Gg false doctrine

[lmao]

Does anyone know of any false doctrine at gg that does NOT seem to have as the underlying purpose: to protect leaders, especially chs, from accountability?

[cordell]

The "angelic infiltration" doctrine based on a faulty understanding of Gen.6.

Their understanding of most eschatalogical events (common to most dispensationalists).

Their understanding of the gospel that places the determining act of salvation upon man and not God.

Their understanding of hermeneutics--which is mainly pietistic and 'spiritual'rather than Christ-centered, historical and grammatical.

That's a start--but then if I kept on I'd pi$$ off a lot of FN'rs who still hold to the $hit they learned from Carl in GG or the Speaks.

[lmao]

"Angelic infiltration" is one I forgot about. The next two seem to be a matter of opinion based on the theology we might subscribe. The hermeneutics I learned at ssb was Christ-centered, historical and grammatical which did seem to be at odds with the hermeneutics that chs followed in his preaching and teaching. His way of getting "deep" truth right from God kept him above accountability.

[shat_happens]

"The next two seem to be a matter of opinion based on the theology we might subscribe."

Yeah, it’s like are we Elected, or did we chose Salvation?

It’s a tough call, but if you look at other things, the Angels for example would be though of as a picture of someone who is elected, they don’t have much say in the matter, but humans on the other hand can chose willing to praise God. That is the key difference between us and them. They do it without thought or question, but we have an option, and the angels marvel with us and join in on our praising.

I don’t remember how that was taught, but I think I’m pretty close!

[sofree]

cordell- what is your take on Genesis 6 vs. GGWO's?

[cordell]

My take is that you should not get your theology from a guy who used to be either a bakery salesman or a guy who was an engineer who believed that it was impossible to understand the Bible without charts that look like comic books (LaHaye and the other Left Behind Bozo have just dedicated their latest book to him--Clarence Larkin).

There are two reasonably intelligent alternatives to the 'infiltration' view which is that the passage speaks either of the two of Seth and Cain which is the context or it speaks of governmental leaders overstepping their bounds and 'taking' what was not offered to them--see the passage referring to Lamech in Gen.4:18-24.

[herkeybird]

There are two reasonably intelligent alternatives to the 'infiltration' view which is that the passage speaks either of the two of Seth and Cain which is the context or it speaks of governmental leaders overstepping their bounds and 'taking' what was not offered to them--see the passage referring to Lamech in Gen.4:18-24.

Huh? Jim, with all due respect, you lost me. Can you restate? Or can anyone diagram that sentence?

[cordell]

OKAY...my bad english day:
<font color="0000ff">There are two reasonably intelligent alternatives to the 'infiltration' view--which are:

*that the passage speaks either of the lines of Seth and Cain--which is the context

OR

*it speaks of governmental leaders overstepping their bounds and 'taking' what was not offered to them--see the passage referring to Lamech in Gen.4:18-24.</font>

How's that herk? Comprende?

[sofree]

The only explanation I have ever heard (pre/post GG) is that the sons of God were fallen angels backed up with Jude saying these angels left their estate. If the Nephilim were only big humans they should have died out in the flood right? But they returned after the flood. Who knows...very interesting to say the least.

[cordell]

sofree...you need to get out more, too. There are THREE views of this passage. The infiltration view was popularized by Clarence Larkins in his abominable charts amongst dispensationalists--A.W.Pink was a Baptist guy who wrote a commentary on Genesis who spread the view amongst other evangelicals. It was also held by some superstitious Jews, who originated it and then it was espoused by Origen.

Dogs and zebras do not bear offspring any more than do angels and humans.

X-Files had an episode about the Nephilim Geborim that took the popular view. You can take that to the bank along with the prevailing understanding of the chupacabra (http://reguite.free.fr/photo/el_chupacabra.html).

[lmao]

My recollection is that gg teaches Gen 6:1-4 that fallen angels in human form had children with human women. That activity corrupted the blood line of the human race potentially making it impossible for the savior to be fully God and fully man and that this was why the flood had to occur. The interpretation seems to magnify Jesus and not a man unless chs claimed he got it from God and I don't think he did this time. As far as determining quality of scholarship behind the interpretation, I will leave that to others.

[cordell]

LMAO--note the verse:
Gen. 6:4--the Nephilim were on the earth in those days and also afterward...

Then see verse 5:
The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of his heart was only evil continually.

1. Men were the ones being punished for wickedness here. Not angels.

2. Earth was flooded, not heaven.

3. The fall of Satan and his cohorts had already taken place and was complete, and there is no evidence in scripture that angels still fall.

4. When angels take on the form of looking like men, there is no evidence that they become actually incarnate capable of impregnating human women. I would think it would be pretty tough to do the deed with the appearance of a johnson.

5. If it was God's plan to rid the earth of these 'nephilim' the scriptures record in verse 4 that his plan was UNSUCCESSFUL, in that these nephilim were around after (and we must presume that angels are still falling--that they love to incarnate themselves in MALE human form in order to do the horizontal conga with human women). AND we must assume that these Nephilim need killin'...(see the X-files episode).

6. I think we need to look at some of these Slavs, Russians and Chinese who come over here to join the NBA. I am sure that the World Champion (1999,2003,2005) San Antonio Spurs were nearly taken over by the Nephilim. Who was that Rasto guy anyway? And who the hell ever saw a Chinaman as big as Houston's freakin' Yao Ming? All those guys are practically midgets.

[sofree]

cordell - no thank you. I WAS out. I have come to find that anytime someone takes a superior stand theologically there is always trouble right behind - especially if it is coming from someone who takes a leadership position over other people. Genesis 6 fascinates me. I lean toward the angel theory - and ya know what? I have the freedom to do that - but I will never take the position that I have superior knowledge nor will I negate anyone else's input or consider it beneath me...or above me.

I do take the stand that anything is possible. Mary was not impregnated by man. In our eyes any other way is inconceivable (no pun intended).

[shat_happens]

http://reluctant-messenger.com/book_of_enoch.htm


lmao very cool stuff, many suggest that christ him self was reading this. it wasn't added to our bible, so take it for what it is.

the book of enoch is very cool nonetheless!

[cordell]

sofree dearest, I am not taking a leadership position--Carl did. Some theological positions ARE actually superior--having nothing at all to do with who holds to them. I like trouble and FN is currently so bloody boring that any sort of 'trouble' would be a refreshing breeze in comparison with the mindnumbing tripe that gets posted here. Listen, I hope you're free enough to do Robin William's little dance from the 'Fisher King'--just let the little fella get some frickin' air! Don't worry, sofree, superior knowledge is reserved for Vogons who build intergalactic bypasses--but I bet your poetry is as endearing as theirs!

And, sofree, there is a BIG difference between being impregnated by the HOLY SPIRIT who is the Lord and giver of life and created spirits who cannot CREATE anything!

You are actually making a case by the way, that your position of not having superior knowledge is superior to having superior knowledge and that your 'humility' is better and superior than taking a position that may ACTUALLY be superior to another which is in fact not really humble at all but is in fact quite arrogant because you are saying that all theological positions are equally valid and deserving of respect when in fact that is ridiculous as saying that the moon being made of green cheese is a valid scientific view!

If you cannot excercise any kind of discretion, discrimination or jugdment of the good kind in evaluating one position over another then whacking someone in the head with a 2X4 in order to reach personal Nirvana is just as valid as preaching the gospel to them or peeing on their trouser leg in order to show empathy--all views are equally valid and deserving of respect right????

Now if you protest on the grounds of common sense you will have made my point for me.

Thankyouthankyouverymuch.

[sofree]

cordell - maybe you are the one who needs to get out dahlink. My dear friend, I do believe you have inhaled some whacky weed one too many times in your life http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/uhoh.gif

[cordell]

Actually sofree, I was there and remember the 60s--it was the 70s and 80s I missed because I was in the Speaksgrips. I am not running for office...so much for the inhaling thing.

As openly confessed here on FN, I will congeneally imbibe with anyone willing a large tumbler or old-fashioned glass full of cream sherry on the rocks. I prefer Lustau (even moreso than Harvey's Bristol Cream at this stage), but anything other than the California or New York kcrap will do (Lustau is proof positive that Spain is still a civilized nation--and as soon as Mexico follows suit they will probably emerge from the third world). FNer's putting together letters to Santa please take note.

[sofree]

I prefer Hennessey Cognac http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/blush.gif

[cordell]

I once preferred Diet Pepsi, when I was an uninitiate...post tenebris lux

[sofree]

add a little cognac to that diet pepsi and you will be tenebris lux

[lmao]

During the taped portion of today's grace hour, chs spoke against judging saying that if someone judges, maligns or accuses someone else, that any divine discipline coming to the someone else (even if the accusations are true) is removed from him or her and placed on the accuser. As we would expect, gg elder and grace hour host, john love, gave his approval to the message.

Here is another doctrine invented out of thin air for the purpose of keeping people from scrutinizing gg leaders. If God loves me, why would He remove from me any discipline or chastisement which is designed to correct and restore me just because some third party judged me or talked about me? What a fool I was for ever believing such BS.

[cordell]

I'm rubber and you're glue whatever you say bounces off me and sticks to you.

neener neener neener, I can do whatever I want.

[sidethorn]

Sounds like GG double standards. The GG leadership puts all these crazy rules on those around them to put them in bondage and then this leadership does whatever it wants. Then they have the nerve to say that God would strike those who disagree with them instead of them themselves. Sounds like the current GGWO under Schaller is the same old crap house with the same old unaccountable, uncaring, hypocritical leadership. The Carl Stevens legacy goes on.

[kupski]

Attn G.G.W.O. and all "Dissafiliates"

Fascism:

a.)A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
b.)A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.

2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

http://www.answers.com/topic/fascism

[littlesister]

Aren't we all glad salvation is such a simple message. Even a child can do it. I now know why God inhabits the heart first and not the mind.

[escaped]

Imao,

Good thought, how true...

I love how communion is taken, first the bread/body and then the cup/blood of the New Covenant...

when we take these components apart and see what they are for... we discover that God in a sense comes into us first then the blood, it's almost, saying, God will come in because it is grace and then the work of the Blood is then doing it's job after...

how often we would think that the Juice/Blood should of been used first, then He comes in after the Bloods work...

just a silly thought, nothing to split doctrinal hairs over...beleive me.