- Topic
Hello,
I have been told by a MSCOG member , yesterday 6/19/2013 they needed to have an emergencyservice because Mother says that this is the year the New Jerusalem will be completed. Meaning the world will end this year. Does anyone know how this is possible? The bible states in Matthew 24:36 "But of that day and hour knows no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." Here is the complete passage: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of theearth mourn , and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power andgreat glory. 31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other . 32 Now learna parable of the fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know thatsummer is nigh: 33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even atthe doors. 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass , till all these things be fulfilled .35 Heaven and earth shall pass away , but my words shall not pass away . 36 But of that day andhour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. 37 But as the days ofNoe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be . 38 For as in the days that were beforethe flood they were eating and drinking , marrying and giving in marriage , until the day that Noeentered into the ark, 39 And knew not until the flood came , and took them all away ; so shall alsothe coming of the Son of man be . 40 Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken , andthe other left .
renita.payno wrote:
Disturbed wrote:
@Simon…I was told that Joshua was 25 when Moses appointed him and GP was supposed to follow suit and be 25 when Ash turned the reigns over to him.
I've been doing some research and here's what I found.
Num 14:29-30 God said anyone who was at least 20 at the time of the exodus and grumbled against God would not enter the promised land. They will die in the wilderness. He made an exception for Joshua and Caleb. This means that during the exodus, Joshua was at least 20 years old otherwise God would not have needed to make the exception, right? Real question.. Am I right?
Assuming I'm right Josh 5:6 says 40 years had passed before all of those people who were not allowed to see the land died. Joshua survived them just as God said. This would make Joshua at least 60 years old.
Assuming I'm wrong and that Joshua was of a younger age during the exodus, the youngest he could be when they reach the promised land is 40 because he was not born in the wilderness.
According to Josh 1:1-9 Joshua didn't take Moses' place until he died which wasn't until they made it to the promised land.
Meaning, Joshua was at least 40 when he succeeded Moses, not 25. God appointed Joshua to take Moses' place, to succeed him. Joshua may have been 25 when Moses appointed him to lead an army in Ex 17:9. But if the WMSCOG is using that event [army] to say GP is to Ash as Joshua is Moses, then are sadly mistaken because GP took the lead after Ash died, not during his life.
Thanks for checking this out Renita. I briefly tried to find a direct verse when I was given the information. I was unable to find a direct verse that stated Joshua was 25. I just figured it must be in the bible somewhere…why else would the church make the claim. They knew we wouldnt take the time to research it.
Yea, it took some reading and re-reading. I found there are a bunch of other people who have attempted to figure out how old Joshua was when he took over. None of them gave any number close to 25. I saw 60's and 80's.
the last time there was a big national "to-do" with unions, I saw way too much evidence of control. I'm not calling unions a cult, but I'm not backing down on the controls I saw. That being said, I don't see teacher's unions giving any enthusiasm to new curriculum.
@Simon,
I don't understand the ambiguity with your last 2 postings.
I was very concrete actually
oh and I'd not call a union a cult cuz I'd rather be back in WMSCOG than a union…
Just so you know, teachers create new curriculum all the time. And their unions are what help to keep them from losing their jobs when they bring that creativity into their classrooms.
When I was a member of wmscog they had me convinced every time someone talked about anything but doctrine it was a diversion because they KNEW we were right and were making stuff up just to attack rather than discuss "the truth"
MountainMom wrote:
Just so you know, teachers create new curriculum all the time. And their unions are what help to keep them from losing their jobs when they bring that creativity into their classrooms.
unfortunately teachers unions are also what prevent tenured teachers from being fired when they assault students (and not only in theory it has happened where I am from in Northern California)
MountainMom wrote:
Just so you know, teachers create new curriculum all the time. And their unions are what help to keep them from losing their jobs when they bring that creativity into their classrooms.
Good luck to the teacher that gets creative and teaches how control structures work
when a rank & file member gets interviewed by "Fox" news (lets just go with it as an example, because it happened) then the group leader comes over and
1) says to the underling, what are you doing? hold on a moment.
2) interrogates the reporter not as to what the subject matter is, but who they are and who they are with.
3) sends the reporter off, sometimes pushes / almost breaks the camera / sometimes confiscates the camera
4) tells rank & file that "those guys are bad". don't talk to them.
methinks that teacher aint gettin no help from the union.
Unions like to play the card about "kids" and "education" but many private organizations educate much better and with less administration and costs. They talk about the middle class and the top of those pyramids – their salaries are 6 digits and often start with a 4. Now, what do you suppose they need every so often to justify a salary like that?
and I know I'm in danger of hijacking this thread, but back to Simon
Simon wrote:
When I was a member of wmscog they had me convinced every time someone talked about anything but doctrine it was a diversion because they KNEW we were right and were making stuff up just to attack rather than discuss "the truth"
good point but thats about control. imo, gotta come up with an example not associated with the church to show how controlling that is. If that's what they want, then don't you think its playing into their hand to discuss doctrine?
No its proving them correct to not talk doctrine
So even outside the group, they still have you in a state of bounded choice?
Am I understanding you correctly?
How is this not playing a hand into their strong suit?
@Simon: Teachers are people with rights too. Now lets get back to the thread. @Q: what the heck were you talking about?
MountainMom wrote:
@Simon: Teachers are people with rights too. Now lets get back to the thread. @Q: what the heck were you talking about?
Questioninginla wrote:
So even outside the group, they still have you in a state of bounded choice?
Am I understanding you correctly?
How is this not playing a hand into their strong suit?
with this?
Simon wrote:
No its proving them correct to not talk doctrine
It sounds like they want a debate about doctrine. Anyone that debates knows that the one that chooses the battleground wins.
But I'm busy with other projects now so I've lost interest in this group.
ok.. i see what he's saying. the church says anyone who avoids discussing doctrine can't find anything wrong with it. even though there are controls present, discussing them puts a 'win' under their belts.
I have personally seen resistance to both approaches. I agree with Simon because I have seen members getting worked up as soon as you bring up the 4 letter word "cult". The moment you say that, it ends all dialog.
When you talk of doctrine, it is as if they cannot even hear you. They just say what they are taught and just virtually stop up their ears and don't want to listen to the other side of the debate.
I believe a member cannot get out by debate because of the strong built-in resistance to logical debate. The best way is by somehow letting the member see his/her situation for themselves while we show interest in their belief and ask the right questions. The result could be a realization either about the doctrine or about the control system.
The only way I got out WAS discussing doctrine and its discrepancies and practices
people making every conversation into talking controls only validated every claim they made about non members
As far as what mountainmom said I certainly believe teachers have rights that doesn’t mean they get to beat up children (not that I think she would ever claim they do)
Simon wrote:
The only way I got out WAS discussing doctrine and its discrepancies and practices
people making every conversation into talking controls only validated every claim they made about non members
Simon, you seem to have been willing to discuss doctrine and kept an open mind while still in. That doesn't seem to be the norm among members.
For most members, discussing doctrine is limited to talking about their own rather than listening to another opinion.
Wasn’t very open but was more open to doctrine talks than the topic of mind control which looked like a.diversion
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.