|
Post by verna on Jul 30, 2022 12:30:36 GMT -5
Come on Wally we know you are not like that. You can be nice, value the 2x2 history. It has been recorded in a very accurate way, most interesting. A lot that I never knew about, not derogatory, just accurate. I'm sure it is. Does it build up the 2x2's? Promote 2x2's? Encourage people to join the 2x2's? I suspect not(no proof). That sounds like propaganda Wally.
|
|
|
Post by openingact34 on Jul 30, 2022 14:46:31 GMT -5
I don't understand the parable of the hamburger at all. Can one of the professing people explain it to this wicked worldling?
|
|
|
Post by verna on Jul 30, 2022 15:21:28 GMT -5
I don't understand the parable of the hamburger at all. Can one of the professing people explain it to this wicked worldling? I don’t really get it either but I think he might have been referring to Cherie as a trash can. Of course, I am ex so what would I know.
|
|
|
Post by openingact34 on Jul 30, 2022 15:56:20 GMT -5
I don't understand the parable of the hamburger at all. Can one of the professing people explain it to this wicked worldling? I don’t really get it either but I think he might have been referring to Cherie as a trash can. Of course, I am ex so what would I know. Hmmm, I was thinking it was maybe a twist on the treasure hid in a field. Cherie was the spoiled brat who took one bite and threw away the hamburger. The burger was God's true ministry, and homeless man was the professing people who were happy to find it instead. But maybe the homeless man was Lee. The burger was Cherie's book. And the whole point was that Lee was feeding on trash but acting like it was valuable. I'm usually good at interpreting 2x2 nonsense, but can't crack this one.
|
|
|
Post by verna on Jul 30, 2022 16:59:00 GMT -5
I don’t really get it either but I think he might have been referring to Cherie as a trash can. Of course, I am ex so what would I know. Hmmm, I was thinking it was maybe a twist on the treasure hid in a field. Cherie was the spoiled brat who took one bite and threw away the hamburger. The burger was God's true ministry, and homeless man was the professing people who were happy to find it instead. But maybe the homeless man was Lee. The burger was Cherie's book. And the whole point was that Lee was feeding on trash but acting like it was valuable. I'm usually good at interpreting 2x2 nonsense, but can't crack this one. No end of possibilities I guess which makes it a perfect religious analogy!
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 30, 2022 17:57:38 GMT -5
I don’t really get it either but I think he might have been referring to Cherie as a trash can. Of course, I am ex so what would I know. Hmmm, I was thinking it was maybe a twist on the treasure hid in a field. Cherie was the spoiled brat who took one bite and threw away the hamburger. The burger was God's true ministry, and homeless man was the professing people who were happy to find it instead. But maybe the homeless man was Lee. The burger was Cherie's book. And the whole point was that Lee was feeding on trash but acting like it was valuable. I'm usually good at interpreting 2x2 nonsense, but can't crack this one. Read Alice In Wonderland, Practice opening cupboard doors and looking behind mirrors. Peering down warrens may also help.
|
|
help
Senior Member
Life Member "Australian Order of Old Bastards" AOOB.
Posts: 841
|
Post by help on Jul 30, 2022 18:11:34 GMT -5
Come on Wally we know you are not like that. You can be nice, value the 2x2 history. It has been recorded in a very accurate way, most interesting. A lot that I never knew about, not derogatory, just accurate. I'm sure it is. Does it build up the 2x2's? Promote 2x2's? Encourage people to join the 2x2's? I suspect not(no proof). Glad that you understand that it is a credible book. It was not meant to promote or encourage people to become 2x2's. The 2x2 Church has that responsibility. It is meant to be an accurate history revealing the true beginnings of the 2x2 Church. That should dispel the many stories that have been told in the past. “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.” John F. Kennedy
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 30, 2022 18:35:28 GMT -5
It's interesting how the Sunday morning meetings were not introduced until a few years after the workers were being sent hither and thither by Irvine. The first few years it was much the same as the Faith Mission.
|
|
help
Senior Member
Life Member "Australian Order of Old Bastards" AOOB.
Posts: 841
|
Post by help on Jul 30, 2022 18:58:19 GMT -5
Yes I found that interesting. The "Faith Mission" was used for 3 years as a starting point and then given the flick. Actually the "Faith Mission" was a good organisation, non exclusive, accepted all comers the way that Christianity should work.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 30, 2022 19:17:07 GMT -5
Irvine's way was his gods ever changing way.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 30, 2022 21:57:58 GMT -5
Irvine's way was his gods ever changing way. That's what happens when you've convinced people you're "the one".
|
|
|
Post by guest8 on Jul 30, 2022 22:50:08 GMT -5
I dont want to believe, I want to know.
- Carl Sagon
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Jul 31, 2022 10:38:21 GMT -5
One explanation of why the workers and friends don’t recognize a conflict in their founder/no founder claim is they subconsciously imagine they’re not women or men in the first place.
A shocking observation, or counter-claim? Sure.
Let’s examine their theology. Do they believe in the resurrected man? No, they believe in a resurrected, out of body experience.
To be continued….
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jul 31, 2022 14:31:29 GMT -5
One explanation of why the workers and friends don’t recognize a conflict in their founder/no founder claim is they subconsciously imagine they’re not women or men in the first place. A shocking observation, or counter-claim? Sure. Let’s examine their theology. Do they believe in the resurrected man? No, they believe in a resurrected, out of body experience. To be continued…. The belief in eternal life is a sympton of death denial. Death denial is a common malady that inflicts humans who consider themselves exempt from the natural and unavoidable end that all species meet with.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Aug 1, 2022 12:06:13 GMT -5
Define what it means to be alive.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Aug 1, 2022 14:13:01 GMT -5
Define what it means to be alive. adjective 1. (of a person, animal, or plant) living, not dead.
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Aug 1, 2022 17:51:51 GMT -5
Define what it means to be alive. adjective having life; living; existing; not dead or lifeless. living (used for emphasis): the proudest man alive. in a state of action; in force or operation; active: to keep hope alive. full of energy and spirit; lively: Grandmother's more alive than most of her contemporaries. having the quality of life; vivid; vibrant: The room was alive with color.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Aug 2, 2022 9:23:24 GMT -5
Your definitions a little better. Curlys was tepid. Considering the opprobrium he levels at religious people, his incoherence stands out.
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Aug 2, 2022 9:27:57 GMT -5
One explanation of why the workers and friends don’t recognize a conflict in their founder/no founder claim is they subconsciously imagine they’re not women or men in the first place. A shocking observation, or counter-claim? Sure. Let’s examine their theology. Do they believe in the resurrected man? No, they believe in a resurrected, out of body experience. To be continued…. Does anyone share my curiosity with Christianity’s early push back against the Gnostic conception of Jesus, and it’s implications for who and what mankind was, and who he was intended to be? How are we to make sense of this scripture? For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. Hebrews 2:16
|
|
|
Post by verna on Aug 2, 2022 11:08:17 GMT -5
One explanation of why the workers and friends don’t recognize a conflict in their founder/no founder claim is they subconsciously imagine they’re not women or men in the first place. A shocking observation, or counter-claim? Sure. Let’s examine their theology. Do they believe in the resurrected man? No, they believe in a resurrected, out of body experience. To be continued…. Does anyone share my curiosity with Christianity’s early push back against the Gnostic conception of Jesus, and it’s implications for who and what mankind was, and who he was intended to be? How are we to make sense of this scripture? For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. Hebrews 2:16 I am curious Lee. What do you think it means?
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Aug 2, 2022 13:55:25 GMT -5
Your definitions a little better. Curlys was tepid. Considering the opprobrium he levels at religious people, his incoherence stands out. You consider Merriam- Webster tepid? How's the hallucinations coming along. Had any voices in your head lately after praying to your imaginary friend?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Aug 2, 2022 14:34:41 GMT -5
One explanation of why the workers and friends don’t recognize a conflict in their founder/no founder claim is they subconsciously imagine they’re not women or men in the first place. A shocking observation, or counter-claim? Sure. Let’s examine their theology. Do they believe in the resurrected man? No, they believe in a resurrected, out of body experience. To be continued…. Does anyone share my curiosity with Christianity’s early push back against the Gnostic conception of Jesus, and it’s implications for who and what mankind was, and who he was intended to be? How are we to make sense of this scripture? For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. Hebrews 2:16 Wally will have a quick answer, I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Aug 2, 2022 15:52:49 GMT -5
One explanation of why the workers and friends don’t recognize a conflict in their founder/no founder claim is they subconsciously imagine they’re not women or men in the first place. A shocking observation, or counter-claim? Sure. Let’s examine their theology. Do they believe in the resurrected man? No, they believe in a resurrected, out of body experience. To be continued…. Does anyone share my curiosity with Christianity’s early push back against the Gnostic conception of Jesus, and it’s implications for who and what mankind was, and who he was intended to be? How are we to make sense of this scripture? For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. Hebrews 2:16 There was a time when I also thought that the Gnostics were of the same time as the Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera family, but later in life my betters educated me to the fact they didn't come along until long after Jesus was dead.
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Aug 2, 2022 16:27:35 GMT -5
I find the early excommunications very intriguing. Following the excommunications were the purges of any who dared a nod to the excommunicated. Then there is the redacting of the history. Today they claim they have no rules but the early workers wrote rules to enforce their beliefs. Disobey them at your own peril.
|
|
|
Post by verna on Aug 2, 2022 16:47:12 GMT -5
I find the early excommunications very intriguing. Following the excommunications were the purges of any who dared a nod to the excommunicated. Then there is the redacting of the history. Today they claim they have no rules but the early workers wrote rules to enforce their beliefs. Disobey them at your own peril. Of course there are no rules Curly. What are you thinking?!!! 😂 😆
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Aug 2, 2022 19:58:13 GMT -5
I find the early excommunications very intriguing. Following the excommunications were the purges of any who dared a nod to the excommunicated. Then there is the redacting of the history. Today they claim they have no rules but the early workers wrote rules to enforce their beliefs. Disobey them at your own peril. Of course there are no rules Curly. What are you thinking?!!! 😂 😆 How about "mandatory recommendations"?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Aug 3, 2022 14:50:59 GMT -5
Does anyone share my curiosity with Christianity’s early push back against the Gnostic conception of Jesus, and it’s implications for who and what mankind was, and who he was intended to be? How are we to make sense of this scripture? For it is clear that he did not come to help angels, but the descendants of Abraham. Hebrews 2:16 There was a time when I also thought that the Gnostics were of the same time as the Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera family, but later in life my betters educated me to the fact they didn't come along until long after Jesus was dead. How much later?
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Aug 3, 2022 14:53:49 GMT -5
Your definitions a little better. Curlys was tepid. Considering the opprobrium he levels at religious people, his incoherence stands out. You consider Merriam- Webster tepid? How's the hallucinations coming along. Had any voices in your head lately after praying to your imaginary friend? No, but I don’t consider anything I think to be purely my own. The life/non life distinction, as well as the self consciousness peculiar to human beings, is best explained by the presence of the Holy Spirit.
|
|