[OBW]

Sorry if it misunderstood. But when it comes to determining what the Bible says and what it means, it should be obvious that it is not always a simple thing. "In the day you eat thereof" they did not surely die. We had to think about that for a while and understand that instead the process of dying began. Or it was spiritually that we died.

And are we sure that it was a correct assumption that Adam and Eve would otherwise live forever, or just a vey long time?

You get the point. When you make statements like "The trustees reacted poorly to the one who told them the truth" it appears that the interpretation of the ones making the case is presumed correct. But is it really the truth? Are we sure? Just because we have read it that way for years, even centuries?

For example, who is Paul taking about when he comments on someone building with gold, sliver, precious stones, wood, hay, and stubble?

I had more, but I will leave it at that for now. I may have misunderstood what you meant, but you must admit that it was not entirely ridiculous to presume otherwise.

I would suggest that the church was much more tolerant in the beginning that it became over the centuries. That does not mean that the apparent softening in this day is consistent with where the church was at the beginning. But should we simply stick with the addendums of rules that we have added over the years? Should we be in the business of punishing and scolding, or in the business of beckoning and encouraging? Should we be busy trying to get it all right and forcing it on everyone else, or busy trying to live righteously. Both in personal righteousness and in the "love one another" acts of justice.