Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I look at the NT as a collection of Letters of the Apostles pointing people to the Torah and other Writings to bring them to a closer knowledge of Yehovaw...Kinda like me writing a book that many people read, I put a lot of my own thoughts in there, however, my main aim is convincing people to read and learn from the Bible...Not my book...It is the same with the Catholic Appocrypha, at one time, the monks that copied them left foot notes alluding to fact that they were not scripture but were merely for the study of scritpure in order for one to find out what else was going on around the events of scripture at a particular time, and they were placed between the OT and the NT...They were merely meant to be study aids, not Holy Writ...And to add to my example regarding my book, 500 years later, a group of people will undoubtedly cannonize my writings...And people will 'live' within it's pages and very rarely if at all walk in the pages of the Bible...As many do today, live more in the pages of the NT and very rarely go into the OT...They seem to want to use the OT as proof of the NT, instead of the other way around...It states in one of Peter's Letters that Scripture is not open to private interpretation...But many attempt to interpret the NT and miss he point that the Letters are pointing people back to the OT writtings...When Yashua came, He did not bring anything new, all of what He said was from the Torah and OT writings...A co-worker of mine argued at work a few weeks ago that Yeshua did bring new things to the table as not commiting adultry, but if you look on a woman to lust, you have already committed adultry in your heart...This is not new...For in the Torah it says that if you so much as look at the little finger of a married woman, you have committed adultry with her...I think that also applies to betrothed women as well, I am going of of memory here...So, this was nothing new...He also said when the Lord judges from opened books, that there books refer to the books of the Bible...However, they refer to the Books of the Torah...The Law of Yehovaw...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1965
And this is what Yeshua had against the Pharasee...Not what they taught...But, they were hypocrites...If they had lived what they taught, He would not have had a problem with them...He said to listen to them, just do not do what they do...So to speak...
There is evidence that the NT is inspired. No contradictions in the Scriptures as we have it packaged in the Bible "cannon".
People have a problem with Paul, but Peter didn't. He calls his writings
"Scriptures". They are "God Breathed".
There is no contradiction between Paul and James. The "Works" Paul is talking about is "Works of the Law". James is talking about "faith-based" "Works". Two different "Works" being talked about. True Faith produces faith-based Fruit/"Works" - the "Obedience of Faith" which is only possible with the indwelling Holy Spirit.. The faith saves through imputed righteousness not the works.
How I know this is true, besides what the Scriptures say, is that all Cults add Man to Salvation. One biggy is the "New Age" view of Jesus - a man (that's it) that through the Spirit of God overcame and became agod, which denies him of course as YHWY God incarnate. Many many more examples here.
Paul talks about an imputation of Christ's righteousness given to us freely entirely undeserving upon believing/repenting in heart being "born-again". This is what Justifies us (saves us from Damnation). Faith not only in God's works in the atonement but the Resurrection. Only when one is "born-again" can they produce Fruit. Fruit is produced by abiding in the Vine with Faith depending upon the Spirit to work through us. Both the Lord and Paul says the Comforter/Holy Spirit "seals" the believer.
Evidently there is a difference between entering and inheriting the Kingdom. One enters into life upon believing (John 3)(John 10) and inherits in the Kingdom upon faithfulness (Galatians 5). We can do absolutely nothing to Save ourselves except believe in God in Christ to Save us is what Paul is saying. Believe produces choices/faith-based Works. If we Believe having God's Spirit within us, we will produce fruit through faith-based choices. We are a new Creature.
Now a good case can be made that one's Justification is tied in with their ability to produce fruit. This is in essence denying; however, the concept that one is "sealed" with God's spirit "until the day of redemption" (Paul), "Forever" (The Lord). It is denying the concept that all that come to the Son (which is due to the Father which drew us to him), is in both the Father and the Son's hands. It's embracing a conditional sonship status in which the Holy Spirit is lost through disobedience and gained through repentance. When this happens, we've just added our feet to God's hands. Evidently we (mankind) can pluck us out of God's hands. He says no Man can pluck them out of his hands.
Paul makes a pretty good case we are all saved as Abraham was through imputation of God's Righteousness to our accounts upon believing. He talks about a God's unconditional covenant with Abraham in which God himself did a figure eight to demonstrate HIS commitment. One thing we love about our Lord, is that HIS faithfulness to Deliver never fails.
Will all Saved be equal in the Kingdom? No. The scriptures suggest some will "Overcome" entering into his rest via inheritance, and some will be "Cast away" into outer darkness due to unfaithfulness. Equating the "Outer Darkness" with the "Lake of Fire" doesn't equate for one that takes a high view of inspiration of the Text. The Parables of the Talents, etc are talking to Believers/"Servants" which will be handled at a different Judgment than the Great White Throne.
The Scriptures say that once we believe, our bodies have been Purchased. We are a vessel for his use now. God wants a return( ie Fruit) on his investment. We are all called to be "Overcomers". There will be disapproval to the "unfaithful servants" and we will all reap what we sow regarding our faithfulness at the Judgement seat according to our "Works"/Choices where the intent of the Heart is judged.
So I'd suggest not to be so quick to throw Paul, who I think is a chosen Vessel to profess Salvation unto the Gentile, under the bus. He doesn't preach the Saved by Faith alone so in your Liberty you can willfully sin and rebel producing no fruit doctrine like many seem to jump to the conclusion.
I believe people that come to this conclusion, don't understand the Power of God's Spirit within a believer to Conform him. Like someone else said, it is a Spiritual book which must be read with the Holy Spirit. I have come to the conclusion all the Faith vs Works confusion comes from an "intellectual" understanding. Thus Cults add "Works" to faith which tend to end up getting back under the Law which Christ came to free us from.
Regarding what you said about Paul, above:
One issue I have with Paul vs. Christ, is that the things which Christ said were important in order to be saved, had nothing to do with him having to die and resurrect. He may have known it was coming, but he never said to people "This is what you must to do enter/inherit the Kingdom (through effort and dedication)...but once I die and ressurect, and Paul comes to talk to you, that is ALL going to change." If Jesus really knew he was going to have to die and resurrect, he would have said things to reflect this, if it was important to salvation.
Trying to make Christ's death a good thing is fine with me, in terms of the theology. But the problem is that all the spiritual teachers that went against the grain were killed. All of them. And the more I look at it, the more I see the not so subtle change in the message, and the focus of the message from Christ to Paul. When does Paul ever command us to love God the Father first and foremost the way Christ does? It's as if, once Christ died, the God the Father part wasn't necessary anymore, or the other things that Christ said were all-important either. It's like he was wasting his breath. Once Paul decided to not be an enemy to Christianity anymore, the message became about "believing in the death and resurrection" and that it's "paid for" and we can "do nothing of our own effort." But that's not what Jesus said. But even after Christ resurrected and came back to speak withe the apostles...did he ever make mention of this?
Why did a former enemy of Christianity come to write so many letters (before Christ's own Gospels were even written) to eclipse the original message with something else?
Also...we can easily show just how much Paul's writing can be improved upon, every time we make an "interpretation" of what it "really" means. Because it's inspired, it is deemed okay for it to be cryptic or seemingly contradictory, or somerthing that only some can understand. But every time that we have to "translate," we should ask ourselves...if this is what Paul meant, why didn't he just say it this way? The ideas are not complicated. But even the simplest concepts can turn convoluted if the writer can not write with appropriate clarity.
For the moment, I'm inclined to accept Paul's words...because I'm working on a different part of the story and mystery at the moment. But the common misunderstandings and misinterpretations regarding his work are disturbing.
On another note, since many people were illiterate in those days, and since most people didn't even have Bibles until after the printing press was invented...who was reading the scriptures? For over 1,500 years...the Word of God, as preserved as it may have been...wasn't even available to everyone?
Just how did God think that "the hopeless" could be saved, if they had not the chance to even hear the message? Well that's because as Christ said "I came not to heal the righteous, but sinners." It because we're NOT all that hopeless or dead. It's not about us not measuring up to God or being perfect in "his eyes". We all know that this is something (that even the ancient Jews) knew is forever out of our reach while we are incarnate. It's about those who would have lost their souls, and their spiritual nature completely, having a chance to be healed.
You should look into the work of the missionary Don Richardson, who preached to the aborigines a few decades ago. He learned a lot from them and his eyes were opened to what is going on. He came to the realization that this "hopeless and completely fallen" doctrine is not correct. It's a type of mind control that has been used on us.
Christ never said that "we can do nothing" to be saved...or anything even close to that, but said to Love the Father with all our heart (which Paul never instructs to do), and to do the Will of the Father, which is to love each other, of which He was a perfect living example.
Christ is the Messiah, the anointed one.
I have a lot more I want to say to other posts...but short on time right now! I'll be back soon.
I tell you "Two Witnesses", when I first came into the truth and believed, the pages of the Bible jumped off the page at me. The Holy Spirit is need to read the Holy Spirit. There's something missing in uninspired Scriptures such as the Apocrypha - the Holy Spirit and it's noticeable. So I hold the Scriptures with a very high inspiration as I believe it was literally written by God through chosen individuals.
As for doctrine, there are really two doctrines for those that believe Messiah as their Savior
1) Saved by Faith and keeping the Law
2) Saved by Faith Alone
Either the narrow way to life is to live like Messiah living in perfect obedience/holy/righteousness unto good works (ie Highway of our Holiness) in which we willinherit eternal life through being set apart (Sanctificatoin being is required for Justification), or the narrow way to life is Christ's righteousness that is imputed to all that believe/repent in heart (Justified) that is freely given without merit in which the individual enters into eternal life - inheritance being conditional upon faithfulness (sanctification) being rewarded for Spirit-led works.
A third variant is proclaiming "Keeping the Law" is sanctification. The problem with that is Paul makes a case that when one is "Sanctified" they are dead to the "Law" because the believer is dead, buried, and resurrected in Christ. So those that are being sanctified are overcoming in the likeness of Christ's resurrection and are entirely dead to the Law as it can not try a dead person twice. Paul hammers this in Romans 6,7,8. The Law and Spirit are antithetical. It's not about religious rituals or fleshly striving. It's about dying to self and life letting God's Spirit work through and empower us to overcome.
John 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
Romans 6
1What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
I find the #1 barrier of dying to self is our Pride. It's the greatest Liability in this life I think.
Matthew 16:25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
To let the Lord work through us producing fruit we have to purge out all the leaven (pride - corrupts by puffing up)
Lee, this is a great post!! I'll respond to it soon!
Paul is speaking in Thessalonians of preaching. I've heard preaching that was so inspiring that I thought it came from God and not just from the preacher preaching. There is absolutely no question that God's inspiration is present in preachers and writers, and sometimes even forum posters, everywhere and all the time.
Paul was speaking in Timothy of what is known to us today as the Old Testament - he wouldn't have considered his own letters Scripture would he? That would have been very arrogant, don't you think?
Peter refers to letters Paul wrote, not letters Paul transcribed directly from God. He acknowledges Paul had wisdom that God gave him. I too have wisdom God gave me. Does that make this forum post Scripture? Inspired maybe... or maybe that is subject to your interpretation.
I look at the NT as a collection of Letters of the Apostles pointing people to the Torah and other Writings to bring them to a closer knowledge of Yehovaw...Kinda like me writing a book that many people read, I put a lot of my own thoughts in there, however, my main aim is convincing people to read and learn from the Bible...Not my book...It is the same with the Catholic Appocrypha, at one time, the monks that copied them left foot notes alluding to fact that they were not scripture but were merely for the study of scritpure in order for one to find out what else was going on around the events of scripture at a particular time, and they were placed between the OT and the NT...They were merely meant to be study aids, not Holy Writ...And to add to my example regarding my book, 500 years later, a group of people will undoubtedly cannonize my writings...And people will 'live' within it's pages and very rarely if at all walk in the pages of the Bible...As many do today, live more in the pages of the NT and very rarely go into the OT...They seem to want to use the OT as proof of the NT, instead of the other way around...It states in one of Peter's Letters that Scripture is not open to private interpretation...But many attempt to interpret the NT and miss he point that the Letters are pointing people back to the OT writtings...When Yashua came, He did not bring anything new, all of what He said was from the Torah and OT writings...A co-worker of mine argued at work a few weeks ago that Yeshua did bring new things to the table as not commiting adultry, but if you look on a woman to lust, you have already committed adultry in your heart...This is not new...For in the Torah it says that if you so much as look at the little finger of a married woman, you have committed adultry with her...I think that also applies to betrothed women as well, I am going of of memory here...So, this was nothing new...He also said when the Lord judges from opened books, that there books refer to the books of the Bible...However, they refer to the Books of the Torah...The Law of Yehovaw...
Very cool post! Wondering though...where in Peter's letters does it say that scripture is not open to "private interpretation?" I'm sure it does say that...but I just wanted to see the actual verse for reference!
Once again, the problem with this, is that there are TOO MANY INTEPRETATIONS, and some very powerful organized groups that promote certain ideas. I think it's much less dangerous to have private interpretation, than this MASS INDOCTRINATION that happens (much of which is of course false).
I come to this board and see all the debates and arguing over "TRUTH" and it's more and more evident, that more than any other book (or subject) in the history of the world, the bible and christianity seem to cause more arguing and conflict than any other subject under the sun. Where does the TRUTH part come in?
Isn't the FAITH that Christ talked about different than the FAITH that Paul talked about? Paul's faith is about believing in the death and resurrection and that's about it. Christ's faith was about actually moving mountains, and having the courage to transcend spiritually. The two things are completely different. I could be wrong though. Go to Bible.com and enter the word "faith" and see in what contexts Jesus and Paul brought the word up in...and compare them.
Last edited by TwoWitnesses; 03-24-2012 at 01:11 PM..
I tell you "Two Witnesses", when I first came into the truth and believed, the pages of the Bible jumped off the page at me. The Holy Spirit is need to read the Holy Spirit. There's something missing in uninspired Scriptures such as the Apocrypha - the Holy Spirit and it's noticeable. So I hold the Scriptures with a very high inspiration as I believe it was literally written by God through chosen individuals.
As for doctrine, there are really two doctrines for those that believe Messiah as their Savior
1) Saved by Faith and keeping the Law
2) Saved by Faith Alone
Either the narrow way to life is to live like Messiah living in perfect obedience/holy/righteousness unto good works (ie Highway of our Holiness) in which we willinherit eternal life through being set apart (Sanctificatoin being is required for Justification), or the narrow way to life is Christ's righteousness that is imputed to all that believe/repent in heart (Justified) that is freely given without merit in which the individual enters into eternal life - inheritance being conditional upon faithfulness (sanctification) being rewarded for Spirit-led works.
A third variant is proclaiming "Keeping the Law" is sanctification. The problem with that is Paul makes a case that when one is "Sanctified" they are dead to the "Law" because the believer is dead, buried, and resurrected in Christ. So those that are being sanctified are overcoming in the likeness of Christ's resurrection and are entirely dead to the Law as it can not try a dead person twice. Paul hammers this in Romans 6,7,8. The Law and Spirit are antithetical. It's not about religious rituals or fleshly striving. It's about dying to self and life letting God's Spirit work through and empower us to overcome.
John 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
Romans 6
1What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
I find the #1 barrier of dying to self is our Pride. It's the greatest Liability in this life I think.
Matthew 16:25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
To let the Lord work through us producing fruit we have to purge out all the leaven (pride - corrupts by puffing up)
Dude, this is a cool post. Sorry to take so long to get back.
When I first came to the "Truth" I had exactly the same experience.
As far as the part that I underlined in BLUE...this is true, but it's not something that's just automatic, where it doesn't require our own effort, like is so often taught.
The part highlighted in BOLD above (Which begins with "know ye not") is something Jesus himself should have said once he was Risen, if it were true. Paul has changed the aspects of and requirements for salvation, which causes many people to not do what Jesus actually said. Also, once Jesus was raised, he didn't have to leave us and go away. There is no reason that he didn't have to stay...unless he was just anxious to get up to Heaven already. Why leave us that way? He had conquered death, and could have stayed to reign.
We are saved by faith (but the kind of faith Christ taught, not Paul) and also keeping the Law. Christ taught us the importance of keeping the commandments for a reason! Because those who love God will want to keep the Law, and keep trying until they make it, and those who do not really love God won't. It's really that simple. Anything beyond that, that twists Christ's own words, is evil. This idea of pitting the Law vs. Faith is an imaginary conflict that was created...which will fry your brain if you let it. It is really a very very simple concept.
I love to sing...therefore I keep working at my singing, despite the adversity I have encountered, (former vocal problems) and not ever making a penny...and I am not a "sinner to singing" but rather A LOVER OF SINGING. Do my works count for nothing? Hardly. The works are evidence of my love. And beyond that, Good Works are Valuable amd Necessary because there is too much darkness in the world. And so it goes with all things of the spirit. Let's not confound things please. It only hurts people.
The entire "dead to the Law" concept is retarded. The Law and Spirit are not at all antithetical, but parallel. It's like Iron Filings on a magnet. The Law follows the Spirit. Anything that teaches otherwise is a lie.
The "automatic sanctification" that Paul talks about NEVER HAPPENS! Just the same way that he says a non-believing wife is sanctified by the marriage of the husband to her. It's a nice idea. But it's not reality. When people say they accept Christ,
(and think they believe), this automatic transformation and the sudden "instant personal death and resurrection" does not occur. Accepting Christ is the BEGINNING OF THE JOURNEY. "Many are called, and few are chosen." It requires the exact dedication and work that Christ said that it requires.
However, if the idea is that we need to be dead to the material to inherit the spiritual, then of course I agree. This is also what Christ taught. But it isn't automatic, just because we believe in his death and resurrection.
Last edited by TwoWitnesses; 03-24-2012 at 01:07 PM..
Very cool post! Wondering though...where in Peter's letters does it say that scripture is not open to "private interpretation?" I'm sure it does say that...but I just wanted to see the actual verse for reference!
Once again, the problem with this, is that there are TOO MANY INTEPRETATIONS, and some very powerful organized groups that promote certain ideas. I think it's much less dangerous to have private interpretation, than this MASS INDOCTRINATION that happens (much of which is of course false).
I come to this board and see all the debates and arguing over "TRUTH" and it's more and more evident, that more than any other book (or subject) in the history of the world, the bible and christianity seem to cause more arguing and conflict than any other subject under the sun. Where does the TRUTH part come in?
Isn't the FAITH that Christ talked about different than the FAITH that Paul talked about? Paul's faith is about believing in the death and resurrection and that's about it. Christ's faith was about actually moving mountains, and having the courage to transcend spiritually. The two things are completely different. I could be wrong though. Go to Bible.com and enter the word "faith" and see in what contexts Jesus and Paul brought the word up in...and compare them.
(KJV)
2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
I think most people try to find things in the Scriptures that support their views instead of trying to find Truth and allowing that to mold them...Many slave owners in the States used Scripture to support their views of slavery...They did not go into it to see if they were right or wrong...Finding the name Cham/Ham which meant hot or burned they seen it as meaning black and since his descendants were cursed to be servants of the descendants of the other two, this was proof that a God-fearing Christian could own slaves...However, if they bothered to go farther into the migration of nations they would find out that not all of hams descendants are black...It is like an emotionally charged letter from a wife to her deployed husband, if he reads the whole letter, he knows how she truly feels, however, if he only read sections or one sentence, he can get a totally different picture of how she feels...For instance:
...I hate you when you when you are gone...
...I hate you for being gone. And I pray every day for your safe return to my embrace...
...And I pray every day for your safe return to my embrace. But yesterday, I met a man that made me feel not so lonely...
...But yesterday, I met a man that made me feel not so lonely...But, I pushed that out of my mind with the memory of you and our love...
...I wait only for you, even if forever.
With love and anticipation of your return, your wife.
Any one of these sentences would give one a different idea of what she was feeling or doing...But, He he read the whole letter:
I hate you for being gone. And I pray every day for your safe return to my embrace. But yesterday, I met a man that made me feel not so lonely. But, I pushed that out of my mind with the memory of you and our love. I wait only for you, even if forever...
With love and anticipation of your return, your wife.
...He comes away with a different sense of how she feels as opposed to individual sentences or sections...However, If he were looking for an excuse to cheat, he could very well use the sentence of her meeting another man, and stop at that, and use it to justify his unfaithfulness...And say, 'Well, you said in your letter that you met another man...So, I went and met another woman'....And she might say, 'Did you bother reading the whole letter?'...He says, 'No, all I neede to know was that you met another man, you cheated on me first'...To which she would say, 'If you had bothered to read the rest of it....'
The bible is, as you say, not a perfect translation. The proof is where it says "resist not evil" in the KJV and several that came from that one. Please! spare me...."resist" not?! Okay, lay down if you suffer a home invasion, let them rape, your wife, daughters, mother....sorry, but you get my point.
Most likely in the original it says "resent" not evil, but overcome it with good. Of course we are to resist evil, we do naturally and with a clear conscience, etc.
BUT! The grace of God and power of His Holy Spirit is that none of the goofs in translation are in places of the bible that change any of God's eternal, timeless principles. None of them are in ways that can send us to hell through the errors. THIS has always fascinated me and given me great peace and appreciation.
I think there is a time for every thing at the proper time as Proverbs says. Resist not evil has nothing to do with defending wife, children or country which we should should do. If a thief has you at gun point you should give up your money rather then your life. Or a person given to anger needs to vent. I say let him. For the moment, he is not listening. Why say anything and escalate his anger. He will calm down eventually. There are other countless examples when not to resist. Lots of Scripture are general Truths that do not apply in every situation.
2Pe 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
I think most people try to find things in the Scriptures that support their views instead of trying to find Truth and allowing that to mold them...Many slave owners in the States used Scripture to support their views of slavery...They did not go into it to see if they were right or wrong...Finding the name Cham/Ham which meant hot or burned they seen it as meaning black and since his descendants were cursed to be servants of the descendants of the other two, this was proof that a God-fearing Christian could own slaves...However, if they bothered to go farther into the migration of nations they would find out that not all of hams descendants are black...It is like an emotionally charged letter from a wife to her deployed husband, if he reads the whole letter, he knows how she truly feels, however, if he only read sections or one sentence, he can get a totally different picture of how she feels...For instance:
...I hate you when you when you are gone...
...I hate you for being gone. And I pray every day for your safe return to my embrace...
...And I pray every day for your safe return to my embrace. But yesterday, I met a man that made me feel not so lonely...
...But yesterday, I met a man that made me feel not so lonely...But, I pushed that out of my mind with the memory of you and our love...
...I wait only for you, even if forever.
With love and anticipation of your return, your wife.
Any one of these sentences would give one a different idea of what she was feeling or doing...But, He he read the whole letter:
I hate you for being gone. And I pray every day for your safe return to my embrace. But yesterday, I met a man that made me feel not so lonely. But, I pushed that out of my mind with the memory of you and our love. I wait only for you, even if forever...
With love and anticipation of your return, your wife.
...He comes away with a different sense of how she feels as opposed to individual sentences or sections...However, If he were looking for an excuse to cheat, he could very well use the sentence of her meeting another man, and stop at that, and use it to justify his unfaithfulness...And say, 'Well, you said in your letter that you met another man...So, I went and met another woman'....And she might say, 'Did you bother reading the whole letter?'...He says, 'No, all I neede to know was that you met another man, you cheated on me first'...To which she would say, 'If you had bothered to read the rest of it....'
Do you see my point here?...
Very interesting to read this paraphrase between wife and husband. Thanks, Richard!
Blessings,
brian
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I
