIED with it! PRAISE GOD! And it was that unction that
catapolted him world wide. No, he did'nt rescue it from oblivion (I
suppose) But through him the gospel and the appropriate response to
it was takin to a higher level and platform :)
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
surfkrow says:
I am gonna punch him in the nose for hangin with benny hinn and
> gravling like a wimp when facing his mortality on an international
> platform!!!
surfkrow adds:
if true.....
studio
>
> surfkrow says:
>
> Dr.Scott had an unction (in my opinion) A gift to go into gods word
> "put flesh and blood on it" People did'nt just learn principles they
> IDENTIFIED with it! PRAISE GOD! And it was that unction that
> catapolted him world wide. No, he did'nt rescue it from oblivion (I
> suppose) But through him the gospel and the appropriate response to
> it was takin to a higher level and platform :)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
That is too funny surfkrow! Damn right laughable.
A higher level and platform.......higher than Jesus and HIS
platform at Calvary 2000 years ago?
Because truthfully, that's the platform we are working from
here at AFGS.
So tell us about this "higher level" oh won't ya? lol
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
thank you rp for your insights........
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks matt, Well its in Gods hands now. As For Docs Appearent
narsciism I'm gonna walk backwards with a blanket. I dont want to
glory in whatever shame he may have brought upon himself. As for the
teaching it was all correct as far as i can figure PRAISE GOD!
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
Totaly respect that and I am not in denial. I just dont want to
through the baby out with the bathwater as I draw my own
conclusions. It seems to me that even if he was a narscist never the
less He rightly divided the word..
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-Yet God took Paul to where he is today without him ever mentioning
the woman/alabaster box/burial event. The alabaster box/memorial to
the woman should not be blown out of its proportion. There are many
many things that should accompany the gosple and are so recorded. I
dont believe that John even mentions it in his gospel and yet he got
some extra Revelation and Jesus loved him. So there is certianly no
curse implied to any ministry that doesnt make a big show of this.
Genes "appropriate responce" turned the womans burial memorial event,
into a cash event. Judas was the one that brought up the cash thing.
Like Jesus said we dont need to sell this. How can this be sold.
Why this waste? This could have been sold and many thoroughbred
hourses purchased. Or why this waste when we could buy a mansion? Turn
this thing into spending cash! This is hardly the suggestion of Lev
2:2 or 14:12.
As well were does one find the admixture between the "appropriate
responce" and tithing? Jacob pouring out a drink offering on the
stone?
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-Yes thats what the Catholic church did for years.
At any rate, if the blanket thing was so important why did Noah curse
Hams boy? I mean they didnt cover Ham with a blanket or his dad. They
covered the victim not the perpetrator and Noah cursed the seed. Didnt
the brothers run to the dad when he sobered up and say look what Ham
hath done to thee!
H8N S8N
Consult The Oracle. The Oracle knows all!
(and posts 1/3 more than GDK!)
The Oracle wrote:
and delivered souls to God. :)
H8n:
A cab driver reaches the pearly gates. St. Peter looks him up in his
Big Book and tells him to pick up a gold staff and a silk robe and
proceed into Heaven.
Next in line is a preacher. St. Peter looks him up in his Big Book,
furrows his brow and says, "OK, we'll let you in, but take that cloth
robe and wooden staff."
The preacher is shocked and replies, "But I am a man of the cloth. You
gave that cab driver a gold staff and a silk robe. Surely I rate
higher than a cabbie!"
St. Peter responds matter-of-factly, "This is Heaven and up here, we
are interested in results. When you preached, people slept. When the
cabbie drove his taxi, people prayed."
H8n note II:
In the end?
What counts/matter's is how you
Finish the Race.
************************************
If I could ask one, maybe 2 questions:
Were you watching Doc until his very embarrassing,
public-humiliation of a drawn-out death?
After he cursed God if he did not get healed?
Are you aware how that scenario ended?
H. S8n
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-And really the appropriate responce to the gosple is repentance and
believing.
The Book Of Acts-a comedy
" And when Paul and Peter had finished work there in Damascus they had
three wagon loads of sacks of silver and gold from all those who had
repented and showed appropriate responce to the preaching. An the
Angel or the Lord road shotgun as the caravan set out for the bank in
Rome. And many after seeing this move of seed, laid down thier tools
and took up preaching the gospel of Christ. Paul as well said heck
with tent making and told the Corinthians on the way through to get a
job maybe even two jobs and add to the wagon loads or he wouldnt
preach".
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
Matt... I don't know if Scott trusted Melissa to keep his voice going
out or not. He left her in charge but that isn't the same as saying
he trusted her tp keep his messages going out. He might have had some
calculus at work.... or he might have just become an old fool and
trusted it to her.
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
Jim... I don't think Craig Lampe was interested in the pulpit, it
wasn't him and I knew him well enough to say that... could be wrong of
course. I do think it was about managing the estate and seeing to it
that his messages were broadcast with available funds. With Doc's
messages going out he would be her competition for the pulpit even
though he was dead.
rpbc
Surf:
> thank you rp for your insights........- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
You're welcome, really. I know it isn't easy.
Jim Spinosa
>
> - Show quoted text -
I don't personally know Craig Lampe, so I'll take your word that he
wasn't interested in replacing Melissa. I do think that Melissa was
afraid of the fact that Craig was far more knowledgeable of Gene
Scott's teaching than herself.
I remember some years ago (this was after Doc married Melissa) Gene
got angry at the faithless congregation and walked out. Craig took
Doc's place before the camera and gave a speech about; if God had
something for you to do personally and you didn't do it, it wouldn't
get done. I remember this because the same tape of Craig exhorting the
congregation to step up to the plate, played continuously for a solid
week. Even back then I sensed Melissa's discomfort at having to play
second fiddle. Although at that time she couldn't do anything about
it.
My point is that even though Craig Lampe may had no desire, or
intention, of replacing Gene Scott, Melissa knew that he was more
qualified than she was, and was afraid of this fact.
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc qoutes craig lamp:
if God had
> something for you to do personally and you didn't do it, it wouldn't
> get done
simple, to the point and true. hmmm. I like him already :)
"My point is that even though Craig Lampe may had no desire, or
intention, of replacing Gene Scott, Melissa knew that he was more
qualified than she was, and was afraid of this fact"
I say that a lack of desire or intention for ministry is usually
one of the hall marks of a true candidate.
Emmett
Emmett writes:
So what you are saying is Dr. jean did all these good works
and because of it he is in heaven????
Here is your problem guy, you don't understand salvation.
We don't go to heaven for "our" good works.
Man, are you in trouble. Duh!!!!
surfkrow
"Good works are as filthy rags"
What i am saying is that the reality of Christ's ministry was very
present with Dr.Scott
he preached the gospel and rightly didvided the word. restored
> > worship (the giving and praising aspect) to its rightful place. and
> > delivered souls to God
and this lends itself to the notion that he made it.
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
I remember Craig Lampe giving that speech, I was there when he
recorded it and was suprised to see him doing it.... not surprized at
him as much as that Scott allowed it.
Totally agree about Melissa being intimidated by Craig Lampe's
qualifications.... and if you're a pretty woman dress frumpy and wear
the hair in bun if you want to survive anywhere close to Melissa
around planet scott.
rpbc
Surf:
> rpbc qoutes craig lamp:
>
> if God had
>
> > something for you to do personally and you didn't do it, it wouldn't
> > get done
>
> simple, to the point and true. hmmm. I like him already :)
>
> "My point is that even though Craig Lampe may had no desire, or
> intention, of replacing Gene Scott, Melissa knew that he was more
> qualified than she was, and was afraid of this fact"
>
> I say that a lack of desire or intention for ministry is usually
> one of the hall marks of a true candidate.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
That was Jim Spinosa that quoted Craig Lampe, sometimes it's difficult
to keep track in a thread.
I've always like Craig Lampe for what ever that is worth.
surfkrow
as for the higher level:
Preaching the gospel uncompromised. Through this aspect of his
ministry, freedom into Gods grace through the life of faith was totaly
set loose on sinners like never befor on the modern stage. He
sacrificed his own standing with fellow clergy by association with
wine bibbers and gluttons, sound familiar? the joe shmo sinner that
could'nt live up to perfectionist expectations and walked away from
the church were brought back by the preaching of Dr.Scott (I was one
of them).
also,
Dr.Scott's equal emphesis on the message of the alabaster box was
unrivaled. He truly did realize and reveal through the word that God
is as concerned about what we do in response to him (God) in terms of
worship, as we are about what God does in response to our fall from
grace. Hence the Gospel, hence our worship (of the son of God.) And
this is pleasing to God. And this is the highest level the church
can attain!
Now take these two issue's, add in Gods provision of an international
platform, and you have what i mean by "taking it to a "higher level"
if not the highest level in recorded history!
studio asks:
A higher level and platform.......higher than Jesus and HIS
> platform at Calvary 2000 years ago?
Not higher than Jesus, rather, FOR JESUS like never before. And
Jesus' platform is the church and what we are talking about is the
churchs work for Jesus sake.
studio says:
Because truthfully, that's the platform we are working from
> here at AFGS.
The way i see it, if this is truthfully the case AFGS may want to
reconsider its position.
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think Dr.Scott was Going through Gods word and finding many
instances where God keeps bringing the money issue up. He was'nt
isolating a single instance and building doctrine on it. As he used to
say it "he was driving home one central thought. Where ever you go in
Gods word, giving, WASTING! in the eyes of the world that which is
most precious" is closest to Gods heart. he also said "And thats
not said to motivate anybody to give because the hard cold fact is the
love of money is the root of all evil. But if you have the mind of
Christ you have the spirit of Christ and if you have the spirit of
christ IT MAKES YOU A GIVER" you cant ignore the fact that God
veiws our giving response (our worship) of Jesus on par with what
Jesus Gave as he hung on that cross.
Gypsie
>
> - Show quoted text -
RE: "The way i see it, if this is truthfully the case AFGS may want
to reconsider its position"
gypsie: Ahem, AFGS does not have a 'position'. We are not a collective
brain setting out here waiting to pounce (unlike many sccottobites).
ANYONE can post here and do, and have as many individual opinions/
positions on many many subjects. his is why it is best to address the
person to whom you are responding.
Not that there is any limit to who may be answering your post. Ya know
that pesky old freedom of speech thingy.
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
"...... you cant ignore the fact that God
> veiws our giving response (our worship) of Jesus on par with what
> Jesus Gave as he hung on that cross...... "
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
crossed wires again.
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-I held that position very strongly in the past. Maybe it was some
transition compromise between the law and grace. Like a
picture...Jesus hanging on the cross, a large basket at the foot of
the cross and a long line of people walking by and tossing silver coin
in. Like a parking meter?
Celestias
I must agree here, Jesus dying on the cross was an act of Salvation
performed by God on our behalf and for His Word's sake. Our worship
and/or giving can in no way be compared to an act of God. Maybe you
were trying to say something else and it didn't come out quite right?
Was Jesus worshipping God by giving His life?
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-What I was getting at was somethingalong the lines of Christ in the
law. "If you really knew Moses then you would know me" sort of thing.
The OT offering types and shadows. The parking meter thing was just
sarcasm.
The way I feel about it these days is whatever privately motivates a
person to give to Gods work is their personal thing. We have some
instructions by Paul but I am not to hip on the vast amount of reasons
for giving one can find out there these days. People that give to lets
say prosperity types can hardly say they are giving in secret when it
is clear to anyone why they give as it is manifested in the teaching
and the persona of the minister they are supporting. If he or she
layes down a sowing and reaping thing then its is clear they are
"sowing" to "reap" therefore its fallacious.
If someone puts out the giving idea about a giving gesture to remember
Christ on the cross or a like kind of giving, say in memorial, they
would need to check and see if they are really giving in faith or in
some law based righteousness giving. As if in the giving they were
adding to redemption i.e by way of a sin offering. We are not like
those durring the millennium that need to be schooled by way of the
reestablishment of offerings and sacrifices. If a real giving/teaching
exercise could be wraped around the law for us now, Paul would have
done it imo.
Gypsie
>
> - Show quoted text -
gypsie: One of my particular favorites was doc's comparison of the
sacraments on par to giving in the communion teachin.
studio
>
> - Show quoted text -
People that give to lets
> say prosperity types can hardly say they are giving in secret when it
> is clear to anyone why they give as it is manifested in the teaching
> and the persona of the minister they are supporting. If he or she
> layes down a sowing and reaping thing then its is clear they are
> "sowing" to "reap" therefore its fallacious.
studio: Therefore Fallacious?
Meaning there was at least some logic that you took
to come to this conclusion? Yes?
Then, if motivation is manifested by the teaching and/or
is motivated by any ROI, it also must include doc's view
whereby he states numerous times about "God blowing on your little",
and "the angel of the firstfruits" and Cain and Able's sacrifice, just
to name a few (I could name more ya know).
It seems to me that what most of us have been saying here on AFGS
is recognizing the bully and guilt trip doc was laying on
the socalled congregation soliciting funds for his "bands" and
projects that never materialized even though he ate and drank
like a millionaire while all those who support LAUC and Faith Center
sit one step away from homeless and derelict with their collective
thumbs up their ass thinking he's the greatest gift since deli meats.
To coersively get someone to give under the motivation that they
will get their ass kicked by God if they don't is spiritual abuse.
The reciprocate, reverse psychology of what you called fallacious.
God didn't let Moses enter the promised land because of tirades
like that, and Moses was only documented doing it once. Gene
Scott did it repeatedly 24/7......do you think God will take that
lightly? Having Gene misrepresent God and Jesus' intentions
for salvation being a free gift from God?
(the only way out for Gene is if he was mentally ill, IMHO)
(( then again, was Hitler mentally ill?)
Gene Scott and his heretical teachings on giving and all the other
conjecture nonsense is the road Jesus warned about in Matthew
24.
Celestias buddy, stop being a lazybird, God gave ya a beautiful
brain....get some self determination and start thinking for yourself.
Don't worry, God's got your back dude!
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-Yea studio I tried hard to restrict my resons for giving based on
the simplist admonitions like say Pauls but will admit that I did
surcome to the tactics of fear. Yes I sure did.
It was very unsettling and frustrating to give out of a giving heart
only to be slaped in the face with threats the next day. I always
hated sweet talk anyway so was probably a good mark for the tuff
stuff. But you can only kick a dog so long before he bites back.
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
I asked Surf where he heard that from... our giving on a par with
Jesus on the cross.... rhetorically, that is not really a question as
the answer is understood. Gene Scott said our giving was on par with
Jesus on the Cross, it was Scott's statement, that's where Surf heard
it assume. He practicallly used the same words and as near as I can
tell from printed text the same inflections.
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
That's another one... there's so many favorites to choose from....
Emmett
Emmett writes:
That has to be only your notion. Most Christians I know of
think/thought Dr. jean made Christianity a laughing stock.
Just for a start, Jesus preached love. Dr. jean was the most
hateful, so called Christian, public figure I have ever seen.
He hated everyone.
Dr. jean restored the "giving and praising aspect".
Surely you joke. Dr. jean put everyone in chains (under the law).
He demanded that everyone should give 29% of their gross
income or they were on their way to hell.
Dr. jean "delivered souls to God". Are you nuts??
How do you know that?? Dr. jean had a works doctrine
and "most of us" know that you don't go to heaven for
your works. Please explain to me how Dr. jean or anyone
else "delivers souls to God". Is that by UPS or Postal?
You have to be the best example of a cult follower I have
ever seen.
Celestias
You know how people who were "there" have a different viewpoint than
we who looked on from afar? Well in a similar way, those of us who
gave have a different viewpoint than those who looked on from afar and
never gave a dime. It's like critcizing Calley from the comfort of an
armchair, and it kinda pisses off those who went to Nam, and those who
burned villages there. But you know what opinions can be like....
Emmett
Emmett writes:
My opinion is based on "FACTS". These are things I have personally
seen over the years in watching Dr. jean on TV and the internet.
These facts are verified by the many posters here.
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-Yes well my freind I see myself as actualy being out in the field
putting the thing to the test. Besides you are wasting your time with
these "been there" guys. They are like a cult to themselves and they
exspect you to navagite around that. I still to this day have not put
to rest the idea that they are all the same person. lol
studio
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's just retarded for you to state those things WeatherMan.
Are you paranoid of AFGS now?
Please take yer meds and post back on a better day. Thanks.
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-What are you talking about? I have always said that. k
surfkrow
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gypsie, studio made the claim that Jesus and his platform at
calvery is the platform that afgs is working for. The context of the
entire conversation we were having is one that revolves around the
gosple (Christ crucified/forgivness of sins) and what the appropriate
response should be in terms of worship i.e. the message of the
alabaster box and wether or not Jesus took Dr.Scotts ministry to a
higher level for his faithfullness to these to fundamentle christian
doctrines. In light of studios opposition to my point of veiw I
further clarified my opinion and with respect to his assertion of
afgs's position I said: "afgs may want to reconsider its position on
the matter".
Now gypsie do yourself a favor, go back and re-read your retort to
what i said to studio and furthermore re-read the entire
conversation. Then re-read your retort again and be honest, it makes
no sense. not being mean just honest for cryin out loud :o In my
opinion If you want to attack scottbotties thats fine but your gonna
have to do better than this :)
Judee77
>
> - Show quoted text -
rp,
This teaching that our giving was on par to Christ giving His life had
to with Doc's teaching on the Tabernacle, specifically the shewbread
and where it was placed. I can actually see Scott in my mind's eye
sitting in his Festival chair, wrapped in leather, long hair and bushy
beard sprouting from underneath a brown cowboy-type hat....
...smiling that arrogant smile of his and beating down our shock by
beating us to his own punchline: "Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh, now he's gone and
done it! Comparing the blood of Jesus to our giving money!" Silence
followed but for the clicking of his lighter. His chair squeaked in
protest, his gaze devoured the camera.
"That's what I said."
Yep, indeed, that's what he said. Much like reaching the Amen level
which sparks a healing, if one gives enough, God will lovingly place
your greenbacks right next to the blood of His Son and call it even.
Works anyone? Anyone?
Gypsie
>
> - Show quoted text -
re: "If you want to attack scottbotties thats fine but your gonna
have to do better than this" <snip>
gypsie: Neow why would I attack scottobitties? r u a scottobotties
or, should I look for another to come?
Gypsie
>
> - Show quoted text -
re: works?
gypsie: works for me ((((((Judee)))))))
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
Wow Judee, you have an excellent memory. Reading your words brought
it all back in living color for I was sitting right there in festival
when he spoke those words just as you described it right down to the
silence and the clicking of the lighter.
Weatherman
>
> - Show quoted text -
WM-If he had just said that we can give as a memorial to Christs
sacrifice that would have been one thing. But now we can give money
and what??? liken it to our blood in kind? Sort of like our own
bleeding? This gets perverted very fast on this slope here if you let
your mind run wild.
matt2442
Matt2442:
I sure wish I had Judee77's knack for writing. She captured Gene
Scott's tactic really well. "That's what I said," and with those words
a glare around the room daring anyone to show the slightest glimmer if
dissent on the issue. And with that glare comes a response of
applause, telling him "Yes Sir! I'm totally with you on this sir,"
hoping he didn't catch that moment of doubt on their face.
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
Matt.... you forgot to capitalize the response.... 'YES SIR". And
that moment of doubt... no time for that, it was overridden with a
moment of fear, which is what he was looking for, and that's the
context one here was asking about... it was fear, camera on or off,
but camera off was often terrifying.... and nothing righteous about it
all. I'd seen him take a bully's pleasure on too many occasions.....
absolutely.
surfkrow
Hello judee77, rpbc,celestias and weatherman :)
surfkrow said:
I am saying that God took GS world wide Because He was willing to
preach the gospel AND because he was faithfull in rightly discerning
(through Gods word ) the appropriate response which is discovered in
the message of the alabaster box
weatherman said:
Yet God took Paul to where he is today without him ever mentioning
the woman/alabaster box/burial event.
surfkrow says:
Paul was'nt perfect, in his pattern of self denial (more
accuratly, self contradiction) we see this in 1Cor 9:1-19 for example:
Paul says in vs. 14/15, Even so the lord has commanded that those
that preach the gospel should live from the gospel. but I have used
none of these things nor have i written these things that it souls be
done unto me; for it would be better for me to die than that anyone
should make my boasting void. HEY PAUL! THE LORD HAS COMMANDED THAT
YOU DO IT!! Now paul would later change his position as in Gal:6:6-7
and else where "the lord loves a hilariuos giver" and there are more
passages but these serve to make the point. And wether or not Paul
did or did'nt mention the message of the alabaster box nevertheless
GOD made it clear "see to it wherever this gospel is preached you
thell what this woman has done." Now who's example you gonna follow
the lords or pauls on this matter?
The alabaster box/memorial to
the woman should not be blown out of its proportion.
Its not being blown out of proprtion. Dr.Scott just made sure to bring
it up like the lord said do and for the right reasons as revealed all
through gods word, because our worshipfull response to God is to be
remembered and done and not delegated to the back of the bus like an
after thought. Able KILLED for worshipping gods way, Abraham (befor
the law) paid tithes and gave offerings to melchisidek, Moses first
words from the lord out of the mount of glory to the children of
Israel "take up an offering, Gideons first response to the angel of
the lord once he realized IT WAS AN ANGEL OF THE LORD, STARVING
though he was, made an offering right there in his poverty. Elijah and
the widow, FEED ME FIRST and she did, The woman with the alabaster box
poured out WAISTED what was most precious on the lord, Pauls
admonishment to belivers "the grace of god in Christ, though he was
rich became poor for our sake, have this grace in you and its a giving
grace.
Blown out of proportion you say. I say GODS WAY!
Weatherman says;
There are many
many things that should accompany the gosple and are so recorded.
surfkrow says:
The issue of this discussion is one thing, the only thing Jesus
specificly attached to the preaching of the gospel and that was the
memorialization of what the woman with the alabaster box did.
weathherman said:
I dont believe that John even mentions it in his gospel and yet he
got
some extra Revelation and Jesus loved him.
surfkrow says:
Intresting you should bring that up. Johns gospel was unique in many
ways from the synoptics and I touch on how and why I suspect that is
in a piece I posted entitled "Timetravel and the end of days, a
conversation between two original thinkers. Edited and submitted for
gypsies approval."
weatherman said:
So there is certianly no
curse implied to any ministry that doesnt make a big show of this.
surfkrow says:
In Light of the attention God gives in his word on the issue of
worship for him and in clear understanding of Judas' failure and
betrayal. "They honor me with there lips but there hearts are from
me". Is there a specific curse for this? Probably, but I can't call
it to mind at the moment. but i would say that any person that remains
unrepentant on the issue of worshipping God HIS WAY and for HIS
reasons faces something worst than a curse, that person faces
damnation...
weatherman said:
Genes "appropriate responce" turned the womans burial memorial event,
into a cash event.
surfkrow says:
In light of the fact that I belive that Gene Scott proved Gods frame
of reference on the subject by thouroughly searching out Gods word and
interpreting it rightly under unction of the holy spirit and then
properly applying it as a mandate of Jesus upon the church, I would
have to say that what you just said is blasphemous in the eyes of God
and reveals your own judas mentality.
weatherman said:
Judas was the one that brought up the cash thing.
surfkrow says:
obviously.....
weatherman said:
Like Jesus said we dont need to sell this. How can this be sold.
Why this waste? This could have been sold and many thoroughbred
hourses purchased. Or why this waste when we could buy a mansion?
Turn
this thing into spending cash! This is hardly the suggestion of Lev
2:2 or 14:12
surfkrow says:
Wether or not Gene scott offered a portion of the offerings he
collected as a grain offering is between him and the lord and you
can't prove he did'nt you nosey presumptuous jack ass! and
furthermore your reference to the wave offering in light of the fact
that what gene scott did with offerings he collected is as you said,
"hardly suggestive" which infers that its not related and its not. SO
WHY EVEN TRY? did you take a stupid pill?? Or did you just think
that tossing in some scriptural references totaly non related to
anything found in this dialogue would throw me off? OooooH aWWWW
weatherman busted out some verses! EVEN THOUGH THERE TOTALY NOT
RELATED TO ANYTING BEING SAID HE MUST KNOW WHAT HE'S TALKIN BOUT! I
BETTER LISTEN TO HIM MAN HE'S THE WEATHERMAN OOOH AWW!!
Weatherman, I would'nt of takin that tone if you would'nt have gone
from honost inquiry of doctrinal interpretation to accussational
rhetoric. be nice and i'll be nice. be a jackass and i'll treat you
like one.
weatherman said:
As well were does one find the admixture between the "appropriate
responce" and tithing? Jacob pouring out a drink offering on the
stone?-
surfkrow says:
nobody is admixing anyting tithing is tithing and offerings are
offerings. And offerings are to be done in the same spirit as the
woman with the the alabaster box did it, In recognition that whom is
forgivin much loves much ( an accurate feeling invoked and acted upon
through worship, when the gospel is understood correctly and
internalized).
Judee77, celestias, rpbc I want to qualify what I posted and you
all posted in response to but its late and I have to work so i'll get
back to this tommorow goodnight and god bless. You to
weatherman..
Weatherman
WM-Well you are still not seeing that "wasting" was the words Judas
used. To a large degree this whole things is being interpreted
according to the Judas definition. The nature of the alabaster box has
to do with Christs preperation for death not simply looking for
something of value to pour out on Christ. Its all there in Moses and
the truth is, it does not support a giving but a preperation.
"And offerings are to be done in the same spirit as the
woman with the the alabaster box did it..."
WM-What the woman did was not an offering but a preperation of the
body of the lamb, the offering. This idea you have about the alabaster
and offerings is certainly an interpretation of scripture laided out
by the misinformed or the strictures that proceed from the mouth of
christain tyrants. It can not be tied togeather with scripture but is
rather bound up with string. I see Judas still trying to get in there
somehow to extract the priests cut. This is not a division of the
offering meat here.
If a congregation is instructed to pour out to Christ in some
accordance with "what this woman has done" they are still not getting
the point of what she was really doing. She was actually taking the
position of preperation of sacrifice that was the role of (Israle) a
priest (she anointed his head and feet). Jesus reproved the pharisees
primarily becouse they being the know it alls in such things didnt
understand who He was and so didnt act in accordance with the law and
preperation.
Anyway, Christ was properly prepared as the law demands, taken before
the high priest and later executed. Christ had to be prepared to
fullfill the law and the high priest wasnt about to do it. But this
woman, a prostitute, somehow knew to do this. Outside of the Judas
understanding this act had nothing to do with the value of what was
poured out. A beliver that gives here to counter the Judas priniciple
falls short of understanding "what this woman has done".
Only a hack gold loving, cigar smoking christain tycoon, making
motions of self anointing could turn something like this into a sort
of mindless and impulsive act of giddy or otherwise hilarious giving.
The woman was weeping for Christ sake! This was Eve full of understand
and recognition about the failures in Eden, the Lamb, the second Adam,
about to be slain to make it right. The only offering here is
Christ.
My point about Paul is that God took him all over the world and into
millions of homes, with incalculable influence on nations and socities
over centuries and yet he did not specifically mention what the woman
had done. I point this out again becouse it shows your point about
Gene being taken to the world as faulty. Oh an I love the way you
tried to dovetail Pauls teaching about giving and the alabaster box
into a comprehensive giving package. Had to muddy up the water there
at the joint but thats ok, just typical traditional handling of
scripture.
Weatherman
>
" Wether or not Gene scott offered a portion of the offerings he
collected as a grain offering is between him and the lord and you
can't prove he did'nt you nosey presumptuous jack ass!"
WM-I dont need to know if his holyness gave a portion as a grain
offering. Dont even want to hear about any self right holyer than the
rest NT high priest crap. Christ is our High Priest, our sacrifice and
offering. Dont want to hear about some retard making levitical high
priest motions on my behalf or his own. Talk about presumptuous. And I
didnt say anything about what you are even talking about.
I can get up and go right into the Throne Room right now and have a
high priest waiting there for me that has paid all in full. Dont need
some horizontal relationship with some earthly high priest like I need
to bring him the silver shekel or something for a sort of atonement.
Celestias
Very well said WM, but consider this....would you have reached that
understanding if not for the experiences you've had with Gene Scott?
Possibly, but how likely?
It was God who taught you, using Doc as an audio/visual aid. That's
all I'VE been trying to say since I got here. Maybe Surf has too, but
I won't speak for him.
Weatherman
>
> Weatherman, I would'nt of takin that tone if you would'nt have gone
> from honost inquiry of doctrinal interpretation to accussational
> rhetoric. be nice and i'll be nice. be a jackass and i'll treat you
> like one.
>
WM-This is really very funny. Man you can talk to me anyway you want.
But just so you know this is syber world. K? You have to establish
that someone really cares before you try to lay down some ground rules
you control nut. Not going to change my tone for some new guy asshole.
K? You dammed dog.
surfkrow
> On Dec 9, 8:49 pm, surfkrow <kevinrandlek...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 9, 12:25 pm, Weatherman <the.sizeofah...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 9, 11:20 am, surfkrow <kevinrandlek...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
rpbc said:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> cross! Where did you hear that from......?
surfkrow says
Dr.Scott taught me. And what he taught me is as follows:
All through Gods word, worship as "offerings" and "prayerful
praise" in response to whom God is to us and what God has done for us
is quint essential to a complete understanding of our walk with Lord.
(And i articulated it [offerings/prayerful praise] in that order
intentionaly. I will explain why further on in this response)
The context and intent of this post is to qualify my assertion that
God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
level as what jesus offered on the cross. The question is what did he
offer that is likened unto what we offer?
Simply put, Jesus took upon himself the likeness of man and in
doing so he made himself our kin. He made himself a little lower than
the angels as we are. He who knew no sin became sin for our sake. He
shared our humility and from that place of humility, Jesus loved God
and offered his life a ransom for fallen man.
Jesus offered himself unto God out of love and this particular love
was expressed through the humility he shared with us by taking on our
human condition. And this is what he offered that is likened unto
what we offer. Love expressed through humility.
Love expressed through humility like the woman with the alabastor
box expressed toward the son of God. "Whom is forgivin much ( which
is very much a humbling experience) loves much"...
And the consistant expression of recieving forgivness is worship
of the forgiver through valuable offering(s). (Because the forgivness
recieved is considered valuable, even priceless [so you cant give
enough] ) and prayerful praise (cant do enough of that either)
(someone mentioned levitical practices of preperation for offering
a sacrifice or funirary issues and that rings true. But it dos'nt
diminish the point i am making rather, it adds detail.)
rpbc said:
A televangelist's
surfkrow says:
Dr.Scott was'nt a televangelist and if he were alive and heard you
say that he would verbaly turn you into a spoon full of ashes. Don't
make me bust out his dead bones and start beatin you over the head
with that fact lol....
doc once said that when he dies he's gonna come back and beat'm
( people like you, sayin the things you say in places like this [I
added this part] ) over the head with his dead bones lmao! Just
call me bones :) anyways, i digress...
rpbc said:
words
surfkrow says:
Not words... GODS WORD!
> cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> on a par with Jesus on the Cross
surfkrow says:
Gods word says no interpretation is a private interpretation so YEAH!
Dr.Scott cross connected verse and scripture till it made good
christian and godly sense. and the sense in it all was...
That giving to the Domota (which takes the place of the old
testament priests (and God veiws as giving to himself, for it is GODS
CHURCH.) in the spirit of humility and love for what God gave us
(forgivness and restoration) on the level with what Jesus gave as he
hung on the cross in humility and love for God
(so celestias he was worshipping God when he sacrificed himself)
back to rpbc.... let me show you where Dr.Scott cross connected verse
and scripture and in doing so made good christian and godly sense on
the matter.
Exodus 25 starts out with moses commin down from the mount of glory
and sayin "bring me an offering: of every man (or woman NO YOU LADIES
DONT GET OFF THE HOOK) that gives it of his/her heart willingly ( and
i add that that can only be done in humility and love)
Gold, silver, brass and a whole bunch of udder stuff starts flyin all
over the place! lol (you get the point)
befor i go any further lets look at this closely...
What is gonna follow is the building of the ark of the covenant the
tabernacle and the furniture found there in. All of which will typify
God, Jesus and man to one degree or another in terms of being and
relationship
But befor any of that is expounded upon God has Moses take up an
offering, a freewill offering so to speak. (yes the offerings would be
used and were needed for what was to follow) but they did'nt know that
and even if they did it did'nt matter because the point was and is...
Front and center with god is worship for himself in love born out of
humility.
so what am i saying? or what is revealed in this side road? Like the
doc said and i paraphrase " even befor God teach's on giving in all
its dimentions
(on the part of God and man), and its various forms (Jesus as
kinsman redeemer, man giving out of substinance recieved by God, mans
prayerfull praise and god as he presides over it)
God is looking for that love and humility that is the basis for
relationship with himself and expressed through giving.. He
emphasized worship befor he even began revealing what its about.
THATS TOTALY UNAPOLIGETIC ON THE PART OF GOD, HE WHO KNOWS THE HEART
AND THE MOTIVES FOUND THERE IN, WILL DISCERN OUR LOVE AND JUDGE OUR
HUMILITY IN THAT DAY AND THERE WILL BE NO ARGUMENT ABOUT IT! The
fortunate that get the opprotunity to understand why through all he
has revealed through his word and ministers are just that, fortunate.
And will be held to a higher standard....
anyways.....
let me remind you all where I left off lest you think I forgot:
Gold, silver, brass and a whole bunch of udder stuff starts flyin all
over the place! lol (you get the point)
Now, the first thing God has them do with all this love and humility
(this stuff) is build an ark of shittim wood ( a type of man) 2 1/2
in length, 1 1/2 in width and 1 1/2 in height.
then he covers it in gold (a type of Gods abiding spirit) So what we
have here is a type of christ 1/2 man and 1/2 God.
Then the mercy seat is fashioned in pure gold and this symbolizes
forgivness of sin and where god meets us once it is placed on the
ark. And this ark is placed in the holy of holies
Here it gets criticle
In the holy place is the table of showbread and its the first thing
God speaks about once he is done addressing the the oly of holies and
the ark found there in. Its made of shittim wood ( again a type of
man ) and its dimensions are 2 in length, 1 in width and 1 1/2 in
height and it also is overlaid in gold ( again, a type of Gods
abiding presense).
The very next thing he talks about is the showbread made from the
manna ( a type of christ givin by god to us). and from that manna
( that christ-ness, that humility-ness, that love-ness, that stuff-
ness) intstructions are givin to make cakes out of it and place it on
the table for which it was made.
The very table that is the first object of Gods attention outside
the holy of holies and differs in all dimensions from the ark save
one.... Its height or the level it reach's.
And God is a deliberate God and he sees the height of the table of
showbread
(which bares christ-ness, humility-ness, love-ness, stuff-ness, that
which we give back to God out of that which he gave us which is the
same christ-ness humility-ness, love-ness and stuff-ness)
as being of the same height or "on the same level" with the ark and
and what it symbols in terms of humility and love.
Hence "see to it where ever the gospel is preached you tell what
this woman did". And what she did was her own version of the table of
showbread.
God manifest in the form of humility and expressing love, gave
her love (expressed through forgivness) in the condition of her
humility. And in turn she loved God out of her humility and she
expressed her love through worship (the alabastor box).
And God sees the same humility and love expressed in both Jesus and
the woman with the alabastor box.
Our worship of God differs in length and width in that only christ
could offer up the sinlessness required for redemption of man for he
is God in man and can do that.
But that human side of God kins itself in humility and expresses
love on that cross.
We can share in that by baring our own crosses and by dying to our
pride and in doing so becomming humble, which in turn, gives rise to
love and its a giving thing by definition. And first love goes to God
alone!
rpbc said;
On a par! ... think of what youare saying
surfkrow says:
if you got this far u can see that i have
studio said:
Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
surfkrow says:
a little humility wont do because it reflects being forgiving only a
little and god forgives completely So only complete humility before
the cross will suffice....
studio said:
even a person who sacrifices their life for another.
surfkrow says:
Jesus said see to it that where ever the gospel is preached tell
what this woman did. And I explained that to the best of my ability
in all humility and love for Gods sake. Jesus did'nt say see to it
where ever the gosple is preached see to it you tell people to go
sacrifice there life for another. But if you really belive that
sacrificing your life for another is paramount (though, how God spared
Issac proves other wise) then go find sombody and sacrifice yourself
for them (and the sacrifice denoted in that passage is literal death
so dont confuse it to mean doing for others, or laying yourself out
for others. NO, GO DIE FOR SOMBODY! In the mean time, it is my
humble opinion and I give it to you in love. That it is in your best
intrest for the Lords sake that you consider the meaning of Gods word
shared with you here and now, for in the Lords day he will call you to
give an account on the matter and goes for anybody that has read
this. God will hold you to a higher standard now and there will be no
arguing with him over it.....
rpbc says:
There's those
crossed wires again
surfkrow says:
you seem to be hung up on wires would you like me to cut you down??
rpbc
rpbc:
> surfkrow says:
> you seem to be hung up on wires would you like me to cut you down??
Surf... your boasting precedes you. However.... one thing at a time.
> rpbc said:
> A televangelist's
>
> surfkrow says:
>
> Dr.Scott was'nt a televangelist and if he were alive and heard you
> say that he would verbaly turn you into a spoon full of ashes. Don't
> make me bust out his dead bones and start beatin you over the head
> with that fact lol....
>
> doc once said that when he dies he's gonna come back and beat'm
> ( people like you, sayin the things you say in places like this [I
> added this part] ) over the head with his dead bones lmao! Just
> call me bones :) anyways, i digress...
Okay... as in Doc's presentation of the proof of the Resurrection, one
step at a time, for there must be understanding if not agreement for
continuity in a logical thought process. You didn't digress... you
obfuscated then dimissed. First, words being abstract representations
for an object world, establishment of definitions are paramount for
understanding. What is your definition of a televangelist?
rpbc
rpbc:
And, since expressions of free thought are encouraged at afgs, orderly
ones appreciated, this conversation is open to thoughts from all.
Weatherman
WM-Breaking out in a self right slober with that tone. Ill take it up
as the Spirit of truth directs as He always has in my giving. I can
tell you that Christ isnt going to ask me about my tithing or lack of
it in a strick sense. It seems that the biggest sin that some for us
are not around the planet anymore is that our money is missed. Oh
thats right Gene was doing me a favor and didnt need it but I needed
to give. Ok but not there anymore. Bunch of Jesus hustlers. Giving is
no law. Its a personal thing with the master. Gene was wrong to act
like he could tell a persons spiritual condition by thier giving
records. Its none of his biz really. No wonder God shut his pie hole.
surfkrow
>
> > > Dr.Scott was'nt a televangelist and if he were alive and heard you
> > > say that he would verbaly turn you into a spoon full of ashes. Don't
> > > make me bust out his dead bones and start beatin you over the head
> > > with that fact lol....
>
> > > doc once said that when he dies he's gonna come back and beat'm
> > > ( people like you, sayin the things you say in places like this [I
> > > added this part] ) over the head with his dead bones lmao! Just
> > > call me bones :) anyways, i digress...
>
> > Okay... as in Doc's presentation of the proof of the Resurrection, one
> > step at a time, for there must be understanding if not agreement for
> > continuity in a logical thought process. You didn't digress... you
> > obfuscated then dimissed. First, words being abstract representations
> > for an object world, establishment of definitions are paramount for
> > understanding. What is your definition of a televangelist?
>
> rpbc:
> And, since expressions of free thought are encouraged at afgs, orderly
> ones appreciated, this conversation is open to thoughts from all.
rpbs said:
Surf... your boasting precedes you
surfkrow says:
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross.
rpbc said:
> > > A televangelist's
>
> > > surfkrow says:
>
> > > Dr.Scott was'nt a televangelist and if he were alive and heard you
> > > say that he would verbaly turn you into a spoon full of ashes. Don't
> > > make me bust out his dead bones and start beatin you over the head
> > > with that fact lol....
>
> > > doc once said that when he dies he's gonna come back and beat'm
> > > ( people like you, sayin the things you say in places like this [I
> > > added this part] ) over the head with his dead bones lmao! Just
> > > call me bones :) anyways, i digress...
>
> > Okay... as in Doc's presentation of the proof of the Resurrection
surfkrow says:
Dr.Scott, My pappa, my beloved pappa, Gods man on point, asshole
that he could be and even with the ass wuppin i would give him on a
couple of issues. Nevertheless, proclaimed the gospel like none
before him or scince. Brought honor to the things of God and equipped
me with a sound understanding and faith rooted in Gods word. ( And I
confer not with flesh and blood on this matter for my spirit bares
witness.) Yes, my beloved pappa Dr.Scott, would be proud and more
than willing to allow me to metaphoricly beat any spiritual jackass
over the head with his very much alive though dead bones over any
issue that gives rise to the distortion or misrepresentation of Gods
word.
Now,
surfkrow says:
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross
rpbc said:
one
> > step at a time, for there must be understanding if not agreement for
> > continuity in a logical thought process. You didn't digress... you
> > obfuscated then dimissed. First, words being abstract representations
> > for an object world, establishment of definitions are paramount for
> > understanding. What is your definition of a televangelist?
surfkrow says:
enough with the semantics.
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross
rpbc said:
And, since expressions of free thought are encouraged at afgs, orderly
> ones appreciated, this conversation is open to thoughts from all
surfkrow says:
yes, the conversation is open to all but....
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross
rpbc, this is no type of mission field, this is a type of battle
ground. No afgs is not a type of hell. but it is a type of hells gate.
And my screen name is surfkrow and I have found a feast of dead carnal
minds to feast upon. ( its what krows do)
And I intend to use this keyboard and Gods Word to feast on the
dead minds and words that i find here until either the dead minds and
words realize they are dead and come alive through repentance at which
time i will stop (because krows dont primarily feast upon the living)
or there is just nothing left of those dead minds and words for me to
feast upon.
surfkrow
matt2442
> rpbc, this is no type of mission field, this is a type of battle
> ground. No afgs is not a type of hell. but it is a type of hells gate.
> And my screen name is surfkrow and I have found a feast of dead carnal
> minds to feast upon. ( its what krows do)
>
> And I intend to use this keyboard and Gods Word to feast on the
> dead minds and words that i find here until either the dead minds and
> words realize they are dead and come alive through repentance at which
> time i will stop (because krows dont primarily feast upon the living)
> or there is just nothing left of those dead minds and words for me to
> feast upon.
>
> surfkrow
Matt2442:
So you intend to beat us over the head with the same Doc-teaching that
we spent years of our lives getting dinned into our brains by Gene
Scott? You are a presumptuous ass if you think you can judge the
hearts of people in here as though you know where they stand with
Jesus Christ. Go ahead, speak all the more because the more you do,
like several other scotties before you, you only serve to reveal the
cultic nature and mindset of Gene Scotts "church."
rpbc
one
> > step at a time, for there must be understanding if not agreement for
> > continuity in a logical thought process. You didn't digress... you
> > obfuscated then dimissed. First, words being abstract representations
> > for an object world, establishment of definitions are paramount for
> > understanding. What is your definition of a televangelist?
surfkrow says:
enough with the semantics.
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
>
> And I intend to use this keyboard and Gods Word to feast on the
> dead minds and words that i find here until either the dead minds and
> words realize they are dead and come alive through repentance at which
> time i will stop (because krows dont primarily feast upon the living)
> or there is just nothing left of those dead minds and words for me to
> feast upon.
>
> surfkrow
rpbc:
I'm not sidestepping anything, I'm working up to it. You're not used
to having reasoned conversations. First thing one does is define
terms. You want to demonstrate to onlooking minds that yours isn't
dead? I started with a simple term you reacted to which should be
easily defined to establish common ground for discussion and you start
talking about carrion and scavenging. Not a good way to be be taken
seriously using God's Word. You are writing to present the truth of
God's Word rightly divided by Gene Scott, aren't you.... or do you
simply want to froth and thrash around like a buzzard on road kill.
Gene Scott did not tolerate fools and guess what... he tolerated me
for thirty years as primary sounding board during live festival. I was
a good student and faithful follower and many things I learned from
him remain, and one of them is not to tolerate fools. Now... you want
to get off you're holy perch and have a discussion. If not, beat your
wings off to the fields and find leftovers from some predator cause
I'm full of life. Land around me like that I'm going to pull out your
feathers like a Christmas turkey. If you think I can't do like Gene
Scott this ought to cause pause. All this shit.... it doesn't make a
fuck to me... I loved the old bastard. There's a lot to learn from
old bastards. Being a fuck head boasting ass hole claiming to speak
with wisdom from God's Word isn't one of them. From the flow of his
sermons over the course of his life that is one of his most important
lessons. Careful with this now...... it might have been unwitting but
He died teaching it. God did indeed use him and you grind one of his
facets into the ground like a common thug.
surfkrow
matt2442 said:
if you think you can judge the
> hearts of people
surfkrow says:
No, I don't judge hearts I discern words and what is said around here
by using the light of Gods word and that determins the nature of the
mind that bore them. Yes, Gods word exorts all the faithfull to test
the spirits wether or not they be of God.
matt2442 said:
you only serve to reveal the
> cultic nature and mindset of Gene Scotts "church
surfkrow says:
thats a vague accussation and a blanket statement. Nothing you said
in this clip qualifies as evidence for your premis.
matt2442 said:
"So you intend to beat us over the head" "the hearts of people in
here"
"as though you know where they stand with
Jesus Christ"
surfkrow says:
matt2442, I tried to encourage you in our last encounter to get out of
this type of herd mentality. In my opinion, If your gonna speak for
anybody speak for Jesus and if you do that your gonna have to stick to
his word. I invite you to enlighten me where in gods word he led me
wrong...
matt2442 said:
like several other scotties before you
surfkrow says:
A deragatory statement that carries a negative conuptation. this
type of mind set wether intentional or unintetional serves only to
insult a persons intelligence. This method of slander should be
reserved for jackass's like the very one that made that deragatory
statement.
notion
The question is What defines a jackass? and this can only be
understood in the context of what brought the jackass behavior about
that reveals it to actualy be jack ass behavior.
Now I asserted the premis that God esteams our worship of Jesus on
the same level with what Jesus did as he hung on the cross.
rpbc challanged the premis...
So I supported the assertion that I had made with Gods word
rpbc response to what I shared with him through Gods word was non
existant he did not aknowledge it at all. He bogged down on other side
issues that came up and then became very semantical. very unedifying
indeed (reminded me of mellissa scott actualy)
anyway...
In my response to his response I closed on this note:
I intend to use this keyboard and Gods Word to feast on the
> > dead minds and words that i find here until either the dead minds and
> > words realize they are dead and come alive through repentance at which
> > time i will stop (because krows dont primarily feast upon the living)
> > or there is just nothing left of those dead minds and words for me to
> > feast upon
Which by the way I find to be full of zeal for God, his word and
leading people to repentance from carnal minded character
assassination, to where the issue in this forum should be. Which is
wether or not Dr.Scott divided Gods Word rightly And if he did'nt then
prove it using Gods Word. Because at the heart of the matter IS Gods
word and the claim that it has on ones life.
back to the issue...
matt2442 in his first post to all this goings on clearly reveals a
lack of concern for the original premis revolving around how God veiws
worship and wether or not what I learned from dr.Scott on the matter
was correct or incorrect (which in my opinion should be most important
in addressing if matt2442 is only wanting to help me see the lighht
like a good chhristian should, [just my opinion]).
Furthermore, He totaly ignores the fact that rpbc also never got
around to directly addressing the issue of Gods word on the matter as
taught to me by Dr.Scott right or wrong.
No, here is where matt2442's mind is at:
So you intend to beat us over the head with the same Doc-teaching that
> we spent years of our lives getting dinned into our brains by Gene
> Scott? You are a presumptuous ass if you think you can judge the
> hearts of people in here as though you know where they stand with
> Jesus Christ. Go ahead, speak all the more because the more you do,
> like several other scotties before you, you only serve to reveal the
> cultic nature and mindset of Gene Scotts "church
The question is What defines a jackass? and this can only be
understood in the context of what brought the jackass behavior about
that reveals it to actualy be jack ass behavior
Answer?
complete disregard for wether or not a fellow beliver understands gods
word correctly. A herd mentality, vague accusations and derogatory
comments that should be directed at the person exhibiting this
behavior matt2442.
KAW! KAW! FLAP, FLAp, FLap, Flap, flap, fla, fl,f...
surfkrow
rpbc said:
I'm not sidestepping anything, I'm working up to it. You're not used
> to having reasoned conversations.
surfkrow says:
Still side stepping or at least giving that impression.
No need to work up to wether or not my interpretation of what
dr.scott taught me is an accurate reflection of his position and or
wether or not Dr.Scotts interpretation of gods word on the matter was
in fact correct. Just break it down rp....
And its blind at worst or presumtion at least, to assume that I am not
used to having reasoned conversations. Especialy when my efforts
were a complete appeal to your intellectual integrety in that I laid
out what i belive and why in a thoughtful and consice manner so as to
invite your critique on the matter which you have yet to address
rpbc said:
First thing one does is define
> terms.
surfkrow says:
ok mellissa....
rpbc says;
You want to demonstrate to onlooking minds that yours isn't
> dead?
surfkrow says:
will be by the time you get around to addressing the thoughtful and
consice apeal that i made through gods word to your intellectual
integrety. ( a demonstration of being very much alive, i might add)
I just went through five years of this semantical masterbation.
I know what i belive and why and i simply put it out there. Now plz
kind sir, would you simply rebutt and/or agree? In my opinion, all
that is being demonstrated here is that you underestimate the
onlookers intelligence.... not being mean, just callin it like i see
it.
rpbc said:
I started with a simple term you reacted to which should be
> easily defined to establish common ground for discussion
surfkrow says:
No, I did and its as follows:
The context and intent of this post is to qualify my assertion that
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross. The question is what did he
> > > offer that is likened unto what we offer?
rpbc said;
and you start
> talking about carrion and scavenging
surfkrow says:
a vague blanket statement derogetory and out of context.
rpbc said:
Not a good way to be be taken
> seriously using God's Word
surfkrow says:
I laid gods word out there as i have been taught By Dr.Scott in a
thoughtfull and consice manner so as to appeal to your intellectual
integrety. I opened the door for your critique as a gentleman would
do. All I have gotton from you so far is the run around and vague
accussations. And you hav'nt even touched on Gods word so how can you
insinuate that you know how to be takin seriously using it? For gods
sake give me an example to follow. Now the silent onlookers I
suspect, are getting as impatient as I am with your rhetoric and I
have already begun pecking your spiritual eyeballs out to see if your
mind is as dead as your words are. KAW! KAW! KAW!
rpbc said:
You are writing to present the truth of
> God's Word rightly divided by Gene Scott, aren't you...
surfkrow says:
thanx for getting around to aknowledging part of the original premis.
but its twisted.
What i attempted was an accurate reflection of what Dr.Scott taught
me on the subject of our worship directed toward Jesus being held on
the same level with the worship Jesus directed toward God. From Gods
perspective. and that is open for debate (wether or not I represented
Dr.Scott correctly)
However, I expounded upon the concepts of humility and love and
connected the message of the alabaster box in that context in a way I
had never heard Dr.Scott teach. He may have, but i never heard him do
it. So I have to be honest, as i percieve it, I have added my own
insight into the mix. My spirit witnesses it to be consistant with
all I have learned through gods word so there it is.
furthhermore, even if i did represent dr.scotts position on the matter
the question remains, was he correct? And also, is my own added
insight consistant with Dr.Scotts position? And even then, is it an
accurate interpretation of gods word. Again, all this is open to
debate. I live by it until proven otherwise.... I invite you to
critique rp, if you just would lol..
rpbc said:
aoor do you
> simply want to froth and thrash around like a buzzard on road kill
surfkrow says:
so far your gettin run over and i'm flyin after ya. lol KAW1 KAW!
FLAP1 FLAP! PECK !PECK! (there goes one eye, love ya bro you taste
good) lmao! sorry, tryin to be serious.... still laughin
though. GOTTA ADMIT ITS FUNNY lmao.....
rpbc says:
Gene Scott did not tolerate fools
surfkrow says:
he would'nt have tolerated all this "run around" over gods word
either, giv a damn what you say..
rpbc said:
and guess what...he tolerated me
> for thirty years as primary sounding board during live festival
surfkrow says:
thats an oximoron. If he did'nt tolerate fools (which dos'nt suprise
me) and he had to tolerate you ( its what ya said, "he tolerated me")
then he either did tolerate fools or he must have had a special place
in his heart for you, fool that you were which meant he kept you
around in spite of it.
rpbc said:
for thirty years as primary sounding board during live festival
surfkrow says:
I devoted the last 20 of my own years to learning as much as I could
from my beloved pappa and if you want regard, than give it. time for
some of you round here to realize im no dumb ass ain't gonna be
treated like one neither, and I don't say that for prides sake. cause
i can still be a jackass but thats different. and all this just is...
rpbc said
I was a good student and faithful follower and many things I learned
from
him remain, and one of them is not to tolerate fools
surfkrow says:
then why dont you get on with the buisness of showin me what all that
faithfull following and good studentness endowed you with. Cause i am
still waitin for you to critique the concise and thoughtful
intellectual appeal that i made to you through Gods word so as to
qualify my premis that attempted to represent Dr.Scotts position, as
well as my own, on the subject of God veiwing our worship on the same
level with what jesus offered as hhe hung on that cross. and until
you do I consider you the fool here and my tolerance is wering thin.
KAW! KAW!
rpbc said:
Now... you want
> to get off you're holy perch and have a discussion. If not, beat your
> wings off to the fields and find leftovers from some predator cause
> I'm full of life. Land around me like that I'm going to pull out your
> feathers like a Christmas turkey
surfkrow says:
KAW! KAW! FLAP! PECK PECK (there goes another eye) KAW! KAW! PECK PECK
PECK FLAP FLAP!
rpbc said:
If you think I can't do like Gene
> Scott this ought to cause pause. All this shit.... it doesn't make a
> fuck to me... I loved the old bastard. There's a lot to learn from
> old bastards
surfkrow stops:
starts cooing, I saw movement. there is life here... starts searching
for any dead minds that even think of threatning this beautiful moment
for as long as it lasts.
rpbc said:
Being a fuck head boasting ass hole claiming to speak
> with wisdom from God's Word isn't one of them.
surfkrow sees more life, recognizes much love for gods word, if he
would just get on with sharing. dos'nt mind the personal attack, and
forgives it quikly. Begins to hope for more.
rpbc said:
From the flow of his
> sermons over the course of his life that is one of his most important
> lessons. Careful with this now
surfkrow says:
continue please no more attaks for now
rpbc said:
...... it might have been unwitting but
> He died teaching it. God did indeed use him
surfkrow says:
yes i'm listening....
rpbc said:
and you grind one of his
> facets into the ground like a common thug
surfkrow says:
I ground your run around into the ground. My presentation of what I
learned from Dr.Scott on the subject was expressed as thoughtfully and
concisely and respectfully as i could with know malicious intent only
hope and love. and if you share with me what you have to offer on the
subject and it is gods word that you use i will consider it deeply and
prayerfully. I Thank you ahead of time for your thoughtful attention
to the matter
Merry christmass
kevin
Weatherman
>
> surfkrow says:
> then why dont you get on with the buisness of showin me what all that
> faithfull following and good studentness endowed you with. Cause i am
> still waitin for you to critique the concise and thoughtful
> intellectual appeal that i made to you through Gods word so as to
> qualify my premis that attempted to represent Dr.Scotts position, as
> well as my own, on the subject of God veiwing our worship on the same
> level with what jesus offered as hhe hung on that cross. and until
> you do I consider you the fool here and my tolerance is wering thin.
> KAW! KAW!
WM-Well that sounds good. Paul even said we are crucified with Christ.
However it does not appear in the Word, the idea as a worked out,
anything that could be made into a doctrine lets say that our giving
is on par with Jesus on the cross. Its a type of logic and reasoning.
It cant be that our giving should be seen like this becouse ultimatly
it would fall short as no man can give anything in exchange for his
soul. Our giving would never be a complete work as Christs. OT
offerings and sacrifices were done at set times or occasions every
year becouse sin remained and/or the price in full was yet to be paid.
Christs work ended/fullfilled the requirements of all that. Giving on
this basis now could be seen as a form of circumcision even. This is
probably why it is appealing to some, they are simply closet law boys
seeking an admixture with Christ that is profitable with a flesh/
spirit mix.
Profitable to the idea of a work or works to some and the operational
expences of others.
The alabaster box was also poured out in accordance with OT exercizes
as Christ had not finished His work but was being prepared for it. He
was offering and priest at the same time i.e. cetain parts of the body
of the priest were to be anointed ear, hand, and toe which they where
and the offering of the lamb, bull, bird were to be mixed with the
sweet smelling ointment before burning. Moses was trying to show us
that some day a priest/lamb would be offered. And seeing things to be
cumsumed were the priests, Christ, then all was consumed in Christ.
Seeing we are all called priests now, and only after the finished work
of Christ, the vail being rent, that there is no more consuming after
the old order that work being complete. If there were some way to
conjoin the old with the new, in the givng of gold or silver or even
in a likeness with Christ on the cross, or with a stand in, then Paul
would have done it. As it was Paul sufficed it all by saying that we
should share with those that teach us but certainly not after some
admixture with the law.
matt2442
Matt2442:
This is rather lengthy to read, and it's Christmas and I'm with
family, so I'll get back to it this evening perhaps. Merry Christmas
surfkrow. God Bless your day. You can beat me up with Doc's bones
tomorow perhaps, but not today.
nopms
yikes!!! Judee, I just had the same thought; you sent me back to
Festival for a moment. Your description of that scenario is absolutely
right on.
surfkrow
A kind word turns away much wrath (for the moment) :) merry
christmass matt and i mean that from the bottom of my heart.
rpbc
surfkrow says:
Still side stepping or at least giving that impression.
No need to work up to wether or not my interpretation of what
dr.scott taught me is an accurate reflection of his position and or
wether or not Dr.Scotts interpretation of gods word on the matter was
in fact correct. Just break it down rp....
And its blind at worst or presumtion at least, to assume that I am
not
used to having reasoned conversations. Especialy when my efforts
were a complete appeal to your intellectual integrety in that I laid
out what i belive and why in a thoughtful and consice manner so as to
invite your critique on the matter which you have yet to address
rpbc said:
First thing one does is define
> terms.
surfkrow says:
ok mellissa....
rpbc:
"No need to work up to wether or not my interpretation of what
dr.scott taught me is an accurate reflection of his position and or
wether or not Dr.Scotts interpretation of gods word on the matter was
in fact correct. Just break it down rp."
No need to work up to whether or not my interpretation...... Oh
really! No comment necessary here, your words yell contempt for any
discursive process.... the break it down.
"And its blind at worst or presumtion at least, to assume that I am
not
used to having reasoned conversations."
No assumption, it's your demonstration. You make no appeal to
intellect, no orderly presentation, just incoherent thought patterns
that are impossible to follow and torturous to read. I'm sure you
are doing the best you can.
In the Garden of Eden everywhere was life and God spoke of death.
After the fall, everywhere was death and God spoke of life. It's what
His book is about. And you flap around with That Book likening
yourself to a buzzard.
Gene Scott's wife, you say she teaches sound doctrine, he proclaimed
her as the only one that got it... you call her a manifestation of the
cancer that was in his loins. Another function of the buzzard.
You need organization. Your mind is focused on death and it is
becoming you. You've missed Gene Scott's great lesson.
Now flap away and brag about the kill that never happened while
proclaiming your giving is on par... equal to... Jesus on the Cross.
'If it be possible let this cup pass from Me, never the less not My
Will but Thine be done. Your's, Father.' Gene Scott put
identification of himself on the cross with Jesus into your mind and
equated it with giving him money. Made you feel special when you did
it, still does, doesn't it. You have pride but not a moment of
humility.
babyshoes
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
<The question is what did he
> > > offer that is likened unto what we offer?
Now thats a loaded question.
God showed us through Abraham that he did not want
a sacrifice from us likened to his.
God knew before hand the goat was there "before"
Abraham tied his son on the alter.
God is a God of the living.
When God rejected Cains offering It was because Cain was stupid to
offer things
of the garden lost especially fruit….
Satan’s seed is a moron!
Cain knew why Able was accepted and not he.
Cain knew where he came from.
Cain killed his brother on the alter
any practice of sacrifice is murder
God heard Able crying out _______________
God heard Jesus crying out
"Forgive them for they know not what
they do"
Maybe Able said the same thing
because God was kind to Cain considering
what he did
but all in all even contemplating
how we can match Jesus sacrifice tantamounts
to murder, we can’t!
We join our will with the fathers will
"on earth as it is in heaven"
Life is precious.
New works now would only lead to what is not new under the sun.
nopms
Doc was wrong. Melissa was not the only one who 'got' it!
nopms
[pop!pop!pop! pop-pop-pop-pop-pop-pop!] munch munch much ...
nopms
You are quite a piece of work kevin, a presumptuous fool of the first
degree.
You don't know what from the fuck and are doing a stellar job of
displaying your nether parts over the world wide web.
You are a dweeb of an ass and your spelling is beyond atrocious.
Merry Christmas to you too little kevin.
nopms
bluetits:
He's impossible ... you can feel a draft from his rapidly spinning
brain. I do believe he's in earnest and trying his Unlevel best to
carry on doc's teechins.
> In the Garden of Eden everywhere was life and God spoke of death.
> After the fall, everywhere was death and God spoke of life. It's what
> His book is about. And you flap around with That Book likening
> yourself to a buzzard.
>
A krow, a buzzard ... carrion eater .. (kevin... why would you
identify with such nasty morbid creatures? You must have Christianity
confused with some other religion.)
> Gene Scott's wife, you say she teaches sound doctrine, he proclaimed
> her as the only one that got it... you call her a manifestation of the
> cancer that was in his loins. Another function of the buzzard.
>
eewww ... kevin .... eeewww.
> You need organization. Your mind is focused on death and it is
> becoming you. You've missed Gene Scott's great lesson.
>
Yep, he's in the wrong religion.
> Now flap away and brag about the kill that never happened while
> proclaiming your giving is on par... equal to... Jesus on the Cross.
> 'If it be possible let this cup pass from Me, never the less not My
> Will but Thine be done. Your's, Father.' Gene Scott put
> identification of himself on the cross with Jesus into your mind and
> equated it with giving him money. Made you feel special when you did
> it, still does, doesn't it. You have pride but not a moment of
> humility.
He is proud of himself. Watch out kevin. Pride goeth before a fall.
You are full of yourself, and foolishness.
Gypsie
>
> - Show quoted text -
gypsie: Based upon surf's unveiling, I for future reference dub the
"EATS"
Eats, you devour anything and everything you come in contact with. You
are a frightening person and yet, you want to 'win souls for Jeezus'?
I pity anyone who lets you within one block of their fam, kids
especially.
But, do keep on posting eats 'k? There is nothing I could do or say
that would represent twisted, perverted planet scott. any better than
you and cel/jackoff do.
You all say folks don't post here cuz of the 'secret agenda' by those
regulars here, but has it ever occurred to you that there is no need
for them to post.... all they need to do is read your posts and keep
reminding themselves how blessed they are to have been delivered from
this hell by God.
rpbc
>
> - Show quoted text -
He won't come out, his imagination is reliving a feeding when in fact
he's attracting shame and mocking to God's book, or, as he puts,
feeding. Shit heads like him running around spouting vile talk in
God's name before an onlooking world is where he refuels his anger and
fortifies his soul to continue his work. If I didn't know better I'd
express anger over it. With mental organization there's hope he'd
realize what's driving him but the possibility exists he'd only
sharpen the act.... that's on my mind when I'm in these exchanges.
nopms
bluetits:
He's a slavering crocodile
on a feeding frenzy
in the river of denial
feasting on the dead flesh of the fallen ...
w_bane
rpbc /Another function of the buzzard ...
that bird and its family are blood speckeled every day.
pick pick pick ..
What happened to harmless as doves.
rpbc
Bane:
> rpbc /Another function of the buzzard ...
>
> that bird and its family are blood speckeled every day.
> pick pick pick ..
> What happened to harmless as doves.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
rpbc:
He'll tell you he is being wise as a serpent against the enemies of
God and the sword of Gene Scott. He thinks he's the flip side of the
coin with the doves. Somehow he has the idea that identifying with a
buzzard, not even a bird of prey, is being wise as a serpent with the
enemies of the Spirit. I tell you, my concern here is schooling him
way beyond his ability to understand for it'll only advance his
buzzard like qualities. As it is, anybody who can't discern his
ravenous spirit as it is would probably be wasted concern anyway.
surfkrow
rpbc said:
No need to work up to whether or not my interpretation...... Oh
> really! No comment necessary here,
surfkrow says:
at best your reading comprehension skills suck in this instance. Or at
worst you are deliberatly taking my words out of context.
A reminder of what I said in its entirety:
No need to work up to wether or not my interpretation of what
> dr.scott taught me is an accurate reflection of his position and or
> wether or not Dr.Scotts interpretation of gods word on the matter was
> in fact correct. Just break it down rp.
Meaning, just do it. talk about the dementions of the ark tied to the
dimensions of the table of showbread (as you think gods word means
for it to be understood) Talk about how they share the same hieght
but not the same width and lentgh and why. Expound on why God shifts
his attention directly from the ark, buy passing the lampstand
( the type of prayer life) to the table of showbread and why you
think that is. And why does God emphasize memorializing the woman
with the alabastor box where ever the gospel is preached. and what is
its relationship to these other matters already mentioned? if any...
And in doing so, reveal wether or not you conclude that Dr.Scott
interpreted this matter correctly and wether or not i reflected his
position correctly and finaly wether or not my own added insights on
the matter are consistant with dr.Scotts veiws and or Gods word.
rpbc says:
your words yell contempt for any
> discursive process
surfkrow says:
I will let the readers of this thread decide.
rpbc said:
No assumption, it's your demonstration. You make no appeal to
> intellect, no orderly presentation, just incoherent thought patterns
> that are impossible to follow and torturous to read
surfkrow says:
You may think your three posts of side stepping away from where all
this started so its easy for you to make a blanket statement like that
but your not. Im including this entire exchange going all the way
back to where it started for the readers sake so they can have a
complete perspective of both our positions.
and by the way, What you just said is a blanket statement full of
vague accusation and dead words. PECK PECK PECK KAW KAW!!!
rpbc said:
In the Garden of Eden everywhere was life and God spoke of death.
After the fall, everywhere was death and God spoke of life. It's
what
His book is about.
surfkrow says:
Yes, that is what its about. For those chosen befor the faoundation
of the world. But many are called and few are chosen. And those
chosen are revealing the same response as the woman with the alabastor
box because this is the appropriate response to the hearing of the
gospel. this is why Jesus said see to it where ever you tell this
gospel that you tell what this woman has done. And what she did ( as
i see gods word revealing it
and Dr.Scott taught it) was an expression of love out of humility
toward God. And its an expression of the same love christ expressed
out of humility toward God. BECAUSE CHRIST IDENTIFIED HIMSELF WITH OUR
OWN CONDITION. And thats the meaning extracted from the similarity
in height between the ark of the covenant and the table of showbread.
And That is what began this entire exchange between us.
Now plz kind sir, do you care to rebutt the premis or do you agree
with the interpretations found here in?
rpbc says:
And you flap around with That Book likening
> yourself to a buzzard
surfkrow says:
rpbc, this is no type of mission field, this is a type of battle
ground. No afgs is not a type of hell. but it is a type of hells
gate.
And my screen name is surfkrow and I have found a feast of dead
carnal
minds to feast upon. ( its what krows do)
And I intend to use this keyboard and Gods Word to feast on the
dead minds and words that i find here until either the dead minds
and
words realize they are dead and come alive through repentance at
which
time i will stop (because krows dont primarily feast upon the
living)
or there is just nothing left of those dead minds and words for me
to
feast upon
Which by the way I find to be full of zeal for God, his word and
leading people to repentance from carnal minded character
assassination, to where the issue in this forum should be. Which is
wether or not Dr.Scott divided Gods Word rightly And if he did'nt
then
prove it using Gods Word. Because at the heart of the matter IS Gods
word and the claim that it has on ones life
Now rp, either your to small minded to get the meaning of the
symbology i am identifying with for Gods sake or you just dont care.
My hope is that you do.
You know, I first surfed in here 12/1/09. I posted for 10 days
then broke off because I dont spend that much time doing anything with
out then breaking away from it just to prove to myself that I hav'nt
slipped into somekind of obsessive behavior. I WILL BE A SLAVE TO
NOTHING SAVE CHRIST. During my break I prayed and I Listend to my
pastor, leslie hale. I also reflected over the last twenty years spent
learning from my pappa Dr.Scott and 5 of those years listening to
Pastor Scott. I pulled out my kings house certificate as I wept over
the devastating blows that have been dealt to Dr.Scotts legacy and I
truly belive Gods most important work for our age to say the least. It
was then that I noticed the date on my kings house certificate and it
was 11/30/89
Twenty years to the very day that I fell in love with christ I surfed
in here not realizing that I would surrender my kings house identity
and resign a public, in this forum called afgs. Now the way I see it,
things happened for a reason. I am too grounded in Gods word, I
esteem Dr.Scott too highly and I respect ordained ministry too much to
just be givin to the wims of the devil so as to make a mockery of all
that God has entrusted to me.
I did'nt know why I chose the screen name surfkrow, just came to me.
I had no idea that all these connections would come together until
they did. The question is why?
When I first came to Christ through Dr.Scotts ministry I was impressed
to my core by the spirit of Christ within me that what Dr.Scott was
doing was the most important of all activity in these last days till
Jesus takes us home. I wrote him telling him so. And all that I
learned from him over the next 20 years confirmed it and is still
doing so.
NOW (just now recieved a phone call from pastor Hale)
It was a recorded message encouraging me to say YES to the burden of
God but No to the burden of the world.
My burden for the lord now is to follow Pastor Hale as he follows
Christ but also to see Dr.Scott's legacy live on, as God has impressed
upon me that it should.
I have to respond to rpbc's next statement befor I can finish what I
am burdened to say right now for the Lords sake.
rpbcsaid:
Gene Scott's wife, you say she teaches sound doctrine, he proclaimed
her as the only one that got it... you call her a manifestation of
the
cancer that was in his loins. Another function of the buzzard
Jesus I love you so much, you've been there for me and all I want is
for you to be glorified. your so beautiful. your love runs so
deep. your mercy is endless. underneath bottomless are the
everlasting arms to hold me. If I ascend into heaven you are there if
I make my bed in hell you are there. If I say surely the darkness
shall cover me even the night shall be light about me. Praise God
Thank you lord for your tender mercies
Mellissa,
sinners ar'nt being reached, they come home drunk and stoned they
can't follow what your sayin. There guilt just drives them to change
the channel. Please empithize with where there at. They need the doc
to bring'm in. They need there hearts freed from the guilt and the
pain. They need to turn on that tv and see the cigar chompin, hells
and damns preachin, ghost story tellin, pyramid danglin, communion
giving doc they used to know and could know. Because once there hearts
are open they can then recieve the message of the alabastor box. They
can then recieve the message of grace and the message of faith and
the message of the cross. You tube could be a venue for more of the
teachin and theres 30 yrs worth to draw from. No replies on that
venue though, just a phone # and a p.o.box. Its in your hands and
your the boss
rp, I make mistakes. and drawing the conclusion that mellissa was the
personification of Dr.scotts cancer was one of them. I immediatly
repented. I am ashamed for sayin that, it was indescent.
furthermore, the doc was mistaken for sayin she was the only one that
got it and shes capable of makin mistakes to. dos'nt have to mean
there evil. I have come to realize this by trial and error over the
course of my time spent here at afgs.
rpbc said:
You need organization.
surfkrow says:
with gods help its all commin together
rpbc said:
Your mind is focused on death and it is
becoming you.
surfkrow says:
My heart is focussed on dying to self. I hope you see that. And its
just my humble opinion and i give it to you all in a spirit of love.
The sooner we all die to self and the god forsaken burdens of this
world, the sooner Christ can come alive in all of our hearts and
minds.
rpbc said:
You've missed Gene Scott's great lesson
surfkrow says:
that would be first love. His love for me and my love for him
rpbc said:
Now flap away and brag about the kill that never happened
surfkrow says:
no bragging for even if it were true it would be sad
rpbc said:
while
> proclaiming your giving is on par... equal to... Jesus on the Cross.
surfkrow says:
If done out of humility and love born out of that humility? And
directed towards God?
Then our worship to God in response to his sacrifice, is in fact on
the same level with the worship Jesus offered to God as he hung on
that cross. That is what is revealed in the fact that the ark and the
table of showbread are equal in height. And I am still waiting for
you to correct me on this matter through Gods word and not your own
spurrious opinion. More dead words. PECK PECK PECK
rpbc said:
> 'If it be possible let this cup pass from Me, never the less not My
> Will but Thine be done. Your's, Father.'
surfkrow says:
Pastor Hale taught me that the reason Jesus prayed that "this cup pass
from me" is because he was in the garden of gethhsemene and he did'nt
what to die there. He wanted to make it to the cross.
In matt 26:38 jesus said to his desciples "my soul is exeedingly
sorrowfull even unto death"
He was engaged in spiritual battle taking place within himself to
the point of death.
Also in luke 22:43,44 an angel appeared and touched him and gave him
strength. "and being in agony (completely traumatized) prayed all
the more earnestly and his sweat was blood"
I heard the message online sunday service and am waiting for the dvd
to arrive so i can really mull over it and put it to memory....
rpbc said
Gene Scott put
> identification of himself on the cross with Jesus into your mind.
surfkrow says:
Not once in anything Dr.Scott ever taught me on the subject and/or
what i have shared with you in these posts did he or I EVER make
that assertion!
In the old testament, offerings were brought to the priests. In
the new testament The ministers of his church take the place of the
priests and recieve those offerings. Where else are we to bring our
offerings if not to his church (his body) what we do with respect to
HIS chuch we do unto HIM not Dr.Scott not pastor Hale or any other
minister of gods word. 1 Cor 9:13,14 sums all this up. And dont
even try to use :15 as an excuse because paul was clearly
contradicting Gods own ordination on the matter. And Paul
sufficiantly straigtened the matter out befor his ministry was
over.......
What rpbc just said was a vague accusation and not one single dead
word of it qualifies the premis. YOU KIND SIR SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF
YOUSELF! for expecting me to take your spurious notions at face
value.
rpbc said:
and
> equated it with giving him money.
surfkrow says:
God did that not Gene Scott. And its revealed all through Gods word
not rpbc's. Gal 6:6,7 states plainly he that is taught in the word
communicate ("koinoneo" strongs:G2841 meaning share, distribute,
partner) with him that teacheth in all good ("agathos" strongs:G18
meaning goods) things. So, if your taught in Gods word you are
obligated by Gods word to share what you have with the teacher.
furthermore 1 Cor 9:13,14 again sums the matter up.
rpbc said:
Made you feel special when you did
> it, still does, doesn't it. You have pride but not a moment of
> humility
surfkrow says:
speak for yourself accusser of the bretheren. And i'm beat'n you over
the head with docs dead bones in the name of Jesus! KAW KAW! PECK PECK
PECK FLAP FLAP FLAP KAW KAW PECK PECK PECK!
And lest you think I forgot what started this ass wuppin to the glory
off God. What now follows is a complete history of the posts that led
us here......
> > > The context and intent of this post is to qualify my assertion that
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross. The question is what did he
> > > offer that is likened unto what we offer?
> > Okay... as in Doc's presentation of the proof of the Resurrection, one
> > step at a time, for there must be understanding if not agreement for
> > continuity in a logical thought process. You didn't digress... you
> > obfuscated then dimissed. First, words being abstract representations
> > for an object world, establishment of definitions are paramount for
> > understanding. What is your definition of a televangelist?
> rpbc:
> And, since expressions of free thought are encouraged at afgs, orderly
> ones appreciated, this conversation is open to thoughts from all.
rpbs said:
Surf... your boasting precedes you
surfkrow says:
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross.
rpbc said:
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross
rpbc said:
one
> > step at a time, for there must be understanding if not agreement for
> > continuity in a logical thought process. You didn't digress... you
> > obfuscated then dimissed. First, words being abstract representations
> > for an object world, establishment of definitions are paramount for
> > understanding. What is your definition of a televangelist?
surfkrow says:
enough with the semantics.
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross
rpbc said:
And, since expressions of free thought are encouraged at afgs,
orderly
> ones appreciated, this conversation is open to thoughts from all
surfkrow says:
yes, the conversation is open to all but....
rpbc, address the main theme. Your side stepping the whole issue
now.
the focus of your retort was as follows:
Fact? Our giving response on a par with Jesus hanging on that
> > > > cross! Where did you hear that from......? A televangelist's words
> > > > cross connecting verse and scripture to equate giving to him by others
> > > > on a par with Jesus on the Cross. On a par! ... think of what you
> > > > are saying. Ohhhhh... a little humility before THAT cross friend....
> > > > even a person who sacrifices their life for another. There's those
> > > > crossed wires again
The context and intent of my rebutt was to qualify my assertion that;
> > > God veiws our own worshipful response to the son of God on the same
> > > level as what jesus offered on the cross
rpbc, this is no type of mission field, this is a type of battle
ground. No afgs is not a type of hell. but it is a type of hells
gate.
And my screen name is surfkrow and I have found a feast of dead
carnal
minds to feast upon. ( its what krows do)
rpbc
rpbc:
rpbc said:
> 'If it be possible let this cup pass from Me, never the less not My
> Will but Thine be done. Your's, Father.'
surfkrow says:
Pastor Hale taught me that the reason Jesus prayed that "this cup
pass
from me" is because he was in the garden of gethhsemene and he
did'nt
what to die there. He wanted to make it to the cross.
rpbc:
Hale told you that! ... I suppose that's why Jesus was sweating blood
over it too. If Hale knows better or not that's not the reason. His
death was to be done in a manner prescribed by Roman authority and
fulfillment of prophecy, timing and all. Nobody took Jesus' life, He
laid it down, what's with this he didn't want to die there, as though
He wasn't in control. He sweated blood over what was ahead you idiot,
and it was more than just the physical death we can imagine, it was
the spiritual death we can only talk about or make analogues to. Read
it for yourself, then correct Hale and if he side talks it, peck his
eyes out.
surfkrow says:
Twenty years to the very day that I fell in love with christ I surfed
in here not realizing that I would surrender my kings house identity
and resign a public, in this forum called afgs. Now the way I see it,
things happened for a reason. I am too grounded in Gods word, I
esteem Dr.Scott too highly and I respect ordained ministry too much
to
just be givin to the wims of the devil so as to make a mockery of all
that God has entrusted to me.
rpbc:
If you're going to get mystical about it consider that maybe God
directed you to afgs for a much needed head clearing. You're grounded
in God's word yet you let some character tell you the reason Jesus
petitioned God to let this cup pass from Him is because He wanted to
make it to the cross. It was the cross He was petitioning about,
that's straightforward. If ordination is telling you the reason Jesus
asked God, 'if possible let this cup pass from Me', is because he
didn't want to die in Gethsemane, you should examine your working
definition of ordination cause at best they're giving you bad
information. Gene Scott made the impassioned point about Jesus words
and the cross himself.
surfkrow says:
rpbc said
Gene Scott put identification of himself on the cross with Jesus into
your mind.
surfkrow says:
Not once in anything Dr.Scott ever taught me on the subject and/or
what i have shared with you in these posts did he or I EVER make
that assertion!
rpbc:
He certainly did. That's what all this giving in context of it being
on par with Jesus on the cross is all about. First he made the on par
statement, then the call to a giving response. And what's the object
for such an on par activity... I think you can figure that one out.
You even call Scott pappa.
surfkrow says:
I did'nt know why I chose the screen name surfkrow, just came to me.
rpbc:
You probably don't know, but you felt it. It's another implant of
being special at work. This is delicate, but the essense of
brainwashed is not to know about it. Brainwashing is about producing
prescribed emotional responses. Emotions are seldom examined, they
have built in rationalizations from whatever is producing them.
Giving is on par with Jesus on the cross, now get on the phones.... Oh
my god, I have to get on the phone and call in that pledge.
rpbc says:
your words yell contempt for any discursive process
rpbc:
That's correct.
surfkrow says:
I will let the readers of this thread decide.
rpbc: They already have.....
nopms
Weatherman
> rpbc:
> rpbc said:
>
> > 'If it be possible let this cup pass from Me, never the less not My
> > Will but Thine be done. Your's, Father.'
>
> surfkrow says:
> Pastor Hale taught me that the reason Jesus prayed that "this cup
> pass
> from me" is because he was in the garden of gethhsemene and he
> did'nt
> what to die there. He wanted to make it to the cross.
>
WM-It is hard to see where Hale gets an idea like this from the
passage. Maybe hes moron? You have been a bible student for 20 years
and are still like a baby bird?
Gypsie
> On Dec 25, 4:41 pm, rpbc <b_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
follows
Christ <snip>"
gypsie: exactly what is a burden FOR the lord?
Ouch!! someone needs to email eats posts to Pastor Hale, methinks he
would want to know what he is dealing with.
rpbc
rpbc:
My guess is Pastor Hale is fully aware of krow and treats him like any
other fish landed in the boat, uses him for whatever purpose the
market has. And that phone call from his pastor... ah.. that recorded
message he received...
An individual such as krow will quickly come to the attention of
everybody with his misplaced zeal same as he would have at planet
scott. Difference is he would have been banned at planet scott for
attracting attention to himself.
Gypsie
gypsie: true enuf, true enuf. Is Pastor Hale another pulpit pimp or do
you know?
I'm still wondering "exactly what is a burden FOR the lord?" I thought
the Lord took our burdens and sorrows. Didn't He also say our burden
is light (cuz he took it all, parphrased)?
studio
>
> - Show quoted text -
A burden for the Lord:
Barbie Bible Babble decoder ring says:
A sense of duty, misplaced.
Gypsie
>
> - Show quoted text -
gypsie: so what is meant is that the Lord has placed a special burden
on eats for whatever? Cuz I don't see how any person can carry a
burden for the Lord, it is too immense. I understand (mebbe so mebbe
not??)
studio
>
> - Show quoted text -
gypsie, need I spell it out for you?
Burdens are carried by a jackass.
If that's the way surfkrow wants to depict himself,
like doc said, "water seeks it's own level". That's why
he's here among us. This is where he belongs.
See? I used a docism in a positive manner!
Reward me gypsie!