This post addresses some of your comments. I would have done a more personal reply, but I have several projects in the works. I trust you understand.

Christian Commons, Eternal and Universal: Kingdom of God

God bless all.

Peace,

Tom

In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loves not his brother. For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
(1Jn 3:10-11)
We are about to misquote Paul. Please bear with us.

If a homeless beggar comes up to me on the streets and asks me for change and I look upon him with contempt as I toss him some coins so he will just go away, I did not love him I just gave him some change. He didn’t see Jesus, he was not loved.

I could do all kinds of wonderful things to help those less fortunate than I. I could build community centers, promote programs, but if I do not love everyone involved, even that annoying project planner that makes me sick because he is “one of those”, I am wasting Jesus’ time.

Just to do a “good” thing for the purpose of doing a good thing, maybe even someone noticing and patting us on the back is not love. It is just doing a good thing. LOVE on the other hand is bigger than all that. When love is the true motivator for good deeds then people see Jesus. They see God because God is love. They will be loved.
We want to love Jesus, and we want to love people. We are asking ABBA Father to show us how to do that. We are just not finding enough love in the churches. Yes, people are doing good things, and YES there are some in there who do LOVE with Jesus’ Love. But we want out. We believe other Followers and Lover’s of Jesus want out as well. What do we do? We want to find a place so the Lovers of Jesus can do the work they KNOW the Holy Spirit is calling them to do. American Churchianity is killing us. We are Sardis, we are Laodecia. So we humbly have been praying for an answer. We are calling out to Jesus to rescue us from this snare. We believe we have found it. At this point we are just calling it “house” fellowship because that is all it is. That is what it is called in other countries. A group of believer’s sharing the Word of God allowing the Holy Spirit to lead the teaching and ministering. We prayed and this vision came to us. Within the house fellowship no tithes or offerings are taken. There are no administrative costs so no need for weekly collections. Families within the fellowship have needs and the others bring whatever support is provided by Yahweh. It may be goods such as: food, clothes, furniture, and so on. It may be cash. It may just be time, prayer and a shoulder for comfort. But whatever the Holy Spirit leads, HIS WILL be done. The Fellowship is not lead by a single leader, but are elder-lead as was done in the Acts church. Keeping small, and planting other house fellowships as the original grows in size. Our vision is for these fellowships to be dedicated to houses. No plans for expanding into larger buildings ever, they will remain house fellowships. This is just our frame work. It will grow as the Holy Spirit leads. The Holy Spirit will call the ministers, the anointing of the gifts, the power to heal by laying on of hands, the power to cast out demons, the power to raise up folks from the dead, either spiritually or by teaching them about being born again, or maybe actually physically raising them up from the dead. All of this includes the DAILY ministering of feeding and clothing the poor, caring for the widows and orphans as the Holy Spirit directs and provides for. Everything Jesus did, we want to do. We PRAY, PRAY, PRAY, all will be done according to God’s Will. Currently we are reaching out to the homeless. We are praying the Holy Spirit will lead our steps as we open up our home for fellowship. Please pray for us as we proceed. See we need “people” too.
It is interesting how all 3 of us have been searching for the same thing. We believe it is possible, since all things are possible with God, to grow both ministries.
We do not know what you think but we feel we have been having fellowship with you, Tom. By discussing the WORD of God, and sharing the FACE of Jesus that we each see, the FACE we each have come to love and adore. We wondered why Jesus wanted us to see your site. We had a lot of ideas, but recently it has been revealed. You have challenged us to really reach farther with our hearts to explore and grasp the sharing and giving ministry of Jesus Christ.

We are not in agreement that the Commons Project is going to heal the planet. Our goal for the house fellowship dose not include healing the planet. We believe John wrote the truth in Revelation. We do not find scripture to support the Commons as you describe it will overthrow globally the hardheartedness of the world.Revelation contradicts that idea.
We are planning on and looking anxiously forward to Jesus’ return and taking us to the Eternal Mansion He is preparing for us. We are not convinced we are to build that mansion for ourselves. But we are convinced to give the message that we are all created in the Image of the Creator of Heaven and Earth. A central theme of that image, we feel the true glory of that image is LOVE. God created us to love HIM and one another. Adam and Eve loved their curiosity more than The Creator. They disobeyed HIM. And thus knowing good and evil has made it so very hard on each of us to Choose Love all the time. But this was not the end all be all for relationship between the Creator and the created. Jesus Christ the son of God, who is the epitome of Loving the Heavenly Father and loving His brothers/sisters shows us how to choose Love all the time. His message is about Love. His message is all about Love. Not human temporary or self serving Love but THE LOVE of the Heavenly Father. His Agape Love can only be written in our hearts by the invisible hand of the Holy Spirit. Jesus’ behavior is Love. His instruction is Love. His provision is Love. He is Love, and He asked His Followers once again to obey 2 commandments, on which all the rest hang “Love Me, and love each other. And then He died and rose from the dead on the 3rd day for us because this situation is more than flesh and blood it was spiritual. The situation has a contender that is spiritual. And in order for the fulfillment of all things the Holy Spirit needed to be dispatched to seal the true Follower’s and Believers for the day of redemption. Jesus knew the contender would try very ferociously to steal HIS children from HIS Hand. But We can not be pluck from HIS Hand when the Holy Spirit seals us. Even in physical death we can not be plucked from Jesus hand.
Once that beastly mark arrives and the image that must be worshipped is installed, we will see prophecy being fulfilled and it will all make sense. The world will see then who are the Lover’s of Jesus and who are the lovers of evil. We are not going to heal the Earth or her inhabitants becasue some will CHOOSE not to be healed.
Some will choose to believe lies.
Many will say in that day Lord Lord…..” But Jesus will not take them to Heavenly mansions. He will not take them to the marriage supper of the Lamb. He will only take the Children of God, the Children of Light, the Children of Love because Jehovah is serious about the choice He has commanded us to make. Choose you this day evil or good. Choose death or Choose life. Choose curses or choose blessing. Who will you serve the Creator of Heaven and Earth or yourself? Even Jesus says don’t be lukewarm, just choose. People need to know He is coming back quickly.
The world is suffering because those who say they know Jesus don’t know how to choose LOVE. They can not SHOW Love. This does not give a good contrast for people to choose between. If the so called “good’ people look so evil, and evil doesn’t look quite so evil. There is no contrast, and with out the contrast how can we see the choice?
We believe Heavenly Father is still showing contrasts so we can know how to choose the good and reject the evil. How to Choose HIM which is Eternal Life and healing.
We believe your work is part of that contrast, and we are happy to be co-laborers in Christ in showing contrasts as well.
We appreciate the time it took for you to read all this. We do not want to be competitors, or enemies. We really are part of the same Fellowship of the Heavenly Father, Jesus the only Begotten son, and the Holy Spirit as all three bear witness as the ONLY Creator of Heaven & Earth.
May the exceedingly abundant love and riches of Christ Jesus be yours now and Eternally,
Quazi and Saijah

Concerning the issue of financial transparency and the questions you asked me about what I've done personally by way of alms giving and other deeds,
I added the following to my comment of Jan. 1, above:

Please see: Christianity, Open-Book Accounting (Financial Transparency), and Doing Thine Alms in Secret. Also, on our Finance page, I stated the following policy that is as consistent with Jesus's teachings as I'm able to make it:

Our aim is transparency or what is called open-book accounting. With the exception of protecting donors and people under confidential pastoral care, we will lean toward sharing our accounting with our membership.

We will endeavor to post general accounting information on our website.

I thought I would point this out to you since you may have already read that comment above and may have intended to return to it.

Tom

A great deal of emphasis has been placed upon the term "liberal." However, even more important is the term "churl." It is the churls who have obscured the Christian requirement to be liberal, to be simultaneously generous and not morally unrestrained and licentious (harmful). The churls are in charge. The stingy, miserly, and avaricious are in charge. They don't want people to know the real meaning of liberal. Nor do they want people who want to act in accordance with correct Christian interpretation knowing that liberality doesn't mean license to do whatever one wants but rather the requirement to bring forth only bountifully and beneficially. This is why I have ...nor the churl said to be bountiful. (Isaiah 32:5) so clearly placed atop the website. The churls are the current false libertarian-conservatives who seek to conserve the tradition of falsehood that is their self-defined economic legal system that is nothing more than the totally unenlightened law of the jungle. They are humanists first and foremost. I believe there is a place for humanism under God. This is why the term "secular humanism" arose, to differentiate it from Christian concerns for the welfare of fellow human beings, which Jesus emphasized when he said those who feed and clothe, etc., God's children are also feeding and clothing the King. The King considers them an integral part of himself, and rightly so.

You also asked about ways to support this ministry. If you will read, "Ways to Support the Real Liberal Christian Church," that should give you some ideas.

Another thing I wanted to flesh out some more, concerns your view of sitting and typing. In the beginning of the Christian Commons Project™, someone writes. Another farms or makes shoes or windmills. Some do multiple tasks. Most rotate around as the need arises and the Spirit moves the whole.

When there are members and volunteers enough, I won't have to spend so much time sitting and typing. Tasks may then be broken up. Tasks may then be delegated as the body of the Church sees fit. Don't you think I look forward to doing all the other things entailed in bringing forth the Christian Commons Project™ and the feeding of his lambs and sheep? I want to roll up my sleeves, literally, and work the soil and do all sorts of other things all for the sake of the many. I don't want to work for self, as especially so many Libertarians come here to press me to want to do. I reject their temptation. It isn't even tempting at all. It repulses me. I'm sick of their preaching selfishness. The world has had more than enough of that! It never should have had any of it.

Now does that sound like it's coming out of the heart of a greedy televangelists or a con artist? If it does, you just don't get it.

For you, the main question is now that of trustworthiness and money. For you, it's not a matter of whether or not small-c, Christian communism (non-Marxist), community property, communalism, or whatever you wish to term it, is acceptable or even desirable. For you, it isn't whether or not sitting and typing all day is a good bit of work. For you, it's a question of whether or not someone will abscond with the purse. For many others who come here, however, collectivism of any kind, to any degree, is an assault upon their individual freedom, as only they define the term "freedom." Many don't define freedom as being free from want. However, much more importantly, many don't define it as being free from the evil of selfishness. They rather laud selfishness, which of course, as you are well aware, is a very antichrist spirit to hold or to promote. In addition, what follows from that is their position that anyone doing any work for the unselfish purpose of a collective effort to bring forth what Jesus said to bring forth (that includes feeding his lambs and sheep), unless that effort is done for-profit or is at least subservient to the for-profit system, those people, those workers, don't really have a real "job," again, as only the naysayers define the term "job." For many of these misled and misleading people, a real job is where people pay one for working for selfish profit. The moment anyone receives funds for working for or running an unselfish enterprise, that one is not only not working a real job but is engaging in evil deception and is hiding a selfish agenda, has to be a hypocrite since everyone has to be according to these Hobbists. This of course is antichrist and basically atheistic, albeit not all-inclusive of the meaning of atheism in the common parlance.

Now, as for trusting the one with the purse, if you will read the applicable sections of the

DENOMINATIONAL CANONS

and

DENOMINATIONAL COMMUNE CANONS,

you will see that the plan includes general-accepted safeguards for accessing Church financial accounts. The plan is to require more than one signature on checks above a certain amount. Other such accounting and financial procedures can be, and will be, put into place as the accounts grow and as there are more members (hence more board members and those available to work in accounting). You will also see that the entire process is simultaneously bottom-up and top-down, which really translates into level. The object is to rotate people around so that all may be as well-rounded as possible. Among other things, this will train people to begin other commons locations. Understand that those CANONS are only the starting place for doing things correctly.

I hope this additional information helps you.

Tom

People's styles differ. We have different styles. Today, it appears that more and more people expect others to be on their wavelength even though there are also apparently many more wavelengths than used to be. Jesus used language in a style. His style irritated the Pharisees and Sadducees. I know you are aware of that. I'm not trying to talk down to you here.

What I see in the world is too much changing of the subject. I see it as a method people use to avoid getting to the root of the matter. This is not to say that the two of you are disinterested in getting to the root of the matter or that changing the subject is inherently wrong. There are those you should admit who do use changing the subject as a method of avoiding deep introspection because they don't want to think about how they are in error. They don't want to be corrected. Here too, I want to clarify.

I like, even love, being corrected. I love it when I discover how I have been veering off so I may get back on course. This is the attitude I would love to see in everyone because of the huge benefit it would have. For me, it is part and parcel of repentance, which for those who may not know is returning to God who is righteousness and real love.

I like politeness. I like good manners. I like thoughtfulness. There isn't anything wrong with those things, per se. In fact, if they are understood correctly and meted out consistently, there wouldn't be any problems. What is a problem is when they are used to mask the ravenous wolf inside. We've all heard of Satan being described as very refined, sophisticated, cosmopolitan, gentlemanly, well-educated, wealthy, cultured, modern, and things along those lines. At the same time, behind all those qualities lies the heart of the savage beast waiting to pounce. Of course, we've also heard that the spirit that masks the savage beast can take many forms. So outwardly, it can be the opposite of all those qualities cited above too and in any combination. The thing we must ask about ourselves is how much of that masking spirit is in us. Really, that translates into how much of the savage beast is at our core. It is that devouring spirit we each must overcome. It can be done. It's why Isaiah said that the savage beasts will be tamed and led by the child &mdash clearly portending Jesus in my view.

As for your question about Isaiah 32:5 and my passing it back, I understand that you didn't think that I had already answered you. I believe I had, but that you didn't follow. Therefore, I tried a different approach. This is a matter of style. You aren't used to my style and I'm not used to yours. I wish to get to the heart of the matter. I don't ever pass the time anymore. I don't ever hang out (spend time idly). I did that in my youth, not always, but plenty of it — too much in fact. That's well behind me.

When the time is appropriate we will understand Isaiah 32:5 according to HIS exceeding Riches in Glory. Not having the same understanding as you will not diminish our faith, nor should it diminish your conviction.

Ask, seek, and knock. Not having the whole of scripture opened up to us is not to diminish our faith or the conviction of others. I agree.

We understand it is important to you because of your conviction that up until this point Christianity has not been Real, or Liberal according to this verse. We hope we have understood you correctly.

What has been trying to pass itself off as Christianity, especially since Constantine I usurped the leadership by evil means for evil ends, has not been real or liberal according to this verse and according to Jesus who fulfills the verse. You have not stated your position concerning Constantine I.

Concerning Acts 4:32, you wrote

But did Jesus ever preach or commission the followers to put all their resources into “common”, no we don’t believe that.

The Anabaptists, of course, are not confined to the Amish you cite as not holding all things in common. However, it must be said that you have not asked the Amish how they view their possessions. You haven't asked them whether or not they believe that their possessions are really God's. You haven't asked them whether or not they believe that they are obliged to share their possessions with their brethren if the situation arises.

The Hutterites are also Anabaptists who own huge collective farms. They were so successful in Canada that for a time they were barred from obtaining more land because their model of holding the property in common was out competing those families and business that were less leveled.

Nevertheless, that the practice was not continued immediately after the destruction of Jerusalem (and you don't know with certainty that it wasn't, since many fled and could easily have taken the practice with them but it wasn't recorded in history) is no indication that it is not what Jesus meant for his followers. If one were to apply that reasoning consistently, it would lead to agreeing with acts done in the name of Christianity simply based upon how widespread and accepted those acts were and are. That's not how Jesus described the narrow way. It's not the result of a poll.

Jesus and his disciples did keep a common purse but we figure that was as much a part of drawing them into trust with HIM, as it made it easier to conduct the business of the day. No where do we see Peter or the others selling their homes, causing their whole families to be wanderers with Jesus. We see them going from house to house being cared for and in turn ministering to.

How then do you read (interpret) the following: And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life. Matthew 19:29. But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life. Mark 10:30.

Here is how I interpret it. All the houses of all the people who gladly took in Jesus and his disciples are those houses of which he is speaking immediately above. All the people in those houses are his brothers, sisters, mothers, and children. I don't see how a Christian can read it otherwise. The only missing are fathers, but their males and covered by brothers. He reserved the father figure to God. I like that.

You see, if someone with a farm were to decide to treat his or her farm in that shared-ownership manner, then that person would be as those who opened their homes and no doubt farms, as he said lands, to Jesus and his disciples, not claiming their possessions as their own, but the property of all those of that spirit. In that way, they would not have to sell their possessions, nor did they all, to be part of that body.

I hope this sheds more light on the subject.

We do not believe that Jesus preached was against personal possessions or property.

How familiar are you with the position of the laissez faire capitalists? They go to very extended depths to define property. They do it in a way that absolutely precludes Matthew 19:29 and Mark 10:30 above. There are those (a tiny minority) among them who attempt to get people to agree with their definition but go on to say that once their private rights are affirmed, then they will discuss the obligation of Christian charity. What they are missing is that Jesus was not coercive and neither am I. That right there, the absence of coercion in Christianity as intended by Jesus, takes care of their supposed right. I say supposed here because the right they are asserting is that no one has the right to coerce them from following the laws of economics as only they define them and to the exclusion of Jesus's law of the multiplication of the loaves. The self-styled Christian Libertarian Capitalists are being very convoluted rather than going at it directly. In real Christianity, there is no such private-property ownership (allodial title) in light of God's ownership of all things and all Christians sharing all as one with God and Jesus dwelling within, in the Kingdom of God and Heaven within and that outwardly manifests where faith is great enough.

Neither the behaviors of Greed and Idolatry are necessarily corrected by having a community purse.

Truth. That's why we are not to take any aspect of Jesus's teachings in isolation. The common purse is only a part of the full revelation.

An important factor to be considered is: Can and will the people trust the one who holds the purse? In your Commons model someone(s) must be the steward(s) of that common purse.

Your thinking on this is understandable in that we haven't discussed it before. The Christian Commons Project™ is not always contiguous as the lower 48 states of the U.S. are contiguous. The purse doesn't have to be held in one location. Look, the money of the Roman Catholic Church is really one purse. I'm not holding them up here as the shining example. I'm simply using them so you'll see how one purse is not necessarily how you've been envisioning it. The difference between the Roman Catholic Church one purse and the Real Liberal Christian Church one purse is that the Roman Catholic Church one purse is owned and controlled by the clergy to the exclusion of the laity. In the Real Liberal Christian Church and the Christian Commons Project™, the one purse, as diversely held as it will end up being, is the property of the Church that is its members.

Judas Iscariot held the community purse and seemed a trustworthy man. But scripture teaches us that responsibility of the purse did not override his propensity to theft.

Jesus saw through him, but how did he know him? Judas said things that were not consistent with Jesus's views and revealed the inner workings of Judas's heart. Remember, Jesus said, Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. Matthew 12:34. Evil people don't consistently advocate good things. Am I advocating anything that isn't good? Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. Matthew 15:11. What have I written that you've read here that has defiled me?

Jesus didn't let Judas carry the purse to make the point for posterity that no one is ever to be trusted. Since Jesus called money unrighteous and since Judas was the carrier, aren't we to see the connection in light of the error of selfishness that is so wrapped up in money? I believe so. We must remember the Apostles continued the common purse despite Judas. Why did they trust any one of their circle? Why did anyone trust Peter after Peter had denied Jesus?

When Jesus sent out the 70 in pairs He gave no instruction that one should hold the purse. In fact Jesus sent them out penniless, dependant on the mercy and generosity of those they would preach to.

So, who held the purse while the pairs were gone? Who was trustworthy enough? This serves to illustrate the point I've been making with the Libertarian Capitalists that ultimately money isn't even needed where there is a giving and sharing economy, which is exactly what those pairs experienced firsthand, to their amazement and delight.

The money and purse are to be translated into what the hosts of the pairs did. The hosts had money, but they used it opening their houses to those of likeminded spirit. Their homes were the disciples' homes.

The lesson wasn't as engrained as it might have been and through no fault of Jesus's. Money was never needed thereafter. It wasn't needed after Jesus left except that his followers lived with hypocrites surrounding them. Returning to God as humanity is taking a very, very long time with many ups and downs along the way.

We do believe is the picture of the early community of Followers of Jesus just might be a “shadow of things to come”.

Absolutely it is. It goes beyond the coming wrath but to after it is over also. Heaven is the wholly shared place. There is no money in Heaven. The currency there is love.

Is your description of the “COMMONS” the only way of doing community and serving Jesus? We don’t really think so.

You're still viewing the Commons in isolation as opposed to Heaven within coming out. You're not looking at "my house is your house," as those who opened their door in peace and kept the peace with Jesus and his disciples.

And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you. Matthew 10:13. How do you interpret that? I believe I know that it means what I've been saying on this website. The worthy are those of this spirit that all that is in their possession is not their personal, private property but rather God's and all those who feel likewise. It does not belong to those who are unworthy, meaning of the spirit of selfishness that causes all the harm in this world.

Are we prepared to help?

We suppose this is about helping with money donations. No we are not prepared to give you money at this time. Are there any other ways to support your ministry?

I've addressed this often. I know I've covered it with you. However, if you don't agree yet with the definition of the Christian Commons Project™, you can't really inform people that you've found a plan that's right. You still aren't convinced. If you were convinced, you'd promote it in all the ways God move souls to be messengers.

We are not against community property or communism as you like to call it.

That puts you in a distinct and tiny minority right now. You realize that, don't you. Also, I used the term communism intentionally to take back the concept from the atheists whom the Capitalist gave the term for the reason of definitely wanting to disassociate it from Christianity, which cannot rightly be done, since Heaven is free of money and is communist or communal or shared or whatever synonym(s) you care to use.

I haven't blacklisted Paul. I have said, as you pointed out yourself that "his work was so easily perverted by the preachers and priests of denominations." That is not to say that I agree with everything Paul wrote. I don't agree with all of his positions. Some of them are definitely not consistent with the thrust of Jesus's own words. Now, this assumes that what has been attributed to each of them is fundamentally accurate. I don't hold with all things "Protestant Higher Criticism," neither do I say that some of their leanings are not more consistent with the spirit of Jesus's message than are the leanings of those who call themselves Fundamentalists. I was raised in "Protestant Higher Criticism," in case you're wondering if I have room to speak on the subject. Also, it isn't just preachers and priests of denominations who pervert. There's plenty of perverting of the message going on in so-called nondenominational churches.

I believe I know that both Fundamentalism and Protestant Higher Criticism in their most literal and extreme version are in error. I'm not against extremism mind you. I'm for it. I'm for being extremely Christlike, so much so that we all become indistinguishably Christian. I feel this is one of those statements of mine that will leave you wondering what I'm talking about. However, perhaps you're catching onto my style enough that you'll make the connections without any additional explanation on this point from me.

It was not my intention to assign to you responsibility for defending the Roman Catholics, Orthodox, Calvinists, or Lutherans, etc. I really was trying to open up the discussion so I could see how to answer your questions. Doing that helps to anticipate.

We really are very clueless as to what the “five solas” are and to date have not really taken any time to look it up.

I'm glad you've shared that. It's why I asked you.

We simply are not interested in doctrines of men.

Excellent. Neither am I except to work to dispel them so all of Christianity will be one again, as it started out. You aren't there yet. You're not standing against those doctrines in the sense I mean. Those doctrines are used to harm people, to justify war and greed and all the rest. In order that people will turn back to head in the right direction of unselfishness, it is necessary to explain that about which they are now doing that is headed in the wrong direction. Jesus did this same thing.

The thing about the doctrines is that they invariably are based upon truth but are designed to observe half-truths or partial-truths. Most of their adherents refuse to examine their doctrines in the whole light. It is too unsettling for them. They are very quickly uncomfortable with having to defend their positions from questions of hypocrisy. The reasons for this discomfort vary. Some, even most, preachers just don't want to upset the gravy train (their source of income that requires little effort yet yields them considerable profit). I on the other hand want no such profit. The profit I seek is that which will bring forth exactly the spirit I described above: The "my house is your house" spirit (qualified by the whole of the message and life of Jesus).

It is okay if we disagree with your understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

For me, it depends upon what you mean by "okay." I believe that it is not approved by God and Jesus that the sharing way is not the narrow way.

Our disagreement with you should not be such a federal offense.

I disagree. I believe that it is incumbent upon you to come to the same position I have regarding why the people opened up their homes and lands to Jesus and how that ties directly to his message of giving and sharing and Heaven and godliness. I believe that short of that, you're leaving the gate to the wide path open for yourselves and those you influence away from this interpretation I've shared with you.

Your faith ought to lead you to it rather than this causing you to lose your faith. You have faith. I'm just saying have more. I want more faith too. The disciples wanted more. They asked Jesus how to get it. He said do more in faith and your faith will grow.

• You write Jesus came to teach us how to establish and run the “Commons” until He returns to heal the Earth.

The Christian Commons is part of healing the Earth. Jesus is already here in us.

• You wrote that the Commons is salvation, and it is Heaven. You wrote the Commons is God because God is in all things and of all things.

God is spoken of via connotations. God is spoken of within contexts. God is the real life and the real love, and where those things are absent from the heart, God is also absent. That's one connotation and context. Nothing exists except for God. That's another connotation and context. These two connotations and contexts are not paradoxical. The reason human kind struggles with such concepts and finds them incompatible is because of human traditions and human doctrines that have stunted spiritual growth. These things are no paradox within the divine logic of God. I reconcile them without hesitation. I arrived there by accepting the eternal and infinite. Once I did that, the whole message opened and continues to open.

• You have decided not to acknowledge Jesus as the Lamb of God Slain from the Foundations of the Earth for the remission of sins.

• You have decided to teach that sins are not an issue as long as we join the Commons, donate money, and follow the extensive doctrines of the Commons.

You should have put that in the form of a question to save yourself from accusing me of blasphemy. How did you jump to these conclusions? I never said any such things, not even remotely so.

How do you reconcile that you've come to the conclusion that I'm against harm but that I also hold that sins are not an issue?

• You teach that good works like those examples of Jesus and the people of Act 4:32 is our salvation.

Well, here's where you have so much trouble with the faith versus works issue that I initially asked you about the solas. You see, you're verging over into the doctrines of men without realizing it because you haven't studied them to know what to counteract and why, what's at stake, etc.

You keep ignoring what I say about this. It's as if you are hypnotized not to see the words I've written concerning it. I have said repeatedly, ad nauseam, that faith and works go together. I have made it very clear that people can feign good works and that doing that will not grant them access to Heaven. Heaven is not for those who do works without the faith in all that Jesus taught and did. I do though say with all certainty that no one can do good works within the particular context in which Jesus used the term "good" and not be good and faithful. It isn't possible. You'll have to study your Gospels for the term good to see what I mean here. So, there are good works and then there are good works, just as there is the manna and then the real bread. Dwell on it until you see it. It will help.

Also, look up the word "antinomianism." Then realize that that is what you are up against and not just those who hold with deeds without faith. The faith without deeds crowd is even more dangerous, and they come straight out of taking huge advantage of Paul's lack of emphasis on works: Faith almost to the exclusion of deeds (which is exactly the license the antinomians love to exploit). Listen, all you need to do is see the results of antinomians to know how dangerous it is. I've seen families ripped apart by it. I've seen people justify all their addiction with it. Liberality is the code word they use. It's a completely misreading of the term. It has nothing to do with real liberty that is always good, as God is always good because the real liberty comes directly from God and leads directly back to God.

You write: “The cross is atoning. We are to take up our crosses. We are to atone. We are to be sacrificial for the sake’s of our friends who are those who know and love the truth when they hear it that unselfishness is better than selfishness and perfect unselfishness is God.”

This is a noble thought, but it is not the teaching of Jesus. He told us to love EVERYONE, not just our friends. He said to sacrifice for our enemies as well. He said to turn the other cheek, to sacrifice our rights and FORGIVE our enemies and also to pray for them. (MATT 5:44)

What this indicates is not using the given terms within their context while at the same time seeing everything from the fullest context. Jesus said love, but he also hated. Why do you not see that? Why don't you read that as well? He also said to let the spiritually blind alone so they will fall in the ditch. You must come to the point where you have reconciled these things. He came not to bring peace but to divide. He came to prophesy against them. That is, he came to speak the truth to them and about them that they were being evil and would suffer the consequences if they didn't stop, which they didn’t.

He forgave them whom didn't know what they were doing. He showed mercy from the cross. He warned everyone out of his spirit of love. In the end though, only those who accept him, enter. The rest he doesn't know, and neither do I. The rest will be out where there will be the pain and suffering they inflicted on other and failed to address. It's just the way of it, and neither God nor Jesus judges or condemns, even though the truth is the judge and Jesus is the truth. To read the language of the revelation of Jesus, you have to use truth here in the different contexts intended.

DO you not agree that Jesus DIED for EVERYONE, the whole world, friend and foe???

John 3:1 – 36

I reconcile that with what is written above it. Will you?

We do not believe or teach that the cross is salvation. It could have been any weapon that would have resulted in Jesus death. It is the blood not the weapon that has any power. Not unlike the serpent stick Moses held up for the plagued Israelites to look upon. It was not the stick that cleansed them of the curse it was the obedience in looking up as the LORD of HOSTS commanded them to.

Look, I could say you've left out the body. You mentioned the blood but not the body. The cross as I speak of it is not always some physical icon or an actual torture cum killing device. It's just as with the temple. The temple is within. You're turning the cross into a brazen thing. You can do the same with the wine and bread if you're not of the right spirit. Why are you worried about this with me? I don't have the problem you're attempting to address. I never have. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. Matthew 10:38. That's what matters. What he did on the cross is that of which the cross image is to remind us, just as the wine and bread in Holy Communion. The cross is part of the path to salvation when it is properly understood as being the reminding symbol of Jesus demonstrating the New Commandment. He showed the degree and type of love necessary for repentance, atonement, and the remission of sin to perfection eternal. He showed (manifested) God. He revealed God's true nature: Merciful, self-sacrificial, and saving for those who believe and only those who believe. So, when you say he died for everyone, you must not exclude that he died for his believers then and to come. The rest, he doesn't know and they don't know him. They are of the other spirit that doesn't enter into God's Kingdom.

This Blood just like the blood of the Passover Lamb was to cover God’s people from the angel of Death.

• God’s children, His People are as Jesus speaks in John chapter 3, those who are Born Again.

Don't you see that you're saying what I'm saying? Don't you see that you've just excluded from the "everyone" for whom Jesus died all those who are not born again? Therefore, you've assigned Jesus's death to different peoples for different reasons. In other words, you've used different contexts without apparently realizing. Did he die for everyone or the born again? I say he died for both but in different ways. He died for everyone in that he afforded everyone the opportunity to hear and to accept the New Commandment. I also say, as would he, that those who are given by God's grace to accept that opportunity are those who do accept in their own freewill. This again is paradoxical for so many. It is so because of the hardness of their hearts. I can't force anyone to see it. I can only say it let them sort themselves.

You quoted Revelation 20:11-15. You will note that it says we will be judged according to our works. Of course, works includes words and thoughts and emotions and spirit.

How are we stumbling your ability to love and follow God as you understand?

You aren't causing me to fall to temptation. You might ask what temptation you're offering. It just comes back to your not seeing that the giving and sharing way is eternally right and good. It isn't just for stressful times. It is, in fact, the way to not have the stress in the first place. Saijah and Quazi, if Heaven is money free, if it's everything given free of charge, if Heaven is within, if we pray for Heaven on Earth as part of the Lord's Prayer, then why don't you already have this in your hearts to want to bring forth, to shine, to glorify God?

Jesus is more than just a message. He is the Savior of the whole world because we need a Savior. To make the Gospel solely about good works and dramatically changing the evil of the world demeans the Gospel.

The Good News is that there is salvation from ................... evil! How is that demeaning the News?
Here again, you're boxing me in, in your minds where there is no box. Jesus is the word. Ask yourselves what that means. The word is love. God is love. God is the word. That's the message, and it's everything. It is too salvation. Believing in his name is salvation. His name is God Saves. What saves? The message saves, the words saves, love saves. Why do you insist upon compartmentalizing where the whole thing speaks of the whole thing? Jesus is the message when his message is everything that matters. That's the context.

To speak only that it is about mercy, forgiveness and grace also demeans the Gospel. If we refuse to deal with the whole Gospel of Jesus Christ which is about mercy and forgiveness AS WELL as good works that lead people to Jesus following HIS commandments to make the world full of HIS Light, we demean it and turn we diminish ourselves as HIS Followers. Let’s not be tempted to slice the truth up into convenient pieces for our own purposes.

I know you're addressing this to me, but why? From the Alpha and Omega please hear me, when one is speaking of mercy, one is speaking of forgiveness and grace and faith and good works and the light and truth and the way....and the blood and wine and the body and the real bread and God and every Christian and the whole Church. It's all one. You left out love in the paragraph above; yet, I know that even though it isn't listed, it's still there. There is no mercy where there is no love and there is no love where there is no mercy. It's why I know that it is Satan and his fallen angels who will take those who reject Jesus into the lake of fire with him. It is God who will show the mercy of taking all the others: The forgiving and forgiven believers.

You feel that wrath has come and gone.

You really need to stop jumping to conclusions. Just because I call what the Romans did wrath, does not necessarily mean I believe there is no wrath to come. The two world wars were wrath. The Iraq War is wrath. I never asserted that Jesus's "prophecies were just in regards to the Roman takeover of Jerusalem."

However, for you to call it no big deal is very hardhearted. I don't believe you've studied it. I don't believe you understand what the Romans did to the Jews. The crucifixes stretched along the roads as far as the eye could see. They cut open the stomachs of live women who had swallowed a few coins per chance they might survive and be able to buy some bread for their besieged children. They leveled the Temple building and made Jerusalem look as if it had never been. They spent years ramping up to Megiddo just to get at the few holdouts, all of whom committed suicide rather than face what the Romans would have done to them. Jesus felt for them all knowing it was coming as he did. He had wished they would have all listened to him and done what he asked because the abomination never would have happen if they had.

This vision is for all races and ages. So far, I've primarily attracted naysayers, which is understandable. I'm against greed, violence, and sexual harm. I've written for giving and sharing all and pacifism that is harmlessness in all matters. I have written on matters and have not hesitated to link to sites that don't agree. People follow those links and voice their opposition. Nevertheless, I'm confident that good seeds are being spread and that there is fertile soil out there. This is the same basis upon which Jesus ministered. People are more jaded now than then though you ought to know.

To answer you, I have no spouse. I am a father.

You ask me about my almsgiving and to boast about good works. I'll refrain from acceding to your request. You shouldn't have asked. What I'm doing that you can see is enough for you to go on. The whole turn to invasive transparency is in reaction to cheats, but it makes trust stink. I'm not going to list here the things I've done. It's not my style. I'm not of that spirit.

If you want to think I don't do any good deeds, that's up to you.

Please see: Christianity, Open-Book Accounting (Financial Transparency), and Doing Thine Alms in Secret. Also, on our Finance page, we stated the following policy that is as consistent with Jesus's teachings as we are able to make it:

Our aim is transparency or what is called open-book accounting. With the exception of protecting donors and people under confidential pastoral care, we will lean toward sharing our accounting with our membership.

We will endeavor to post general accounting information on our website.

We know you want to make some positive changes to the world. For that we applaud you. We are trying to expand the one dimensional intellectual picture you offer. Don’t be offended but after reading a lot of the other posts and comments it appears your audience has come to the same conclusion. Is Tom just sitting at his computer posting and writing?? Really you can’t blame us. You are asking us to give money to basically words on a page, basically just to pay your rent. A workman is worth his wages, and we are just asking to understand why you deserve to be the “keeper of the Common Purse”? Why should we trust you?

Words on a page is exactly what The Bible is. Why do you have faith in those words on those pages? I'm not asking people to just pay my rent. If that is all this is about, I would be scrambling for a white collar job. I've been there. This is about building up for farmland and more for the whole Church, all members to share and from which to give bountifully. That's clear. If you doubt it, there's nothing I can do about it. How could you trust any charity with your approach? Who would come up with the Christian Commons Project™ only to turn out to be a liar? Regardless, Jesus said give to one who asks. Okay, I'm asking, but not for myself but for all those who will benefit. As far as I'm concerned, that's everyone who will have his or her name written in the Book of Life. I say that they are all for it.

You need to not say "us" unless you want to be lumped in with those whom you have not studied. Have you followed the links to those who have borne false witness against me? Unlike you, for the most part, they hate the idea of a giving and sharing economy. Many of the things you've written that show openness to the Christian Commons would give them reason to insult you as well. To them, you're leaving the door open to not needing capitalism. To many of the visitors and commentators on this site, that's a capital crime, literally. You should go read some of the vindictive philosophy upon which they base their ideologies. They have no problem with coercion and punishment. Human might makes right for a goodly portion of them.

You have no idea the deceptive emails I've received. People pretend to be all sorts of things they aren't, to set me up so they can spring it that they were lying all along and that they really hate giving and sharing. It hasn't worked. All it has done is proved my point about the greedy and why the unselfish and harmless need to band together.

You know, all the while you've been reading what I've been writing and adding your own comments, you've steered completely away from any stand on torture or war. Do you consider it evil temptation to take such stands? You haven't said George W. Bush's name in any of this. I realize that neither of you vote for people in secular office. Neither do I anymore. Nevertheless, don't you feel obligated as a Christian to speak truth to power authorized by the evil spirit who rules this world? It's that same spirit of darkness that murdered Jesus. Aren't you concerned that the self-styled Christian Zionists are leading so many astray and fomenting wars rather than being blessed peacemakers? You haven't said anything about the rich being misled and misleading. Are you apolitical? Do you not consider that Jesus was political? You've written some about how things ought to be governed. The Christian Commons is to call people out of that world and into a different one that is part of making straight the way of the Lord. Here again, you must use the term "world" in multiple contexts.

What I read you saying is that I have to prove to you that I'm not a crook. How does one do that to your satisfaction? You are asking me to prove a negative. You said Saijah had been involved in some antichrist activities before converting. Prove to me that she's not still doing them. You can't.

You're falling into the mindset of people being mundanely guilty until they are proven innocent. That's Napoleonic law. It's also evil. Look, you follow Paul and he said check me out against the scriptures. Jesus said look at the person's results. I know I check out on my reading of the scriptures. I haven't written anything disqualifying me, have I? What rotten fruits do you see hanging on me? I'm a repentant sinner, but I'm not a con artist, as some state about me without knowing the least bit about me or spending more then a minute or two on the site mostly spent writing their unsubstantiated accusations. That's satanic behavior in case you don't know it.

What did Jesus do for the first thirty or so years of his life? Were they wasted? Were they in preparation? I wouldn't change it. How many prophets went unheeded for years? You're judging by a standard that you need to view in that context. As for what is or isn't manifesting from this ministry, who are you to say? Do you know what pause I've given anyone who might otherwise have done something he or she ought not? Do you know how long the seeds spread will last? Do you know the world has not been bettered by this website? No, you don't know any of those things.

• We know you don’t like Paul but really he said some pretty encouraging things like if we want to change the world we just need to walk in the Spirit, and stop walking after the flesh. Jesus produced good fruit every where HE went, and HIS followers should be producing His good fruit as well. Do you produce Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self control? Regardless of your irritation with Paul and the folks who misuse his words, don’t you agree Jesus taught us how to manifest these good works??

Your point being what exactly? As I said above, you don't know what impact this site has had. This site stands foursquare against some huge evils in the world. Don't you think that has any impact upon wavering visitors? Don't you think anything I've written ruminates in people's conscience, as it would not have otherwise? Don't you think that anything here has added to the enlightenment of any visitor? Not all of the comments have been negative you know. There are those who have admitted that they've never thought of many of the things the way they are expressed here.

Also, the reaction to Jesus's message isn't just the production of "Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self control." If it were, they would not have murdered him. The more Satan hates you, the closer you are to God. Oh, the satanic spirit hates everyone and really loves no one in the sense Jesus means love, but Satan hates God and Jesus most of all.

It takes time to build up momentum. It isn't easy to attract people to that about which they are unaware as an alternative to the status quo of Satan, god of the world the Empire of the U.S. and all such empires before it (all fallen). The worst thing to do is quit being that voice on the Internet. You seem to want me to quit. It's as if you were sent with that mission. Do you realize that that is how you are coming across?

• Just think what would happen to the Earth if those who really Believe Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and stopped playing church and honestly Lived according to the Holy Spirit? We would not be surprised if these true believers did choose to live in common community.

Exactly! That's what I've been writing. They pay lip service. It was Jesus's point. Why though do you take this half-hearted, lukewarm, weak-flavored position of yours then? Why aren't you encouraged by the vision of the Commons? Why aren't you full of zeal?

Have you read the Christian Commons Project™ post? Maybe that will help.

We are not being mean to you. We are looking for more evidence you are worthy of a tithe and or offering.

What evidence? Why in the world don't you believe the truth when you hear it? Honestly, just ask God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit directly and by name. Ask them, "Is Tom telling the truth?" Really, I'm not afraid of that. I'm encouraging you to do it. I guarantee that if you do it, really do it, knowing that you will receive the answer that the answer will be "Yes."

I am not lying. This site is not a lie. The idea is to translate mammon into feeding the lambs and sheep of God in a way consistent with Jesus's teachings. The world is not such that it is going to be free of hypocrisy so that we may all eat as from the multiplied loaves or the manna just by the snap of my fingers. God won't do it. The time for just giving out signs is over. The time for giving to the unworthy in such a miraculous way is over.

Think about the religion of science right now and how dominant that is. There are many more people in the world who don't believe in the possibility of the multiplication of the loaves than who do. That includes millions of people who call themselves Fundamentalists even. They say all the power of miracles is closed down.

There are Pentecostals and others who don't agree. Their growing more than those who think the Spirit doesn't speak to anyone, only the text is available. I don't hold with all things Pentecostal mind you, but the Holy Spirit definitely moves me. I won't go into detail, but it is irrefutable with me. I know it as well as I know anything.

It has been almost a year, it may be time to start asking yourself how you are standing in your own way and discouraging donations. It is easy to just say it is “OUR” fault, your audience. We are just too hardhearted. But is that really the problem??

When they didn't have water, they were about to stone even Moses. Think about that. Was the lack of water Moses's fault or his followers? He gave up entering that Promised Land to give them their water. Have I given up anything just to be on the Internet saying what I'm saying so that the thirsty might have a drink? I'm speaking out against the privatization of water. Are you?

It hasn't been almost a year. If you're going by the dates of the post on the site, that's not an accurate reflection. Just having an Internet presence doesn't mean that all the pieces were in place to take donations or that I had done any sort of publicizing.

You don't have a website, do you? It isn't just rolling off a log. Larger sites employ many people fulltime. The rich for-profit corporations suck in traffic via all sorts of temptations. Other sites receive plenty of donations not because they are offering up an unselfish solution but rather the exact opposite. Lots of sites have rich benefactors for the very reason that the site being benefited is preaching selfishness.

Quazi and Saijah, I don't know what else to say to you. You are ambivalent. You really need to ask God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit directly whether I'm telling the truth. I am not out to enrich myself. I want exactly what I've said. I don't want to lord it over anyone. I want friends who want what I want.

I hate Machiavellianism. That's what we're up against. Have you read Machiavelli? The neoconservatives have. They love his teachings. His teachings are antichrist.

God bless everyone in the universe.

Tom

Saijah had written:
“Quazi and I would like to thank you for your generous explanations of what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is to you. Your explanations have given us a little more insight into your ministry goals.
We will stand by our statements, as I am sure you stand by yours. With that said we do have some other inquires we would like to make concerning your church.”

What followed were a series of questions from us we felt would be appropriate to ask in getting to know you and your fellows. Metaphorically speaking, since we were guests in your house, knowing guests have certain privileges we decided to change the subject. We were satisfied by your answers. Contrary to your thoughts we did not come here to debate.
What we did not expect or respect was that you were not satisfied and you did not wish to change the subject.
We beg your forgiveness and mercy for our insensitivity.

The first question we wish to address is in response to our asking you how you came about making Isaiah 32:5 your banner verse for the web page. This was your response:

Tom asked: “Also, what does Isaiah 32:5 mean to you at this point?”

At first your answer put us off because you didn’t just answer the question, you passed it back. But then in a later comment you did give a very clear explanation. So thanks for clarifying. This verse doesn’t really mean that much to us. You are probably correct that it may be we are closed to it. We trust the Holy Spirit and the content He chooses for us to learn and understand. When the time is appropriate we will understand Isaiah 32:5 according to HIS exceeding Riches in Glory. Not having the same understanding as you will not diminish our faith, nor should it diminish your conviction. We believe Jesus reveals Himself differently at times to HIS Followers. We asked about the verse because we are curious and wanted to know why it was so important to YOU. We understand it is important to you because of your conviction that up until this point Christianity has not been Real, or Liberal according to this verse. We hope we have understood you correctly.
Another question you asked us:

Do you believe in Acts 4:32? Do you believe that this is the way Jesus commands his followers to be? “‘And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.” Acts 4:32 If you disagree, why do you? Were those disciples wrong? If you agree, is it the Christian Commons or not? If not, why not? If it is, are you prepared to help?

We believe that all scripture is inspired by the LORD of HOSTS. Yes we do see Act 4:32 as valid inspired scripture. Do we believe this is the way Jesus commands his followers to be, to make community…. for all time? Is that what you mean there? We could say Yes and No. Yes in that Jesus instructed us to be of one heart, of one soul walking in HIS Love and loving one another. But did Jesus ever preach or commission the followers to put all their resources into “common”, no we don’t believe that.
Tom You can believe that, we are not here to debate your conviction.
We are just answering your questions. We believe the followers of Jesus after the resurrection were under incredible stress and persecution. We feel these followers coalesced for a number of reasons, one being survival. After the first Acts fellowship of believer’s were all murdered or chased out of Jerusalem in 70 AD we don’t really see the same model of community for believers in any other testimonies of the Bible. History of the “church” illustrates that various groups along the lines of the early Anabaptists or Waldenses (?spelling) who were a tight knit group who did share commonly to some capacity. But even their present day offspring the Amish do not hold ALL things in common. They own separate property, hold separate resources, and have their own wealth. They are not above sharing and giving within the particular Amish community proper. But they do not have ONE Common “purse” as it were. They are not the best model, they are just a quick example.
Jesus and his disciples did keep a common purse but we figure that was as much a part of drawing them into trust with HIM, as it made it easier to conduct the business of the day. No where do we see Peter or the others selling their homes, causing their whole families to be wanderers with Jesus. We see them going from house to house being cared for and in turn ministering to. We have found no parables that speak of community pockets. A lot of the parables dealing with the kingdom of God show a wise ruler, someone with all the money, a king, so on. One such person in a couple parables gave wages to his servants. We do not witness the servants pooling their resources.
We do not believe that Jesus preached was against personal possessions or property. He was against Greed and idolatry. Neither the behaviors of Greed and Idolatry are necessarily corrected by having a community purse. An important factor to be considered is: Can and will the people trust the one who holds the purse? In your Commons model someone(s) must be the steward(s) of that common purse. Judas Iscariot held the community purse and seemed a trustworthy man. But scripture teaches us that responsibility of the purse did not override his propensity to theft.
When Jesus sent out the 70 in pairs He gave no instruction that one should hold the purse. In fact Jesus sent them out penniless, dependant on the mercy and generosity of those they would preach to.
Of course we do not think the disciples of Acts 4:32 were wrong. It isn’t about wrong or right. It is about a testimony. We do believe is the picture of the early community of Followers of Jesus just might be a “shadow of things to come”. It is very likely the persecution that is coming to the USA will sift the true believer’s from the “churchians”. Those True Followers of Jesus might just need to huddle together, share and share alike. We are not saying your idea is not a plausible one.
Could believers in 2008 choose to live in a community, putting all their resources into a “common” account? Sure, why not? Is your description of the “COMMONS” the only way of doing community and serving Jesus? We don’t really think so. Are we prepared to help?
We suppose this is about helping with money donations. No we are not prepared to give you money at this time. Are there any other ways to support your ministry?
We are not against community property or communism as you like to call it. Our difference of opinion has more to do with our understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. With that said we approach the next question.

Tom you wrote “Please tell us what we have answered you to this point with which you disagree–don’t stand by, if anything.”
The following is Quazi & Saijah not standing by.

From Post # 3 Oct 5th
Saijah wrote, “We are aware that you did not agree with our position.” …
(Tom you inserted after Saijah’s quote) “… You (Saijah) quoted Paul and raised the Protestant interpretations of grace and faith. I expounded upon that stating how Protestants have abused those terms to shirk the obligation to bring forth the Christian Commons. The Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches have also failed to be found so doing. All the nations that have had the word preached in them also now stand judged for their lack of real fruit. In order for you to help me to answer the further questions you asked, I in turn, asked you to inform me where you disagree, if at all. This was not to be harmful. Do you take exception to grace, faith, deeds, and fruits being simultaneous requirements? Does the implication that deeds and faith are inextricable disturb you? Have you been indoctrinated into the five solas? Have you been heavily influenced by the scriptural interpretation of those calling themselves conservative Calvinists and Lutherans? Do you stand back from the Christian Commons and Real Liberal Christianity based upon these solas? Are you more concerned about voicing a temporal order of grace, faith, and works than about doing the works that proved Jesus was Christ, per Jesus? God is grace, faith, and works. Which of these did he first, since he is beyond time? This is no stumbling block. God said, “Let there be light.”

We suppose the first place to begin is with your exception to Paul. It is a shame you have chosen to blacklist this author of inspired scripture just because his work was so easily perverted by the preachers and priests of denominations. We will attempt to share our understanding of the Gospel of Jesus solely with the scripture from 4 “gospels” and Isaiah. We hope you approve.
As it appears in your writings the Catholics, the Protestants, the Orthodox, Calvinists and Lutherans have disappointed or offended you by their interpretations. But we hardly think it appropriate to lay that ax to grind on us. We really are very clueless as to what the “five solas” are and to date have not really taken any time to look it up. We simply are not interested in doctrines of men. We just read the Bible. We ask the Holy Spirit to discern and give us understanding. We do not read books on doctrine. We might have some agreement with some teachings of those in denominations, but it is possible these teachings are actually from the Holy Spirit. If Followers of Jesus are of the same Spirit, they should agree in some teachings once in awhile.
It is okay if we disagree with your understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. You are free to believe and teach as you wish. Our disagreement with you should not be such a federal offense. We are secure in our faith. We are not trying to usurp your convictions or beliefs.
You want to know what we “disagree” with in your explanations of your understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. After reviewing all 4 of your posts we have concluded these understandings about The Gospel of Jesus Christ according to RLCC.
• You write that Jesus came to teach us how and why to do “good” works.
• You write Jesus came to teach us how to establish and run the “Commons” until He returns to heal the Earth.
• You write Jesus has commissioned His followers to put all earthly recourses into one community purse and to be a light of communism TO the world so they can see their error and change from hardheartedness to the softhearted ways of the Commons.
• You explained that the true followers of the Commons/Jesus would be gentle as doves not inflicting disease or other sexual harm on the planet.
• You wrote the Commons/ the RLCC is REAL and is representing a Liberal heart according to Isaiah 32:5
• You wrote that the Commons is salvation, and it is Heaven. You wrote the Commons is God because God is in all things and of all things.
We realize there is more but these seem to be the main points.
We can agree with your teachings that Jesus came to teach us how to love one another as He loved us. He showed us good works to do. Jesus does expect to see good fruit from the trees of HIS planting.
We are realizing the place where your path goes one way and ours goes in another direction is in regards to who Jesus IS.
• You have decided not to acknowledge Jesus as the Lamb of God Slain from the Foundations of the Earth for the remission of sins.
• You have decided to teach that sins are not an issue as long as we join the Commons, donate money, and follow the extensive doctrines of the Commons.
• You teach that good works like those examples of Jesus and the people of Act 4:32 is our salvation.

You write: “The cross is atoning. We are to take up our crosses. We are to atone. We are to be sacrificial for the sake’s of our friends who are those who know and love the truth when they hear it that unselfishness is better than selfishness and perfect unselfishness is God.”

This is a noble thought, but it is not the teaching of Jesus. He told us to love EVERYONE, not just our friends. He said to sacrifice for our enemies as well. He said to turn the other cheek, to sacrifice our rights and FORGIVE our enemies and also to pray for them. (MATT 5:44)
DO you not agree that Jesus DIED for EVERYONE, the whole world, friend and foe???
John 3:1 – 36
We do not believe or teach that the cross is salvation. It could have been any weapon that would have resulted in Jesus death. It is the blood not the weapon that has any power. Not unlike the serpent stick Moses held up for the plagued Israelites to look upon. It was not the stick that cleansed them of the curse it was the obedience in looking up as the LORD of HOSTS commanded them to.
We do not believe the MAIN purpose of Jesus’ death and resurrection was just to teach how to do good things.
We believe the Main purpose for Jesus death and resurrection is the foundational understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
• Jesus came as prophecy spoke of, He lived and was tempted as all men are and yet as Isaiah prophesied He would choose “only the good” Isaiah 7:15
• Jesus is the Man of sorrows as Isaiah 53: 3.
• Jesus is from the Heavenly Father to do the work of the Lamb that was slain from the foundation of the Earth. John the Baptist recognized this as recorded in John 1:36. This lamb was to be slain for the sins of the world. This Blood just like the blood of the Passover Lamb was to cover God’s people from the angel of Death.
• God’s children, His People are as Jesus speaks in John chapter 3, those who are Born Again.
• Jesus speaks of everlasting life, and He speaks of having the power to return back to Heaven and how He will give us the power of eternal Life IF we believe. John chap. 17
What are we to believe?” More and more upon reading and listening to instruction of the Holy Spirit, we keep coming back to the same thing. Given the entire account of Jesus life from the Apostle JOHN we realize we are to believe Jesus is the Lamb that was slain from the foundation of the Earth. Hung on a cross, blood spilt not for fleshly purpose, no real earthly offense. He hung there specifically for the purpose of clearing a spiritual debt between The Creator and HIS creation, humanity. That is grace, mercy, faithfulness and love.
No greater love is this than when a man lays His life down for His friends. Jesus says He lays his life down of His own accord, NO one took it. He chose to lay it down, and had the power to take it up again on the 3rd day. He was the only one who could offer Himself as the Spotless, Blameless Lamb of God.
Why did we need a spotless, blameless Lamb to die for us?
We believe Jehovah put the knowledge of evil and good before Adam & Eve. It may have been a test, it defiantly was a choice.
Believe your Creator who tells the Truth that eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil brings death
OR
Choose your own curiosity.
Well Tom, You know the rest of the story. And we are still cursed with choosing between evil and good. Truthfully it is up to every man, woman, and child to discern what good they want to know, and the evil they want to know. All the choices are out there. Jehovah God has not made this choice that hard. He has taken a lot of effort to show us contrasts between good and evil. He has taken a lot of effort to show us how to “choose” to know the good and reject the evil. He has shown His Authority, Splendor, Power, Majesty, Sovereignty, and Truth. If anyone takes the time to read any of the billions of Bibles printed in thousands of languages, they can know this Creator and what this Creator’s expectations of HIS creation are. Jehovah has met HIS Creation in a variety of ways over time from Adam to now. After this physical life is done there will be a judgment. It is spoken of in Revelation after all flesh dies all the souls will be called to the Throne of the Creator of Heaven and Earth. Thus we have Jesus and a new choice.

We can choose to believe Jesus told the truth when He said He is the Way the Truth and the Life and no one can live with the Heavenly Father eternally except through JESUS, except one be Born Again through the Lamb that was slain from the foundation of the earth,
Or
We can believe whatever we like and inherit eternal separation from the Life Giver.

We can choose to believe the Heavenly Father said “Believe in my only Begotten Son, Jesus and you will live eternally”
OR
We can choose to believe whatever we like and inherit eternal separation from the Life Giver
That is it in a nut shell.

“And I (John in a vision) saw a great white throne, and HIM that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.”
(Rev 20:11-15)

For those who HEAR the WORD of God, they are accountable for what they hear and how they respond.
The question is “What will we choose to know… the evil or the good?”
Quazi and Saijah choose Jesus because we REALLY Believe He is the GOOD. And we follow Him as He calls us. You say you choose Jesus and you are following HIM the way you think He is leading you. Why can’t that be enough? How are we stumbling your ability to love and follow God as you understand?
Tom, we know you have your own ideas to reconcile all the verses you have read on this subject. We are not trying to change your mind. As you requested we are just clarifying the differences between our understandings. We can’t force you to see what we understand any more than you can get us to believe what you understand.
But this is OUR answer to YOUR question. We agree with you that Jesus’ message is of love, and community, and hope. But Jesus is more than just a message. He is the Savior of the whole world because we need a Savior. To make the Gospel solely about good works and dramatically changing the evil of the world demeans the Gospel.
To speak only that it is about mercy, forgiveness and grace also demeans the Gospel. If we refuse to deal with the whole Gospel of Jesus Christ which is about mercy and forgiveness AS WELL as good works that lead people to Jesus following HIS commandments to make the world full of HIS Light, we demean it and turn we diminish ourselves as HIS Followers. Let’s not be tempted to slice the truth up into convenient pieces for our own purposes.

Jesus spoke of the wrath that is to come. You feel that wrath has come and gone. Well our comment for you is this, if that is so, then God’s wrath was really not such a big deal was it? If all Jesus prophecies were just in regards to the Roman takeover of Jerusalem, what about all the testimony of the Apostle John in Revelation? Did that already happen too? How about Daniel’s prophecies?? Jesus and John do cross references Daniel.
So if you are ready to move onto another subject this is where we would like to go. We are interested in your verses and understanding of how the Commons fits into the testimonies of John. Feel free to take some time to chew for a while.
We have some other inquiries and comments.
We would like to see the face of RLCC.
• Is RLCC multi- generational?
• Is RLCC Multi-racial?
• Literally at this moment as you read this letter, do you have any other members besides yourself, Tom? Do you have a wife? Do you have children?
• While you wait for the fruition of the land and buildings of the Commons what are some of the daily good works you are doing to promote the Gospel of Jesus Christ according to your definition?
• We know you told us previous you do not collaborate or volunteer with other mercy giving organizations because you do not agree with them. But we are wondering if you are doing anything besides sitting and typing?

We know you want to make some positive changes to the world. For that we applaud you. We are trying to expand the one dimensional intellectual picture you offer. Don’t be offended but after reading a lot of the other posts and comments it appears your audience has come to the same conclusion. Is Tom just sitting at his computer posting and writing?? Really you can’t blame us. You are asking us to give money to basically words on a page, basically just to pay your rent. A workman is worth his wages, and we are just asking to understand why you deserve to be the “keeper of the Common Purse”? Why should we trust you?
It is not hard hearted to be skeptical. Jesus warned us to be careful, to be “wise as serpents”. You want us to believe you are a really good guy who deserves our hard earned cash. And yet you really have not proved that fact to us. Aside from doctrines and teaching we do not see anything manifesting from this ministry. We do not believe it takes mass amounts of money to do the good works of Jesus Christ. Jesus gave you some very useful tools to catalyze change without donations. Jesus didn’t need a lot of money to spark His changes. He didn’t even have a roof to pay rent for.
• For one if you are Born Again you can ask for the Holy Spirit to dwell within you to instruct you, be your comforter, your friend, your guide.
• We know you don’t like Paul but really he said some pretty encouraging things like if we want to change the world we just need to walk in the Spirit, and stop walking after the flesh. Jesus produced good fruit every where HE went, and HIS followers should be producing His good fruit as well. Do you produce Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and self control? Regardless of your irritation with Paul and the folks who misuse his words, don’t you agree Jesus taught us how to manifest these good works??
• Just think what would happen to the Earth if those who really Believe Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords and stopped playing church and honestly Lived according to the Holy Spirit? We would not be surprised if these true believers did choose to live in common community. But even believers get caught up in the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, the pride of life. Praise God there is forgiveness for that. Praise God if we confess our sins HE is just and faithful to forgive us our sins. We have an opportunity to start over. Being Born Again has many privileges.
We are not being mean to you. We are looking for more evidence you are worthy of a tithe and or offering. Think on these things and ask the LORD Jesus for HIS guidance and direction. It has been almost a year, it may be time to start asking yourself how you are standing in your own way and discouraging donations. It is easy to just say it is “OUR” fault, your audience. We are just too hardhearted. But is that really the problem??
Thanks for letting us share.
As always we Pray the Peace of Jesus on you and your household
Quazi and Saijah.

First, let me say that when I addressed the issue of people not responding, I was not referring to you alone, far from it.

Second, when I raised that point of people not responding or answering, I was not talking solely about giving no reply at all but also concerning replies that fail to answer questions aimed at getting to the truth as best we are able (at least striving for it mightily). That second aspect applies to you. The fact that time had gone by since your last reply was not at issue concerning you in my mind.

Also, by saying striving mightily, I am not saying that we don't know any truth. There are absolutes if one is given to comprehend. To elaborate slightly, let me say that absolutes are in the eye of the beholder, meaning each person will have a conceptualization or definition of "absolute" and that definition will be satisfied or not by that persons conceptualization of God for instance.

The point here is that many people go about spreading their ideologies, philosophies, and theologies, and the like, without the willingness to be probed for error.

Third, I understand that when one hasn't visited a site in awhile that one's memory concerning site-navigation may need refreshing. He or she may need a bit to readjust. It isn't a sin.

Fourth, you may have returned to the site after you made your last comment but before I wrote and published my reply that is above, as the main post on this web page. I was put off by your opposition to my warning people in general and the homosexuals themselves about the proven and well documented physical, mental, and spiritual harm of homosexuality and other sexual emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. Further, I was put off by your degrading the Christian Commons Project, claiming that it is not part of the narrow way. Lastly, I was put off that you would oppose and demean my work while still neglecting to address the questions I had taken the time to pose in direct response to your requests for information.

Fifth, I understand fully that people have many things put on their plates and they cannot always drop things just to continue some thread on a website. May God bless your relative(s) and the others whom you have been looking after.

Sixth, as for friendship, there are degrees of friendship. We are acquaintances. We are not confidants. So far, we have not had a meeting of the minds. We don't trust each other's exegesis. I understand that you are using the word friend more in the sense of well-intentioned. I don't disagree that being well-intentioned is a starting place. Nevertheless, the adage that "the road to Hell is paved with good intentions" has its proper place as well. What I have been trying to do is define "good" such that applying that definition one will not be headed down the wide path to Hell. It is our position that many people hide behind a façade of graciousness to avoid confronting hypocritical behavior that is much more damaging than is bluntness. In fact, we hold that this is much of the reason for so-called civilized society murdering many millions of innocents. We hold that it is inconsiderate not to break with such polite society to make the weightier point that such society is turning a blind eye to wanton slaughter and nearly all the other most salient evils of our time. We aren't advocating the abandonment of politeness and courtesy. We are advocating the proper setting of priorities. Telling the truth concerning the harm being done in the name of various things often cuts through false civility. After all, what's civil, in that sense, about the Iraq War? It's rather rude and impolite, to say the least, to do what the neocons have done and are still doing in Iraq. We say that that stems directly from their improper exegesis as well.

Seventh, the ball is in your court, so to speak. If you want to reply in full, fine. If not, that's your choice. If you do reply and I feel that further discussion would be futile, I won't do much more then express that and move ahead. That's consistent with how Jesus Christ communicated. If you feel we have already reached that point of futility, I will just move ahead.

Veraciously,

Tom

In regards to our inability to find our posts before, we will accept full responsibility, maybe we were looking in the wrong place. But at any rate the more important question is Do you wish for us to answer your questions or has that boat sailed? We only offer to do so in the hand of friendship. We are sad you misunderstood our silence. we have been very busy in our lives since October. Between ministering to ill family members and other folks the LORD JESUS brings our way. We just haven't taken much time to keep up any internet coorespondence including yours. It is your website. We do not want to disrespect you. Do you want to hear our answers to your previous questions?
Thanks for your reply
Jehovah Bless you with knowledge of THE HOLY which is understanding.
Quazi & Saijah

The post above is for the benefit of all who read it.

Nothing has been erased or moved, and the navigation format from comment to post has remained the same since before your last comment in November.

To the best of our knowledge, we answered all of your questions to one degree or another; however, you have not recognized them or have reacted with a degree of contempt. We resorted to the Socratic Method to uncover where you are blocked from comprehending; however, you ignored that. Without direct responses in this case, expectations of fulfillment are hardly justified.

We wish to spend our time in ways that will prove fruitful. We aren't interested in dwelling tiresomely on matters that have already been more than amply explained with no further hope of success with given persons. We trust people understand that and agree.

God bless all,

Tom

Firstly, your comment was automatically filtered as spam. It had too many links. For future reference, limit your links to three or fewer. Some sites will consider all comments with more than one link as spam, and the comment won't be shown right away if ever.

Secondly, you used all capital letters too much. I had to go through your comment manually to change the case for many sentences and words, etc. Please avoid using all capital letters.

Thirdly, your comment contained way too much extraneous text at the end.

Fourthly, I have only had a very brief time to just overview your comment. When I'm done with the project on which I'm currently working, I will come back to your comment, give it my undivided attention, and render a reply.

Thank you for visiting our website and leaving a comment.

God bless all,

Tom

Read the following passages from the bible as it has implications on the war against terror/Islam and the claim of Israel that God gave them the land. If the child is an infant than the Judeo-Christian version becomes null and void and we are wasting our time and resources i.e. we could save trillions of dollars and create a more peaceful world rather than fighting against Islam the religion of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them all).

The covenant with Abraham and his descendants is central to Judaism/Christianity/Islam.

Please note this is not a competition between faiths but an attempt to decipher fact from fiction.

Genesis 21:14 Contemporary English version se below link

http://www.biblegateway.com/pa.....ersio n=46;

Early the next morning Abraham gave Hagar an animal skin full of water and some bread. Then he put the boy on her shoulder and sent them away.

Genesis 16:16
And Hagar bore Abram a son; and Abram called the name of his son, whom Hagar bore, Ish’mael. Abram was eighty-six years old when Hagar bore Ish’mael to Abram.

Genesis 21:5
Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him.

At Genesis 22 Abraham had only 2 sons others came later. The Quran mentions that it was Ishmael that was sacrificed hence the reference in genesis 22:2 your only son can only mean someone has substituted Ishmael names for Isaac!!

By doing some kindergarten arithmatic using Arabic numbers (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10)
Not roman numerals (I, II, III,IV,V,VI,VII,VIII,IX,X) NB no concept of zero in roman numerals.

100 years old – 86 years old = 14 add 3 years for Issac’s weaning

That would make Ishmael 17 years old in genesis 21:14-21
But it is a description of an infant.

Carefully read several times the above passage and then tell me the mental picture you get between the mother child interactions what is the age of the child. If the mental picture is that of a 17 year old child being carried on the shoulder of his mother, being physically placed in the bush, crying like a baby, mother having to give him water to drink, than the Islamic viewpoint is null and void. Why is there no verbal communications between mother and (17 year old) child?

Genesis: 21:14 - 21
So Abraham rose early in the morning, and took bread and a skin of water, and gave it to Hagar, putting it on her shoulder, along with the (17 year old) child, and sent her away. And she departed, and wandered in the wilderness of Beer-Sheba. When the water in the skin was gone, she cast the (17 year old) child under one of the bushes. Then she went, and sat down over against him a good way off, about the distance of a bowshot; for she said, “Let me not look upon the death of the (17 year old) child.” And as she sat over against him, the (17 year old) child lifted up his voice and wept. And God heard the voice of the (17 year old) lad; and the angel of God called to Hagar from heaven, and said to her, “What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not; for God has heard the voice of the (17 year old) lad where he is. Arise, lift up the (17 year old) lad, and hold him fast with your hand; for I will make him a great nation.” Then God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of water; and she went, and filled the skin with water, and gave the (17 year old) lad a drink. And God was with the (17 year old) lad, and he grew up; he lived in the wilderness, and became an expert with the bow. He lived in the wilderness of Paran; and his mother took a wife for him from the land of Egypt.

The age of Ishmael at this stage is crucial to the Abrahamic faiths. If he is 17 than the Judeo/Christian point of view about the Abrahamic covenant is correct. This has devastating theological consequences of unimaginable proportions.

This makes the conflict between Ishmael and Isaac and there descendants a work of fiction. I would strongly suggest it is clear cut case of racial discrimination and nothing to do with God almighty. The scribes have deliberately tried to make Isaac the only son and legitimate heir to the throne of Abraham??

Please can you rationally explain this anomaly?

I have asked many persons including my nephews and nieces - unbiased minds with no religious backgrounds but with reasonable command of the English language about this passage and they all agree that the child in the passage is an infant.
As the description of Ishmael in genesis 21:14-21 is that of an infant it can be assumed someone has moved this passage from an earlier part of scripture!!! And have got there knickers in a twist.