This question posed to 'The Man of God' during a church service in the 70's keeps lifting my spirit to this day:
'IF YOU ARE NOT THE CHRIST, THEN WHO THE HELL ARE YOU?'
Even considered putting it on a t-shirt.


lily rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> guess I do have a few good memories of the CLW.

In reference to similar posts by paleface & changedagain ----------- “I think a big "red light" moment for me happened in the Anaheim church. JRS was talking and Happy Clark stood up and said "Brother Stevens, you're the Christ". John just chuckled and said something general like "Bless you, Happy".
--------------------------------------------

Hebrews 7:16 & 8:1-4 suggest the “True Christ” ministers from the throne in heaven according to the power of an indestructible life, and if He were on earth He would then become unnecessary.

I wasn’t there, but I’m glad for John’s sake that he didn’t answer yes or no. If he had said, “Yes” I suppose the crazy “Walk” teaching would have found a way to Biblically support it.

There is an often heard saying here in Salt Lake City, “Nobody gets to heaven without first passing by Joseph Smith.”

Well, I guess we’ll see about all these things someday.

Came across this today:
"Unfortunately that's one of the problems with religion, the fear aspect. My parents would send me to various churches. They wanted me to get a religious education. But I had a hard time picturing God as being quite as sadistic as being made out by some of these groups, as somebody who couldn't wait to punish you and couldn't wait to make you grovel for some indiscretion you made. I just never saw him that way. I asked my parents if I could not attend. That was the day when I guess they realized I'd made up my mind that I had a philosophy about it. Anyway, it's all in what the mind makes it."
--Clint Eastwood
Conversations with Clint (pg. 17-18)

FCSLC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In reference to similar posts by paleface &
> changedagain ----------- “I think a big "red
> light" moment for me happened in the Anaheim
> church. JRS was talking and Happy Clark stood up
> and said "Brother Stevens, you're the Christ".
> John just chuckled and said something general like
> "Bless you, Happy".
>
> I wasn’t there, but I’m glad for John’s sake
> that he didn’t answer yes or no. If he had
> said, “Yes” I suppose the crazy “Walk”
> teaching would have found a way to Biblically
> support it.
> _________________________________________________

It strikes me how Happy seemed to have captured the imagination of the congregation and probably made everyone chuckle even to this day. Out of the mouth of babes. Also it seems to me ironic that Happy was voicing the Latter Rain Manifest Sons of God doctrine that believers will take on the divine nature of Christ. Didn't John also believe this? Isn't that why he was removed from the Assemblies of God Church? If I am wrong about this, please feel free to lay into me.

I always wondered about this incident. If John didn't want to be deified, why didn't he gently correct Happy Clark? It hinted to me that John might possibly be off the mark at this point. Years later, I remember Gary reinforcing this idea. He implied that John was the Word incarnate. And now, they have made Marilyn their sacred Goddess.

changedagain Wrote:

Conversations with Clint
___________________________________________________

Clint Eastwood? Really?

paleface Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I always wondered about this incident. If John
> didn't want to be deified, why didn't he gently
> correct Happy Clark? It hinted to me that John
> might possibly be off the mark at this point.
> Years later, I remember Gary reinforcing this
> idea. He implied that John was the Word
> incarnate. And now, they have made Marilyn their
> sacred Goddess.
-------------------------------------------

Were were all in the same canoe or maybe it was a banana boat? There was no disclosure no disclaimers that we were to be made malleable to the ministries so we could be formed into "little gods." I didn't sign up for that. The This Weeks were seductive but I don't think I ever wanted to be a "little god."

lily rose Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> changedagain Wrote:
>
> Conversations with Clint
> __________________________________________________
> _
>
> Clint Eastwood? Really?


Yes. I came across this book in our local library.

lily rose wrote: Also it seems to me ironic that Happy was voicing the Latter Rain Manifest Sons of God doctrine that believers will take on the divine nature of Christ. Didn't John also believe this? Isn't that why he was removed from the Assemblies of God Church? If I am wrong about this, please feel free to lay into me.

paleface wrote: I always wondered about this incident. If John didn't want to be deified, why didn't he gently correct Happy Clark? It hinted to me that John might possibly be off the mark at this point. Years later, I remember Gary reinforcing this idea. He implied that John was the Word incarnate. And now, they have made Marilyn their sacred Goddess.

lily rose wrote: Were we all in the same canoe or maybe it was a banana boat? There was no disclosure no disclaimers that we were to be made malleable to the ministries so we could be formed into "little gods." I didn't sign up for that. The This Weeks were seductive but I don't think I ever wanted to be a "little god."

-----------------------------------

I ended up in the “Walk” because of fellowship with so many people close to my own age and there seemed to be plenty of life and it was cool. My theological background consisted of John 3:16 and the Christmas story.

I Googled, “Latter Rain Manifest Sons of God Doctrine,” and there were many sites to choose from. I looked at a couple of sites and was surprised at how many terms, passages, inferences, thought patterns and general themes presented that were completely familiar to me. I know the doctrine already even though I never specifically studied it-----------so, why?

lily rose stated, “I didn’t sign up for that!” I didn’t either. Well, welcome to the “Twilight Zone” and I suppose this forum is helping us to realize that we’re far down a path that most “Christians” haven’t travelled.

One of the most disturbing things is these sights use a lot of terms like ‘militant’, ‘radical’, ‘fringe’ and so forth in the discussion. Great--------can we even trust ourselves to judge rationally?

Back in the ‘tail-spin’ again.

FCSLC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> I Googled, “Latter Rain Manifest Sons of God
> Doctrine,” and there were many sites to choose
> from. I looked at a couple of sites and was
> surprised at how many terms, passages, inferences,
> thought patterns and general themes presented that
> were completely familiar to me. I know the
> doctrine already even though I never specifically
> studied it-----------so, why?
_________________________________________________________
There's some lengthy discussion on fact net that much of what John said was his own revelation or the next new thing, was latter rain manifest sons of god doctrine. If only we had the internet and google back then. Could have saved ourselves from so much.