Letters on Homestead Heritage: Community or cult?

So you would have us believe that the ONLY instructions given to the gentile church occurred in the short, initial document that came from the council at Jerusalem?

No, that was simply the initial effort in dealing with the gentiles.

All of the Epistles deal with further instructions aimed at the church.

In Corinthians 1 & 2 Paul gives instructions and commands with regard to church discipline, order in the church, how to deal with unruly members, gifts, offices, how women are to act/not act in the church service, who can speak and when, how tongues can and cannot be used etc.

In other books he deals with modesty issues for women, decorum in worship, relationships between family members, employers, slaves and masters, instructions for young pastors (Timothy), observation of holidays, meat sacrificed to idols, his instruction that young widows should marry, and that old widows should not drink too much wine or be gossips, who can become an elder, etc. etc.

Peter has his own set of epistles as well.

If the only instruction that the gentile church needed is contained in the short document issued at Jerusalem, then there would be no need for the epistles, and YHWH would not have put them in the Bible for us to read.

However, YHWH did write the epistles as well.

So then logic would dictate there should only be two commands in the Church, no pornea and abstain from eating meats sacrificed to idols, although in 1 Cor.
even this one seems to be only so it will not stumble the less astute...

But Yeshua said more than once:

21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

I tend to think these are optional, just as Jesus asked Peter if he loved him to feed his sheep.
These are salvific or not to the Lord, but not from the Body. This is spirit-rule and not formal.
That is to say, we are all beholden to even the hard commandments of Jesus. But the Church cannot and should not enforce these for they are a labor of love as each has the ability. Both to hear and to do.

The Church enforces against gross sin. It cannot enforce love for a man loves as he is able.

HUH?

I am really sorry. But I'm not sure how your first sentence "logically" flows from my last post.

It cannot flow logically when you are saying the exact opposite of what I wrote.

NO. The point of my post was that there are MANY commands and instructions given to the gentile church THROUGHOUT the Epistles.

NO. There NOT only 2 commands for the New Testament church.

The Jerusalem document was just the initial attempt to deal with the gentile church.

The entire body of work written down by the apostles contains ADDITIONAL instructions for the church that go beyond meat sacrificed to idols and fornication.

The Holy Ghost did not inspire Paul and others to write the Epistles because He had nothing better to do, or because He wanted to take up their time for no reason.

NO. The Holy Ghost wrote the Epistles through Paul and others because He had additional instructions to deliver to the church.

I'm signing off for the evening.

Little Red Hen wrote:

So you would have us believe that the ONLY instructions given to the gentile church occurred in the short, initial document that came from the council at Jerusalem?
No, that was simply the initial effort in dealing with the gentiles.
All of the Epistles deal with further instructions aimed at the church.
In Corinthians 1 & 2 Paul gives instructions and commands with regard to church discipline, order in the church, how to deal with unruly members, gifts, offices, how women are to act/not act in the church service, who can speak and when, how tongues can and cannot be used etc.
In other books he deals with modesty issues for women, decorum in worship, relationships between family members, employers, slaves and masters, instructions for young pastors (Timothy), observation of holidays, meat sacrificed to idols, his instruction that young widows should marry, and that old widows should not drink too much wine or be gossips, who can become an elder, etc. etc.
Peter has his own set of epistles as well.
If the only instruction that the gentile church needed is contained in the short document issued at Jerusalem, then there would be no need for the epistles, and YHWH would not have put them in the Bible for us to read.
However, YHWH did write the epistles as well.

I tend to think the epistles are pretty general compared to HH custom and practice...

Paul chastised them for getting drunk and not sharing their meals amongst others at the same table. This is pretty generally in response to a major problem in my view. Ditto women getting hysterical in congregation or people speaking anything that comes into their little 'ol minds...during times others waited for prophetic utterance.

I don't even think I have an inkling how restricted things were.
You could scream and splash in the river. Up to a point.

Maybe one scream and one splash. Just kidding.

Little Red Hen wrote:

Baaaah -
I haven't said anything at all about Biblical reasons for divorce. You are making up your own arguments, assigning them to other people, and then refuting those arguments - when nobody but you put those forward.
That's kind of like having a conversation with yourself - it's not productive, and borders on strange, to put it diplomatically.
What I have talked about over the last 2 days is wedding attire, wedding rings, and the topic of gossip.
You failed to address my question pertaining to your declaration that Pilgrim is not allowed (by you) to post here any more, unless he posts something more to your liking, or bares whatever part of his soul that you demand to see.
I do find yours and ILTTTT's posts very interesting, though.
Present behavior sheds much light on what past behavior must have looked like.

Sorry I missed this one until now.

Of course I cannot stop Pilgrum from posting and he will as he wonts to. I am not the moderator here, neither do I pretend to be.
Among their own I was the guy who never caught on, so how can I be anyone at all?

The reason why I bring up covenant and the breaking up of relationships to spouse and children is because they believe their
own Body covenant takes precedence over any marriage covenant.
And Body covenant is essentially covenant to their leadership. So that they will again -- give a choice to the remaining spouse to 'follow the Lord' or go the way of the departed one. To hell, in all essence.

The kosmos and the Body are like night and day to them which is not unusual considering the various Anabaptist groups out there who hold to the same ideals. Yet these other groups have a singular difference to HH which I am not sure you understand.

The difference is that the abiding shepherding dynamic entails an ongoing discipleship which is much more and greater than any of the itty bitty rules which there is also a plethora of. Whatever the group leader or elder says is to be prayed over, accepted and done. And he has the discretion to be as micromanaging as he is wont to.

Many found value in this shepherding at first, made covenant and eventually came to an impasse, I am guessing over a single admonition or piece of advice. We do not as a human race tend to agree in all things, after all.

But now he or she is out. Because he or she has become outside of the authoritative thread of communal spirit.

Drat. Again? Some can go their whole lives and never reach the impasse. Others are not so lucky.

Another bump in the road. However, with dire consequences.
See, again I speculate and gossip.

I just can't help it. Certain things have to hold true.

Little Red Hen wrote:

HUH?
I am really sorry. But I'm not sure how your first sentence "logically" flows from my last post.
It cannot flow logically when you are saying the exact opposite of what I wrote.
NO. The point of my post was that there are MANY commands and instructions given to the gentile church THROUGHOUT the Epistles.
NO. There NOT only 2 commands for the New Testament church.
The Jerusalem document was just the initial attempt to deal with the gentile church.
The entire body of work written down by the apostles contains ADDITIONAL instructions for the church that go beyond meat sacrificed to idols and fornication.
The Holy Ghost did not inspire Paul and others to write the Epistles because He had nothing better to do, or because He wanted to take up their time for no reason.
NO. The Holy Ghost wrote the Epistles through Paul and others because He had additional instructions to deliver to the church.
I'm signing off for the evening.

Read it in the morning, then or whenever. My post was not in response to yours.
Just my own thoughts. I did respond to yours after.

The context of the original and first apostolic conference was in regards to the various and multifarious rules on top of rules which made up the Pharisaical tradition. The very general rules of Paul in the epistles were not by any means as exhaustive or distinctive as these. But the main issue was circumcision.
By law every good Jew was circumcised and this was considered still binding by the newly converted Jewish Christians. For themselves and anyone else who wanted to become Jesus followers.

Besides the flesh circumcision now being moot, done for health reasons and tradition, no longer binding in light of the heart circumcision in Spirit, so too were the traditions of men who wanted to do right but had not the discernment of spirit to make rules only by the Law of Love. Which stems back to the Shema to love your God, and then (according to Jesus) your neighbor as yourself. Not eating plucked corn on the sabbath. Washing before every meal. The 613 as well as the ten. And the One.

So all the itty bitty rules which the Pharisees judged the disciples by and Jesus too who was the Lord of the Sabbath, were in essence moot according to the New Covenant. But the Law of Love was never moot, or abrogated by Christ who made many laws HARDER than before to do. Then he said if we love him to follow his commands. So why did not the apostles include the hard laws which Jesus said to do? Turn the other cheek. Walk the extra mile. Love your enemy.

Because these are again according to each man's ability. Just as martyrdom was according to the love a man had back then. Peter thought he was able, and then found out he was not.

And then found out he was able after all in the Spirit after the upper room.

So we can have general laws, I agree, not just two. But the greatest Law is only done according to what each person can do.
As we receive, we give. And those who thought they received may have even it taken away.

And the good Jew still adhered to the laws of the Pharisees which Jesus said to obey. Not because their little law had intrinsic value. In order rather not to stumble the unconverted Jew.

Thoughts?

[Shema states the priority. I say this time and time again. Because it is true. Every individual is covenanted to YHWH first. All other covenants fall under.

And the scripture cannot be broken.] Baaah

That is where HH went terribly wrong. They began breaking Holy Scriptures to place Blair’s rules in their place.

Shema has not happened in HH for a long time because they are not living according to Holy Scriptures anymore. Blair Adams laws has taken precedence over the lives in HH for decades now.

When the Word of God does not rule over the people in HH you have all matter of hell happening there.

Lives, marriages, families; ripped to shreads.

The answer is so simple: Return to the LORD YOUR GOD! Return to the Holy Bible.

Fellowship in the Shema

The basic covenant to YHWH is to love Him with all of our heart soul and might.

The avenue toward engagement of this great and unattainable law whom only one man ever succeeded in perfect accomplishment is only through the repentance and commitment to the Son and everything the Sent One represents. Propitiation, Lordship,
immersion of his word and life...

Now that we are in covenant I see the shining faces, annointed words and committed actions of the believers around me...

We are one as Jesus and his Father are one, in spirit and in truth...each by a look or glance
reflecting this Shema faith...

It is light and it is glory and it is communally shared by all who know this spirit sent of the Father in the name of Yeshua.

It is the Shekinah glory which originally hovered over the tent of meeting then in the Holy of Holies in the Temple over the Ark...

Then tabernacled in the flesh of our Lord and Savior. Now a lamp shining in the wilderness of the kosmos we live in...

Not hampered by doctrine, not corralled by fences,
not hidden by ignorance and not doused by the prideful...

The glory and the light of those in the unity of spirit -- the saints, the faithful ones of Jesus.

This is the Holy Spirit indwelling. This is the singular covenant to YHWH through His Son the Christ. This is the Shema agape love given and then given back.

21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.

22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:

This Oneness is oneness in Body covenant?

Or the Jesus covenant of YHWH? The New Covenant?

I submit the latter. The Bible is clear and true.

This Oneness is in Greek 'hen' the neuter one of unity. This unity has to be of spirit, purpose and vision.

Let us not be misdirected. All believers are unified by this Holy Spirit of YHWH. Come in the name of Yeshua.

The Hagios Pneumatos IS the combined substance of us to them, Father and Son. And it all stems from one covenant and one covenant only.

They may be the foot and us the hand. But as Jesus told the Samaritan woman, we worship now in spirit and in truth:

19 The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.

20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.

21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.

23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.

Ephesians 2
4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions —it is by grace you have been saved. 6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, 7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith —and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast. 10 For we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

[24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.

26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he.]Baaah.

There is no where in Holy Scripture that states that the apostles, or ANYONE for that matter would turn into ‘Jesus coming to you in the flesh.’

NO ONE TAKES HIS PLACE, EVER!
It is blasphemy to even make such a statement.

When men proclaim that they are now in the place of Jesus Himself the group has turned into a cult.

We can see the difference between 'bodies' in the Samaritan paradigm and the Jewish one...

One was more accurate than the other. One was accurate enough that the fundamental principles of faith were still intact. Even enough that Jesus could say, "Salvation is of the Jews."

And thus it is among the faithful in this world who strive after Christ the Lord.

Some are more accurate than others.

In this time of dissension and opinions which
divide us and place us in our little boxes or cells of light...some boxes shedding little or no light at all -- where is the rule of faith, but that of the Epistles as LRH refers to?

All things must conform to the first generation of apostles' own revelation. Their own purpose and vision according to the greater dispensation of spirit given them...

All fundamental principles of faith are contained therein.

Any 'latter day revelation' must also not be contradicted by the authority of the first faithful ones, martyrs of the faith.

This includes:

1) Trinity
2) Idea that the Law is done away with
3) Idea that the initial confession
is salvation in your pocket (OSAS)
4) Idea that the Holy Spirit is a distant
helper of your mind; an automatic tool given
5) Idea that the later Creeds and traditions
of men who had not the Spirit are authoritative
6) Idea that the religion you grew up into is
the more accurate one (you lucky one, you)...
7) Idea that principles outside of the Bible are
salvific and binding
8) Idea that Christianity is not a covenant between
you and God each to his own ability

Now we have the foundation of the faithful. It is time for change and a time for revolution. The internet is a facilitator of this change. All men can communicate with a press of a key or two. And share their ideas in a flash and not the normal delays of technology.

The renewal of the Church of Christ is at hand.

10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love.

11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full.

12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.

13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Jesus, who healed on the sabbath, who was lost in the Temple from his parents NEVER broke his Father's commandments...

So now we must discern the commandments of the Father from that of men's traditions...

Winebibber and glutton, they said, but the Bible says Jesus never sinned. He who did not fast in public and whom drank the devil's drink...

See, it isn't so hard to determine which is what.
Be not drunken with wine. Was Jesus ever DRUNKEN?

Not really. He might of caught a 'buzz.'

Just saying. Don't be a stick in the mud. Jesus wasn't.

The scripture cannot be broken. So we know better?
Since when?

And what was the biggest dynamic mentioned in the verses above? Reiterate: the Law of Love. Greater love hath no man than this.

I.e. Shema. The first principle and commandment of the Jews.

Ah. So now we see the heart of your theology on full display.

"He [Jesus} might of caught a buzz. Just saying. Don't be a stick in the mud. Jesus wasn't."

So, if we disagree with "catching a buzz" then we are a "stick in the mud"?

Suddenly the reason for the rambling nature of many of your posts is made plain.

No sir. Jesus did not "catch a buzz", since that is the first stage of drunkenness, and drunkenness is a sin.

We will each be judged for every idle word we speak.

I'd say that accusing Jesus of "catching a buzz" falls into the idle word category at the very least.

In reality in falls into a much more serious category, along the lines of taking the Lord's name in vain, among others.

Yes, suddenly, with this one post, many things are extremely clear.

Hee hee, Little Red Bird.

You have been trying to bait me the last four posts or so. It's like the line in the sand, woman. What is this line, and did I really cross it? We know of what we speak, right being from this here Tejas?

The line in the sand is really the gospels and epistles as you have stated yourself. So take this precept to the bank. It is ABSOLUTELY true.

And as such you stand incorrect in your last post.
Jesus' first miracle was making so many gallons of that Chardonne Red which we now call wine.
And don't believe that Wilkerson jive about this being grape juice.

"You saved the best for last." Grape juice? Jesus saved the best tasting grape juice for last?

Seems like me an' Waco were jousting over this not too long ago.

But if you do not understand THIS concept then think on another one. The true Eucharist has real wine just as it did the first time. This is Bible.
This is gospel. This is truth.

Don't give me traditions of men. I am not impressed.

I am still a babe in the Lord. But I wasn't born yesterday.

I went through the gauntlet of being the second longest vistor on Friday night status in the history of HH. To ever last that long. Give or take.

What an accomplishment. You should be impressed.

The problem with making rules and regs outside of gospel is that it puts you in your own slimy little box of your own making.

You have separated yourself from the masses, even from your own brethren whom do not have the same conviction as you. We always think we know better
and that our own pet theories have new meaning over and above the old ones. Absolute abstinence was the
way of John the Baptist. It was NOT the way of our Lord Jesus.

So now I will mention again the conundrum which befell the original disciples of John WHO BECAME
disciples of Jesus. Assuming John also required of them what he required of himself.

When the first Eucharist was presented did they partake or not?

Hee, hee Little Red Chicken. You are thwarted once more. A single cup of wine will give a man a 'buzz.' To say Jesus didn't ever get one is a little idealistic.

So back to the original point I was making. Making rules and regs according to one's own opinions will only separate his group from OTHER BELIEVERS
who do not need or appreciate his rules

WHICH JESUS HIMSELF NEVER REQUIRED OF US.

And he was the maker of the hard sayings and commandments, yes? You want MORE burdens than the ones our own Lord gave? Hoo haw.

That's a good one, separator. What happens when we SPECIALIZE ourselves from our own brethren?

Tears from heaven. Do I need to reiterate the Lord's command?

20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

So now what does a rule like absolute abstinence
cause? Division and dissension.

Now YOUR true colors are showing you stuh stuh
stick in the mud.

The old UPC was a holiness body.

Some customs now seem only for the inner circle, the ones who are more fervent and given to commitment.

The outer circle still attends services and can worship and praise to their hearts desire. In other words, fellowship is not denied them.

This to me is the way of the ancients. Making rules on top of rules was the Pharisaical bent and mind-set. It was immediately seen as destructive in conversion of the Gentile into the New Covenant.
This was reason behind the result: only two commandments which were then modified as they went.
As you say in the epistles new rules were given in response to sin.

There is 'sin' and then there is 'flesh.' And the terms are not exactly the same although there is overlap. Jesus asked that his cup would be taken away, and I'm sure it was not a casual prayer.
This to me proves Jesus was a man of flesh although
he never sinned.

Thus it is too for the young believer. Too many burdens are sinful to place on his or her back.
We entice them into the love covenant, and this the same way as our Lord in spirit.

In the name of love and not fear.

THIS is the HH paradigm:

It is the horse who has his saddle cinched tight.
His bridle in place with the bit in his mouth...

Stirrups ready to spur. Blinders even so he will go the straight path...

What was not mentioned is that the rider is fat and well, burdensome. He in other words weighs alot.

Now the horse is ready to bear fruit. Now the child is being prepared for fruit in the body...

Sorry my horse runs free. I give him his head and he already loves to run. Over hill and dale.

We are free together. I am not a burden to him, because this horse and I love each other.

Am I bashing yet? Pilgrum tell me if I am.

Ephesians 5:
18 Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit, 19 speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit.

The sin referred to was getting drunk.

I lived to tell the truth wrote:

Ephesians 5:
18 Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit, 19 speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit.
The sin referred to was getting drunk.

Yes and notice the exhortation which is consistent and true.

Be ye filled with the Spirit.

The Hagios Pneumatos is everything and all. We see not Jesus at least yet. His Father's spirit was sent in his name for us to be unified into.

All and everyone upon this planet. Be ye filled with the spirit of YHWH come in the name of the Christ!

Black, oriental, Hispanic, poor, rich, factory worker, farmer,
circuit board maker, salesman, tax collector, or Roman legionaire.

Did I miss any? Oh, white people too.