Emptied Himself?

[vernecarty]

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Ephesians 5:11


I determined to never again respond to personal attacks by those posting on the SWTE site. I intend to keep that committment.
I want to issue a warning to all my bretheren with whom I have shared fellowship on this BB.
You have a responsibility to speak the truth and to stand for righteousness.
To allow others to cow you into silence and passivity with manipulative and false charges of "hatred" and "lack of love for the brethren" is to fall prey to one of the oldest of Satan's ploys. By this sort of intrigue, many have been surborned to accomodate what God clearly condemns.
I want to state publicly and on the record before heavn and earth, that the person who made the following post is in my opinion engaging in terrible blasphemy.
If you love the Lord Jesus Christ, you will have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness...be warned...
I was certain I would be away for a while, and now this...
In the Love of Christ,
Verne

It doesn't say that Jesus Christ emptied Himself and He didn't.  For God to humble Himself would not be a compromise.  To humble Himself was to lose nothing.  To humble Himself, He knew, was to enrich Himself with true power of God....that is, add to the power He already had.  (Same is true for every man who makes the same choice).  

[M2]

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Ephesians 5:11


I determined to never again respond to personal attacks by those posting on the SWTE site. I intend to keep that committment.
I want to issue a warning to all my bretheren with whom I have shared fellowship on this BB.
You have a responsibility to speak the truth and to stand for righteousness.
To allow others to cow you into silence and passivity with manipulative and false charges of "hatred" and "lack of love for the brethren" is to fall prey to one of the oldest of Satan's ploys. By this sort of intrigue, many have been surborned to accomodate what God clearly condemns.
I want to state publicly and on the record before heavn and earth, that the person who made the following post is in my opinion engaging in terrible blasphemy.
If you love the Lord Jesus Christ, you will have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness...be warned...
I was certain I would be away for a while, and now this...
In the Love of Christ,
Verne


It doesn't say that Jesus Christ emptied Himself and He didn't.  For God to humble Himself would not be a compromise.  To humble Himself was to lose nothing.  To humble Himself, He knew, was to enrich Himself with true power of God....that is, add to the power He already had.  (Same is true for every man who makes the same choice).

Hi Verne,

I don't see it.  Please explain what it is that you agree/disagree with re. the highlighted comment.

Marcia

[editor]

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Ephesians 5:11


I determined to never again respond to personal attacks by those posting on the SWTE site. I intend to keep that committment.
I want to issue a warning to all my bretheren with whom I have shared fellowship on this BB.
You have a responsibility to speak the truth and to stand for righteousness.
To allow others to cow you into silence and passivity with manipulative and false charges of "hatred" and "lack of love for the brethren" is to fall prey to one of the oldest of Satan's ploys. By this sort of intrigue, many have been surborned to accomodate what God clearly condemns.
I want to state publicly and on the record before heavn and earth, that the person who made the following post is in my opinion engaging in terrible blasphemy.
If you love the Lord Jesus Christ, you will have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness...be warned...
I was certain I would be away for a while, and now this...
In the Love of Christ,
Verne




It doesn't say that Jesus Christ emptied Himself and He didn't.  For God to humble Himself would not be a compromise.  To humble Himself was to lose nothing.  To humble Himself, He knew, was to enrich Himself with true power of God....that is, add to the power He already had.  (Same is true for every man who makes the same choice).  

While I agree that the statement is somewhat vague, I don't see a huge problem with it at face value.

Certainly we could make some assumptions, draw conclusions from the assumptions and conclude that this was heresy, but I don't think that would be fair at all.

My first question would be, "What do you mean by that?"

My next question to Verne would be,  "What is it that about this statement that leads you to call it doctrines of demons?"

Setting aside the personal bias on both sides, I would appreciate hearing what is so bad about this statement.

Brent

[al Hartman]

And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them. Ephesians 5:11

I want to issue a warning to all my bretheren with whom I have shared fellowship on this BB.

I want to state publicly and on the record before heavn and earth, that the person who made the following post is in my opinion engaging in terrible blasphemy.


It doesn't say that Jesus Christ emptied Himself and He didn't.  For God to humble Himself would not be a compromise.  To humble Himself was to lose nothing.  To humble Himself, He knew, was to enrich Himself with true power of God....that is, add to the power He already had.  (Same is true for every man who makes the same choice).  

"Doctrines of Demons!"  Is that a bit strong?  Consider:

Now the Spirit speaks expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Speaking lies in hypocricy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron... 1Tim.4:1-2.  Paul goes on with specifics that applied to Timothy's situation at that time, but the point is general in further application.  

That point does not warn against the influence of outsiders, but of those who are within our midst (one cannot "depart from the faith" unless that one is among the faithful).  Such a one will seem to be genuinely concerned for what is right and good, having been himself "seduced" by evil spirits (the secret of seduction is that it is not openly malicious, but invitingly persuasive).  

But the great tragedy of seduction is that it cauterizes behind itself (...having their conscience seared with a hot iron...), so that one cannot return upon the path by which one has exited.  Indeed, the burn will ultimately become scar, often mistaken for healing.
So what, exactly, is the "terrible blasphemy" that the above quotation sets forth?  As with most such lies, it is cleverly couched in truth.  The truth being that Jesus, being God, did indeed humble Himself, and that we, as His disciples, can and should do the same:

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:  
But made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Phil.2:5-8.

Stopping there, we might agree with the statement in question, but Paul continues in the following verse (9):

Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name which is above every name...

The allegation that the Christ, as Jesus (or that Jesus, as the Christ), did not empty Himself is in error.  The question is not what He, rightfully being Almighty God, was capable of, but what He did.  He could have done all the things with which  satan tried to tempt Him (see Mt.4; Mk.1; Lk.4), but He set aside His godly powers and answered the tempter with His Father's Word, as a faithful servant.  He could have called for more than twelve legions of angels to do His bidding (Mt.26), but elected to forego His personal desire in deference to the will of His Father (Mt.26; Mk.14; Lk22; Jn18).

Did He empty Himself?  Yes, to the utmost:

Jesus... yielded up the ghost (literally: dismissed His spirit) Mt.27:50.

He who had, as God, made all things (Jn.1:3), as man was made sin, which He submitted to His Father, Who righteously judged, condemned, executed, and cursed Him for it.  He emptied Himself of all that His Godhood availed Him of, to suffer, die, and be sent to hell for us.  Because He was not us, and our sin was not His own, death could not hold Him, and His (and because of Him, our) Father raised Him up and exalted Him.
Is there, then, also a question regarding our status and conduct  as the redeemed of the Lord?  Should we also "make the same choice" as did Jesus?  Peter answers thusly:

Humble yourseves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time*:
Casting all your care upon Him; for He careth for you. 1Pet.5:6-7

Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man sows, that shall he also reap.
For he that sows to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that sows to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season* we shall reap, if we faint not. Gal.6:7-9.

*In your patience possess your souls. Lk.21:19

In Christ,
al

[vernecarty]

  But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:  And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, Phil 2:7,8


To teach that the Lord Jesus Christ humbled Himself as a man, to add to power He already had is blasphemy. This teaching has been presented on SWTE website by one Sondra Quinlan, calling herself “Affirming” and demands her exposure and public condemnation as one preaching a perverted gospel.

Philippians 2:7.8 tells us that Christ humbled Himself because He was human.

Though He was fully God, He was also fully man.

The proper posture for ALL men is one of humility, and that not as an instrument for acquisition of power...

And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself...


To teach that Christ humbled himself to add to power He already had is to deny His essential deity. This is the spirit of Anti-Christ.

To teach that Christ humbled Himself to add to power He already had is to trivialize the Biblical teaching of propitiation, and to heap cynical scorn on One who paid such an awful price, to loose us from our sins by His own blood.

To teach that He humbled Himself, and became obedient to death, and that by a cross, for the acquisition of power, is to display a level of wickedness and perversion that hails straight from the bosom of one who determined that he would be like the most High.

This is high blasphemy. I pray that God Almighty would put a stop to the slander of His Only Begotten Son.
Verne

[M2]

Thanks for that explanation of the Scripture passage.

I must confess that I qualify as being one who sometimes "preaches a perverted gospel" too, because I am still re-learning a healthier perspective of the scriptures.  I hope you will all bear with me as I get the Geftakys slant out of my system.

God bless,
Marcia

[Oscar]

Folks,

I must admit that I am surprised  to find out that the SWTE website is still up and running.  A few months back someone mentioned it and I took a look.  

Seems there were about 4 or 5 posters who kept a discussion going between themselves by reading this website, lifting quotes of of our posts, and thing telling themselves what they thought of us.

Can't say it seems like much fun....but....if that's what rings their chimes.....

Regarding the interpretation of Phil. 2:7-8.

 Although I don't intend to read anything else off that site, what Verne is talking about is known as the "Kenosis" theory.  It comes from the greek word "kenoo", meaning "to empty".

However, the teaching of the passage is that Christ left his exalted heavenly place of honor and came to earth to live and die as a man.

But the NT is clear that he is the eternal Word, fully a member of the Trinity, and fully participating in all the attributes of his essential deity.  He definitely did not "empty" himself of any divine attributes.

BTW, even false teacher George Geftakys had it right on this issue.

This teaching arose in Germany shortly after 1860, and spread to England and America with a whole bunch of other lousy ideas.   It has never been taught as orthodox Christian doctrine by any branch of Christianity.  

I can't say that I am sure that when someone like "Affirming" promotes this that it constitutes blasphemy.
But it definitely constitutes Baloney.

Thomas Maddux  

[editor]

Folks,

I must admit that I am surprised  to find out that the SWTE website is still up and running.  A few months back someone mentioned it and I took a look.  

Seems there were about 4 or 5 posters who kept a discussion going between themselves by reading this website, lifting quotes of of our posts, and thing telling themselves what they thought of us.

Can't say it seems like much fun....but....if that's what rings their chimes.....

Regarding the interpretation of Phil. 2:7-8.

 Although I don't intend to read anything else off that site, what Verne is talking about is known as the "Kenosis" theory.  It comes from the greek word "kenoo", meaning "to empty".

However, the teaching of the passage is that Christ left his exalted heavenly place of honor and came to earth to live and die as a man.

But the NT is clear that he is the eternal Word, fully a member of the Trinity, and fully participating in all the attributes of his essential deity.  He definitely did not "empty" himself of any divine attributes.

BTW, even false teacher George Geftakys had it right on this issue.

This teaching arose in Germany shortly after 1860, and spread to England and America with a whole bunch of other lousy ideas.   It has never been taught as orthodox Christian doctrine by any branch of Christianity.  

I can't say that I am sure that when someone like "Affirming" promotes this that it constitutes blasphemy.
But it definitely constitutes Baloney.

Thomas Maddux  

Sometimes people say things out of ignorance, sometimes they say things wrong in an attempt to communicate something else, other times they don't know any better.

I think that one or more of the three things listed above took place on Affirmings quote, and Verne's passionate nature, combined with his beef with Affirming led to this.

I don't think she's blaspheming, neither is she teaching a false gospel.  She just didn't know the implications of the wording of what she said.

A similiar thing happened recently with her ideas on three levels of heaven.  It sounded Mormon, but that really wasn't what it was.

Brent

[vernecarty]

Thanks for that explanation of the Scripture passage.

I must confess that I qualify as being one who sometimes "preaches a perverted gospel" too, because I am still re-learning a healthier perspective of the scriptures.  I hope you will all bear with me as I get the Geftakys slant out of my system.

God bless,
Marcia

There is a mighty difference - you never claimed to be prophetess...
Verne

p.s Tom I think we have to be careful in making assertions about what Jesus did or did not do so far as limiting Himself in human form. I am sure that you are aware that the so-called Kenotic theory of His humanity was  held by many theologians. This is definitely one area in which language alone, as you have pointed out, cannot do full justice to what transpired. We know for example that God the Father knew things that God the Son did not. I for one to not believe the Son's omniscience was in any way lessened by His humanity. I simply do not fully understand it.

[M2]

I'd like to start a campaign for Verne Sondra and Matt to "kiss and make up" (those smilies don't work).  Maybe when I get back another thread and a poll might be good.

In my previous post, I was attempting to demonstrate that I do not believe that Sondra is blaspheming, but rather that some of us are still re-learning or may need adjusting to our perspectives and hence may appear to be preaching a perverted gospel.

Marcia

[vernecarty]

I'd like to start a campaign for Verne Sondra and Matt to "kiss and make up" (those smilies don't work).  Maybe when I get back another thread and a poll might be good.

In my previous post, I was attempting to demonstrate that I do not believe that Sondra is blaspheming, but rather that some of us are still re-learning or may need adjusting to our perspectives and hence may appear to be preaching a perverted gospel.
in
Marcia

It seems to me that you are forgetting a bit of history Marcia.
Those two used to be a part of this posting community.
They demonstrated themselves to all concerned not to be at all interested in honest debate, but rather engaged in a campaign of divisiveness, subterfuge, and outright viciousness.
Ask Brent.
Despite repeated appeals from the BB community, this kind of behaviour continued with the result that they were banned by Brian as trolls.
On the BB they established, they took lying, slander, and giving of offense to new lows.
What basis do you have for considering these people brethren?
Had I thought that, I would have taken my concerns to them privately long ago. Nice thought though.
Verne
p.s. O.K. Here is one of many examples. Ms. Sondra Quinlan posted on  her website that I was removed from leadership at CMA for teaching false doctrine.
It does not matter whether she knew that to be true at the time or not, She is guilty of bearing false witness and will have to answer to God for her lies. Ler her deny it.

[vernecarty]

Hi Verne,

It's Sondra here.  Hey, I think you know I am a believer and I think you also know I am re-married and that I have a new name.   I think you know this applies just a little more salt in my wounds.  I believe it has also been pretty well established in the past that I did not get "ousted" from this board.  I was not disruptive, at all.  I just didn't like the smugness and I didn't like the way older men who should know better were treating young men who were struggling with the Assembly 'meltdown'' so I stepped back and communicated privately with Matt.  He was the only one that I could see had a real backbone.

I blame the older who should have more control over themselves and should carry the young on their backs to utter exhaustion if necessary.  Rather, you and a few others greatly contributed toward stumbling several young people in the name of Truth.  That I am positive about.

You have a good memory, you've proven that you do with incredible arrogance and pride, so what do you call this when you purposely misrepresent, hmmm?

I do forgive you for all, however.  I have developed a habit of letting things go since I have needed much forgiveness.  I hope you will consider the same because we all have much to be forgiven of.  Am I right?

You are partly correct that perhaps I bore false witness against you re. the CMA, but we had one source who gave me this impression.  But then after posting, we had several emails of people who don't post on either boards who gave us the full scoop.  For you not to admit your wrong is very "gg"ish of you, Verne.

You may not believe me when I say that I will always love the Verne I knew and know is still "in" you, but I think your love has grown cold.  I love you in Christ...that love that can "see the diamond in the rough"  not what you are, but what you could be if you would only put off that arrogant and hateful attitude.  

Bill O'Reilly has a name for you intellectuals that I quite like....pinheads.  Why, do you suppose?  Because it tends to bogg people down and confuses the facts.  The Verne I used to know defied the "penhead" types.  You were smart personified, but real and enjoyable.  WHAT HAPPENED?

"Judge not that you be not judged."  A woman proclaiming scripture (prophesying) doesn't make me a "Prophetess" - the power of the Word carries the Word given to another by a believer.

Well, here I am.  You once insinuated that I was fearful and wouldn't/couldn't endure the scrutiny of real men in a community.  I have absolutely "NO FEAR" of you or anyone on this board.  I have simply chosen to be elsewhere.  In some ways I am a daughter of George and Betty.  I tried to keep the good.  One thing I do - I do not allow fear and it has become a good habit that has opened doors that God told me to go through.  But, you, Verne, I know you and I don't fear you.

Sondra Jamison

p.s.  This is not meant as a "mud in your eye" post toward the Administrators or Moderators of this board.  Please excuse me if I say I don't fear you.  I do want to maintain respect and politeness with all.  

The "quote" mechanism is broken or else I'm goofing something up?? - so I took the quotes off.


 

I have suggested to Sondra that we continue this conversation in private.
A few things by way of response to what was posted.
My use of her original married name was unintentional, and not meant as a slight. I am aware her last name is now Jamison. I do apologise for the error.
With regard the the goings on at CMA.
There are things only the former board members know.
I know you have not spoken to any of them.
There are things only the two former elders know.
I know you have not spoken to Ralph Johnson.
There are things that only I know, and which were not disclosed, not even to the other serving elder.
You have not spoken to me.
I would be extremely careful.
The way you have so far responded to that particular offense leaves me a bit dismayed over the possiblilty of this going anywhere. We will see...
Verne

[vernecarty]

Hi All,

I have responded to Verne that I would personally like to have this conversation on the public forum since the reason I am here is because Marcia and Brent suggested dialog.  I don't mind talking with Verne if it will be helpful.

Here is what the Bible says about two believers dealing with issues of offense Sondra:


  Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother  Matt 18:15.

As I indicated to you privately, the way I respond to you will depend on the matter of how I see your relationship with Christ.
If you insist on a public discussion on these matters,  I can only continue to assume based on your prior conduct that you are not saved and that Matthew 18:15 does not apply.
I will also assume you are not intrested in resolving any disagreement between us, but in winning a public debate. Either way, you are welcome to take your best shot, but be prepared...

Why did you call me an adulteress? (even if you don't think I am saved, for example?).....not to mention all of the other colorful names???  Do you believe as GG does that men and women only have one shot at marriage.  If one is divorced and remarried - they are an adulteress?  Is that it, or would there be another reason you would say such a thing?  I didn't sleep with you now did I?  If I had slept with someone, you certainly would not have been invited to the rendevous.  So, now, please explain yourself to me and all others if you don't mind.

The answer to this one is easy and it does not matter whether you are saved or not. What I said was clearly said in anger and frankly a cheap shot intended to insult you.
That was wrong and for that I apologise.
What I think about your marital situation is irrelevant,
I don't want to disucss CMA in this context as  I do not think it would be useful.
I suggest we go back to the very beginning of our exchanges on this BB (the posts are still here!) and deal with each item. Again, my assumption is that we are not following the Biblical pattern for resolving of differences among brethren, but simply having a discussion about the relative merits of positions that you and I have taken on matters over which we disagree.
One of your earliest declarations on the BB, and which led to most of the subsequent acrimony, was to pronounce GG "The Lord's servant."

Is that still your position based on the facts now at your disposal?

Here is the very first thing I said to you after you came on the BB using a pseudonym.
You knew who I was and your response was not to identify yourself as a sister in Christ or to take up any issue you had with me personally. You immediately tried to embarrass me by posting the PM I sent on the public forum.

There is something terribly wrong with you...your invoking pseudo-spiritual language does not mask the obvious deep spiritual scars you bear...what exactly did George do to you madam?
Your representing a man of  this level of depravity as God's servant betrays a spiritual darkness that I find startling. I see you for exactly what you are...a vessel of wrath.

Verne
 

[M2]

...
Well, here I am.  You once insinuated that I was fearful and wouldn't/couldn't endure the scrutiny of real men in a community.  I have absolutely "NO FEAR" of you or anyone on this board.  I have simply chosen to be elsewhere.  In some ways I am a daughter of George and Betty.  I tried to keep the good.  One thing I do - I do not allow fear and it has become a good habit that has opened doors that God told me to go through.  But, you, Verne, I know you and I don't fear you.

Sondra Jamison

p.s.  This is not meant as a "mud in your eye" post toward the Administrators or Moderators of this board.  Please excuse me if I say I don't fear you.  I do want to maintain respect and politeness with all.

Hi ruth (Sondra),

I do not want to butt in to your conversation with Verne.  Please explain your comment that I highlighted.

Marcia

[M2]

...
Well, here I am.  You once insinuated that I was fearful and wouldn't/couldn't endure the scrutiny of real men in a community.  I have absolutely "NO FEAR" of you or anyone on this board.  I have simply chosen to be elsewhere.  In some ways I am a daughter of George and Betty.  I tried to keep the good.  One thing I do - I do not allow fear and it has become a good habit that has opened doors that God told me to go through.  But, you, Verne, I know you and I don't fear you.

Sondra Jamison

p.s.  This is not meant as a "mud in your eye" post toward the Administrators or Moderators of this board.  Please excuse me if I say I don't fear you.  I do want to maintain respect and politeness with all.

Hi ruth (Sondra),

I do not want to butt in to your conversation with Verne.  Please explain your comment that I highlighted.

Marcia

Hi Marcia,

I don't mind fielding this one question since it's you - but otherwise, I will be handy on SWTE.  Generally, I came over to have a little conference with my old friend, Verne.

I have already talked about this on SWTE.  I am of the persuasion that no matter how many times we face the corner and repeat, "I am not a child of G & B" - we will be.  It's perspective more than things of the memory or things we can control with our wills.  

GG & BG are in my head and I hear them in the heads and hearts of most people on these boards....in attitudes, vocabulary, perspective, spirit, etc.  Like it or not, when you sit through as many meetings, counsel, pray, worship with, receive the Word from, not to mention all the people we were friends with doing the same....how easy do YOU think it is to suddenly be someone else?

If it was just our thought life, it would be one thing...but no, it's perspective we pick up when one combs through every topic in the universe over 12-35 years.  Perspective stays over a lifetime when all else can be changed.  I think perspective can be changed, but it tends to change very slowly and almost not as a part of our will.  Perspective seems to be "what I am really, deeply convinced of."  Just some thoughts...not the gospel.

Now, see, I learned a lot from GG (and Betty).  They made mistakes, but I see that as with Joseph, God uses not only the good, but the painful, even errors of others in our lives for good.  I have only love in my heart from George and Betty.  Did I leave?  Yes.  But I grew up and put away childish things.  God called me out of my father's house.  


Ps 45:10-11  Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people, and thy father's house;  11 So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty: for he is thy Lord; and worship thou him.

God is the author and finisher of our faith.  We need to look forward and drive forward.  To continue to complain about the instruments God used is to argue with Him.  Hadawouldaknown....but you didn't...and for a reason...you needed what you got....if not to learn the positives of things - to learn the negatives.  This, IMO, is the "Law" phase of our Christian lives.  We naturally fall right into it, because rationalizing and reasoning we know.  It is spiritual we don't know and can't know until we fall long and hard on our faces.  Then there is an "awakening" in the soul....this is God's doing.

Isn't the "I will never do that again" as important as what I will do.  It comes down to the teaching of the will.  He's got to get our will's in line with His ways.  How can He do that without hurting us...without pain?

So, yes.  I have stopped fighting it, knowing that GG and BG are in me just as my natural parents are.  I keep the good and question and resist the wrong/bad/limited.  Verne is full of GG and needs to recognize it or he will have a whole life of misery in that particular area.  Judging people, high-mindedness, etc.  This was some of the worst of GG and sons tend to pick up on aggression from their fathers, it seems.  Not believing people when they tell you something, always arguing with them, putting them in a little slot that is only real in your own mind, living full of questions and doubts.  This is the world and not the Spirit of God.

sj

Thank you Sondra, I appreciate your responding to this on AB for a couple of reasons.  Firstly, you posted the statement here, and secondly, I have a pretty good idea what I can and cannot say on AB, but am still figuring out the SWTE rules.  I think it is great that you and Verne are taking the initiative towards reconciliation.

I found this statement particularly insightful:

GG & BG are in my head and I hear them in the heads and hearts of most people on these boards....in attitudes, vocabulary, perspective, spirit, etc.  Like it or not, when you sit through as many meetings, counsel, pray, worship with, receive the Word from, not to mention all the people we were friends with doing the same....how easy do YOU think it is to suddenly be someone else?

If it was just our thought life, it would be one thing...but no, it's perspective we pick up when one combs through every topic in the universe over 12-35 years.  Perspective stays over a lifetime when all else can be changed.  I think perspective can be changed, but it tends to change very slowly and almost not as a part of our will.

Isn't it interesting the lasting effects of our time in the assembly.  Some of us were there for a very short time and yet it has had this effect on us.  It does take a concerted effort to weed out the bad.
Also interesting is the fact that we had very little actual contact with GG and BG, and yet they have had such a lasting influence upon us.

God bless,
Marcia