quote: Again, what gives you the right, or even just the "insight" to know what's in someone else's heart?
Excuse me, but there are many here who seem to know exactly what was in VPs heart.
Steve, thank you for opening up. I feel like I know you better. Those quotes from Isaiah and Jeremiah ignore that we today are members in particular of the body of Christ. We have eternal life guaranteed. Those folks in the OT didn't. God allows many unspeakable things to be done, even by born again ones. That doesn't impact incorruptible seed. From God's pov all mankind is evil from youth. We're dead. His mercy allowed Christ to enter the world sinless, live a perfect life, voluntarily die to pay for our sins, and return for us in glory. God's immediate judgment on OT people is irrelevant. You know this.
You said in the previous post that your respect for VP/twi was turned inside out when a woman told you face to face that VP propositioned her. Next thing you know, VP is not a Christian. You're not the only one here who snapped like that. You never had to do that. I can see that you love God. Again, some things only God can sort out.
Those quotes from Isaiah and Jeremiah ignore that we today are members in particular of the body of Christ. We have eternal life guaranteed. Those folks in the OT didn't. God allows many unspeakable things to be done, even by born again ones. That doesn't impact incorruptible seed. From God's pov all mankind is evil from youth. We're dead. His mercy allowed Christ to enter the world sinless, live a perfect life, voluntarily die to pay for our sins, and return for us in glory. God's immediate judgment on OT people is irrelevant. You know this.
This is only applicable if you accept dispensationalism, as set forth by Darby. Wierwille called them "administrations". Same thing, different name.
quote: Again, what gives you the right, or even just the "insight" to know what's in someone else's heart?
Excuse me, but there are many here who seem to know exactly what was in VPs heart.
Well, that's not at all related to the question. However, vpee was the one in the spotlight pretty much all of the time and put himself out there as the "MOG."
There's LOTS of reflection in the GSC forums on his actions.
I'd say to you, "nice deflection," because that's what your response is. But it's not nice. Instead, it constitutes an invalid argument and apparent lack of understanding of
18 But someone will say, "You have faith, and I have works." Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.
So - Johniam - what "faith" was VPW demonstrating by his works upon young women? And upon the young women's husbands, if they had a husband?
Even by his work a boy is known, if he is pure, and if his works are right. [Aramaic Bible in Plain English]
or more familiarly:
Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right. [KVJ]
If one can tell what is going on in a child's head and heart by the child's actions, by the outward demonstration of what the child believes, how much more for an adult? Remember, we're not looking in the short term of a quick and convenient lie about something that VPW did or didn't do - anyone can lie and dissemble for a short period. On the contrary, we're considering the pattern of behavior over a period of years. Over some decades, what does that man's actions betray about his heart? His thoughts? His faith?
And that's what gives the right, or insight, to know what's in someone else's heart. The long-term actions, or works, of that someone. Whether that someone be VPW, Johniam, Rocky, the Pope, the President, the Queen ...
You would do well to pay closer attention to what I've actually written, my friend! :)/>
You wrote, "You said in the previous post that your respect for VP/twi was turned inside out when a woman told you face to face that VP propositioned her. Next thing you know, VP is not a Christian. You're not the only one here who snapped like that. You never had to do that. I can see that you love God. Again, some things only God can sort out."
I didn't write that my "respect for VP/TWI was turned inside out." I wrote "That was the moment when my love for The Way International turned inside out." That moment was when it was confirmed to me by biblically proper testimony that Martindale, the leader of TWI, was practicing the same sins as Eli's sons and as the prophets of Jerusalem did prior to the fall of the city in 597 BCE. It wasn't Wierwille... I didn't have ANY testimony regarding him at that time... it was Martindale. And I already knew that Martindale's leadership was making wreck of the whole ministry.
I did NOT write "VP is not a Christian." I wrote, "Wierwille was not Christian." I had originally written, "Wierwille was not a Christian," but after long and hard consideration, I decided to take the "a" out of the sentence. That changed the word "Christian" from a noun to an adjective. I am not judging whether or not Wierwille was a Christian. Only Jesus Christ himself can do that. But I am saying that the words and actions and fruit of Wierwille's life do NOT demonstrate Christ-like attitudes or behaviors.
I never "snapped," as you put it. It took me a lot of time, diligent study, and prayerful thought before I was able to see through the "Dr. Wierwille" that we all thought we knew and loved to the real "man behind the curtain" of TWI. The first thing that gave me pause was the quality of leadership exhibited by Martindale and the Corps Coordinators I had known. This quality was the fruit of Wierwille's specific example, training and selection, and it was reprehensible. Wierwille was not a leader. He had an uncanny ability to manipulate people into doing what he wanted, but that isn't the same thing as leadership. Wierwille didn't teach Martindale, the Corps, or ANY of us, the very first principle of leadership, to take responsibility. Wierwille didn't train people to become leaders. He surrounded himself with yes-men. And Martindale became president of TWI because he did best that thing which yes-men do.
Martindale didn't start out as a serial sexual predator. He had to be persuaded to become one by his mentor, Wierwille. That was some of the fruit of Wierwille's life.
So - Johniam - what "faith" was VPW demonstrating by his works upon young women? And upon the young women's husbands, if they had a husband?
or more familiarly:
If one can tell what is going on in a child's head and heart by the child's actions, by the outward demonstration of what the child believes, how much more for an adult? Remember, we're not looking in the short term of a quick and convenient lie about something that VPW did or didn't do - anyone can lie and dissemble for a short period. On the contrary, we're considering the pattern of behavior over a period of years. Over some decades, what does that man's actions betray about his heart? His thoughts? His faith?
And that's what gives the right, or insight, to know what's in someone else's heart. The long-term actions, or works, of that someone. Whether that someone be VPW, Johniam, Rocky, the Pope, the President, the Queen ...
Here's another... Proverbs 23:7. thanks for those verses, Twinky.
So you don't want to be in the body of Christ anymore because you'd have to share space with VP...and millions of others? You'll get over it.
I never said anything even remotely similar to that. My comment was in reference to dispensationalism, a concept that Wierwille called administrations. It's a (non-Biblical) methodology that compartmentalizes sections of the Bible in order to absolve oneself from the mandates of other sections. I suggest you go back and read what I said more carefully.
Those quotes from Isaiah and Jeremiah ignore that we today are members in particular of the body of Christ. We have eternal life guaranteed. Those folks in the OT didn't. God allows many unspeakable things to be done, even by born again ones. That doesn't impact incorruptible seed. From God's pov all mankind is evil from youth. We're dead. His mercy allowed Christ to enter the world sinless, live a perfect life, voluntarily die to pay for our sins, and return for us in glory. God's immediate judgment on OT people is irrelevant. You know this.
...snip...
Was the fall of Jerusalem in the sixth century BCE REALLY God's immediate judgement on OT people? Is it REALLY irrelevant to us today? You say I know this. What do I REALLY know?
I know this. Paul wrote in Romans 15:4 that the accounts of the fall of Jerusalem were written for our learning... for OUR learning. According to Wierwille all of God's wonderful matchless Word in the Old Testament and in the Gospels has been totally irrelevant to US since the Day Of Pentecost. Yet here in Romans, written AFTER the Day of Pentecost, Paul, the man who received the revelation of the mystery, tells us that everything written before-time was written for US to learn things from!
Wierwille taught in Power for Abundant Living that Romans 15:4 says the Hebrew Bible, which was all that had been written before Paul, was written FOR us, but not TO us, therefore we can safely ignore whatever parts of it we don't like. In PFAL, Weiwille was forcing Romans 15:4 to mean the exact opposite of what it actually says. If you stop and carefully examine what Wierwille taught, he often desecrated the Word of God that way. Romans 15:4 tells us that the accounts of Jerusalem's 6th century BCE fall were written for US Christians, living in the same time as Paul, to learn something from. What are we supposed to learn from them?
We have to have a little background first. Salvation for Israel in the OT was the Exodus from Egypt. Israel was saved BEFORE the law was given and the covenant of Sinai was cut. People did not have to work to earn salvation in the Old Testament. After the Exodus, they were automatically born into the covenant community. Keeping the law was NOT a means to salvation, it was how saved people were supposed to behave out of thanksgiving for their salvation. Sin did not automatically exclude a person from the covenant community. Sacrificial atonements freed them from the consequences of their sins. Those atonements were symbols for the full atonement that would come with the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. The heart of the law was not for people to keep all the picky little details, the heart of the law was for people to extend the same mercy and righteouness toward others as God had extended to them in the Exodus.
Time went by, the united kingdom of Israel was set up (later to be divided into the kingdoms of Israel and Judah). God had his symbolic home in the Temple at Jerusalem. Because the leaders of Israel led their people out from under the covenant, Samaria, the capital of Israel fell to the Assyrians in 722 BCE, but Jerusalem miraculously escaped the same fate.
So the leaders of Judah taught their people that they were invulnerable because God's Temple was in Jerusalem. They could never "lose their salvation" the way the ten tribes of the north had, whether they kept the heart of the law or not.
So what was going wrong in Jerusalem? First, according to Isaiah 9:16-17, it was the leaders who were responsible for the problems. It was not the "leaves on the tree" failing to run the classes strictly enough. It was the leaders' hypocrisy, speaking the truth of the law, but behaving lawlessly. According to Jeremiah 23, the hypocrisy was exactly the same as TWI's... adultery... teaching that people are to be loved and things to be used, but using people and loving things.
The prophets told the people of Judea that they were immune to having the same judgment fall on them as had fallen on Samaria, because God's Temple was in Jerusalem, and God would NEVER let it fall, even if the people didn't keep the law. The people didn't reform, and Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians, and the Temple was destroyed in 587 BCE. Israel has never fully recovered since then.
As Christians we were saved when we received the gift of the Holy Spirit under the new covenant, not by works, but by grace through faith. After we received salvation, we received a law that we are supposed to keep out of thanksgiving for our salvation. That is the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, written on the tables of our hearts, and it does NOT contradict the 10 commandments.
Wierwille taught us that grace freed us from having to keep any law whatsoever. We can sin however we want to, whenever we want to, and we will be still be invulnerable to the consequences of sin. That just ain't so. When we fail to keep the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, we walk out from under the protection of the new covenant. What will that mean at the bema? Only Jesus Christ can say. But we saw the fruits of Wierwille's hypocrisy, the "covenant community" of The Way International was destroyed, as surely as Jerusalem was destroyed in the 6th century BCE.
I never said anything even remotely similar to that. My comment was in reference to dispensationalism, a concept that Wierwille called administrations. It's a (non-Biblical) methodology that compartmentalizes sections of the Bible in order to absolve oneself from the mandates of other sections. I suggest you go back and read what I said more carefully.
I thought VP made his case very well. There are scriptures that blatantly contradict each other if they're addressed to the same people under the same rules. By denying this, you "absolve" yourself of having to rightly divide the word. Or even believe there IS a word of God. VP thought all that through. He was right about that one.
Was the fall of Jerusalem in the sixth century BCE REALLY God's immediate judgement on OT people? Is it REALLY irrelevant to us today? You say I know this. What do I REALLY know?
I know this. Paul wrote in Romans 15:4 that the accounts of the fall of Jerusalem were written for our learning... for OUR learning. According to Wierwille all of God's wonderful matchless Word in the Old Testament and in the Gospels has been totally irrelevant to US since the Day Of Pentecost. Yet here in Romans, written AFTER the Day of Pentecost, Paul, the man who received the revelation of the mystery, tells us that everything written before-time was written for US to learn things from!
Wierwille taught in Power for Abundant Living that Romans 15:4 says the Hebrew Bible, which was all that had been written before Paul, was written FOR us, but not TO us, therefore we can safely ignore whatever parts of it we don't like. In PFAL, Weiwille was forcing Romans 15:4 to mean the exact opposite of what it actually says. If you stop and carefully examine what Wierwille taught, he often desecrated the Word of God that way. Romans 15:4 tells us that the accounts of Jerusalem's 6th century BCE fall were written for US Christians, living in the same time as Paul, to learn something from. What are we supposed to learn from them?
We have to have a little background first. Salvation for Israel in the OT was the Exodus from Egypt. Israel was saved BEFORE the law was given and the covenant of Sinai was cut. People did not have to work to earn salvation in the Old Testament. After the Exodus, they were automatically born into the covenant community. Keeping the law was NOT a means to salvation, it was how saved people were supposed to behave out of thanksgiving for their salvation. Sin did not automatically exclude a person from the covenant community. Sacrificial atonements freed them from the consequences of their sins. Those atonements were symbols for the full atonement that would come with the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. The heart of the law was not for people to keep all the picky little details, the heart of the law was for people to extend the same mercy and righteouness toward others as God had extended to them in the Exodus.
Time went by, the united kingdom of Israel was set up (later to be divided into the kingdoms of Israel and Judah). God had his symbolic home in the Temple at Jerusalem. Because the leaders of Israel led their people out from under the covenant, Samaria, the capital of Israel fell to the Assyrians in 722 BCE, but Jerusalem miraculously escaped the same fate.
So the leaders of Judah taught their people that they were invulnerable because God's Temple was in Jerusalem. They could never "lose their salvation" the way the ten tribes of the north had, whether they kept the heart of the law or not.
So what was going wrong in Jerusalem? First, according to Isaiah 9:16-17, it was the leaders who were responsible for the problems. It was not the "leaves on the tree" failing to run the classes strictly enough. It was the leaders' hypocrisy, speaking the truth of the law, but behaving lawlessly. According to Jeremiah 23, the hypocrisy was exactly the same as TWI's... adultery... teaching that people are to be loved and things to be used, but using people and loving things.
The prophets told the people of Judea that they were immune to having the same judgment fall on them as had fallen on Samaria, because God's Temple was in Jerusalem, and God would NEVER let it fall, even if the people didn't keep the law. The people didn't reform, and Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians, and the Temple was destroyed in 587 BCE. Israel has never fully recovered since then.
As Christians we were saved when we received the gift of the Holy Spirit under the new covenant, not by works, but by grace through faith. After we received salvation, we received a law that we are supposed to keep out of thanksgiving for our salvation. That is the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, written on the tables of our hearts, and it does NOT contradict the 10 commandments.
Wierwille taught us that grace freed us from having to keep any law whatsoever. We can sin however we want to, whenever we want to, and we will be still be invulnerable to the consequences of sin. That just ain't so. When we fail to keep the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, we walk out from under the protection of the new covenant. What will that mean at the bema? Only Jesus Christ can say. But we saw the fruits of Wierwille's hypocrisy, the "covenant community" of The Way International was destroyed, as surely as Jerusalem was destroyed in the 6th century BCE.
Love,
Steve
In the grace administration, we have incorruptible seed the OT believers never had. David prayed that God wouldn't take holy spirit from him. (Ps51:11) In Acts 15 Peter called the OT law a yoke neither we nor our fathers were able to bear. (v.10) There was no guaranteed eternal life in the OT. Yes, I agree twi lost its community and VPs actions had something to do with it, but that doesn't mean VP wasn't born again. Doesn't mean pfal wasn't teaching the word of God.
I thought VP made his case very well. There are scriptures that blatantly contradict each other if they're addressed to the same people under the same rules. By denying this, you "absolve" yourself of having to rightly divide the word. Or even believe there IS a word of God. VP thought all that through. He was right about that one.
VP simply parroted an idea that was launched by John Darby, in the 1830's.. Darby may not have been the first to present the concept but he is generally attributed as being the leading proponent. It encompasses the idea of various portions of the Bible being written to one group with the exclusion of another. It is not a Biblical concept, nor is there any scriptural documentation substantiating it.
You said:
"There are scriptures that blatantly contradict each other if they're addressed to the same people under the same rules."
That's precisely what dispensationalism attempts to resolve.
There are portions of scripture that plainly contradict each other. The only way to make them "fit" is to pretend that different administrations are subject to different rules. The problem with this is that it has no scriptural basis.
You are perfectly free to think VP was "right about that one". However, you have not successfully demonstrated a basis for that opinion.
edit:
" ....that doesn't mean VP wasn't born again."
I never raised that issue.
Quite frankly, I couldn't care less if he was or wasn't.
"Doesn't mean pfal wasn't teaching the word of God"
PFAL was a conglomeration of the (uncredited) works of others , such as B.G. Leonard, Stiles, Bullinger and many others. There is no guarantee their works were correct or incorrect interpretations of the scriptures.
edit#2:
"In the grace administration...."
The Bible talks about God's grace. It never talks about a "grace administration".
Almost thou persuadeth me... er, well really I should say that pretty much, thou hast persuaded me that the Bible is just one big story that provides (probably) billions of people with something around which to provide meaning to their lives and provide meaning to this life.
When I was 20, there were people, my elders (not in my church or cult) just people who had lived a couple of decades longer than I had at that time. These folks suggested to me that truth was relative and that there are many ways to "find God." Of course, VPee addresses that issue head on in the FLAP class. Over the course of the last 40 years, so much more of life, and discussions like we see on this thread, have convinced me that there probably ARE many ways to get to heaven, if there is or will be such a thing (or place).
Seriously, it has become so obvious that johniam is either a tremendous poser (pretending to be such a twi dogmatist) or is a complete loon. I say that with respect. There's no indication I see in your writing here, john, that your life is out of control in any way. It's just that your writing shows a worldview that I find so completely bizarre.
OTOH, Steve L makes a solid argument with most everything I've seen him post (especially on this thread). But I can't help but wonder/realize that, in the context of myths (many myths are true, but as I understand it now, they all are stories that help people understand social and psychological aspects of life). I wonder how genuinely it really matters who is right?
Granted, I accept that the common understanding at gsc about our common experience with twi is that twi was not a genuine heavenly utopia, rather a subculture built on a charismatic, narcissistic and perhaps psychopathic character's storytelling. But other than that, what does it really matter which meaning a given greek word is correct?
1) someone who actually plays in a popular rock band
2) any one who...
a) connects with their culture enough to have discernible impact
b) because of a) is allowed to disrespect things like government, religion, education, public mores, etc.
One of my window cleaning accounts is an Irish pub/restaurant in downtown St. Louis called the Dubliner. Inside there are 2 posters on the wall. One is of prominent Irish politicians, the other is writers. I never heard of ANY of the politicians. I heard of about half the writers; people like George Bernard Shaw, Oscar Wilde, William Butler Yeats, and James Joyce. Then it dawned on me that those writers were the 'rock stars' of their generations. They didn't play in bands, but they connected with their communities, and they were allowed to disrespect things in their culture. Politicians have their time in the spotlight, then they're mostly forgotten. How does this relate to twi?
The men and women of God in twi were like the politicians. They spoke to us publicly; they were the face of the organization. Were there writers? Sure, but something was missing. By writers, I mean not just Elena Whiteside or Dennis McGee. We had musicians, comedians, painters, etc. But none of those were allowed even a hint of criticism. DID we criticize? Sure, but it had to be in secret. One of the last ROAs I attended I remember LCM talking about someone there who had "spoken against VP and against LCM and against twi". LCM called this person a dog who had to be muzzled.
I can see that religion might have to handle criticism differently than mainstream culture. Religion has to juggle their God, who is holy and perfect and cannot be disrespected,with their people who are imperfect and capable of doing any unspeakable thing anyone else could possibly do. I can't picture the catholic church or any other religion allowing anybody to promote music or literature displaying their "bloopers".
But criticism is healthy. Even in scripture we're supposed to check and balance ourselves (Gal. 6:1, Rom. 12:2, etc.). Countries and religions which are extreme in suppressing criticism tend to stick out like the sore thumb that they are. IMO what has happened to twi wouldn't have if certain things had been addressed freely. But they couldn't because...wasn't John Schoenheit's life threatened if he told anyone what he knew about certain things? Sounds like suppression to me. I guess the only true 'rock stars' of twi culture are here.
The more I have participated on this thread, johniam, the more I have come to appreciate what you wrote in your first post. It seems that you and I have some things over which we we can agree to disagree, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate you as my brother in Christ, and as the unique expression of God's love that you are. You fell in love with TWI and Wierwille. So did I. We just had different experiences coming out of our encounters with TWI.
God has recently flung me back into intimate contact with a religious community that I had to walk away from about five or six years before I ever heard of
TWI. That community formed in the late 1800s, but believed that there is only ONE church of God, and that creeds are man-made and divisive. This group never participated in the fundamentalist conferences, and so never ended up subscribing to the idea of literal inerrancy of the Bible. But the group was very much into music, and there are several nationally known gospel singers who came out of the tradition. It struck me that the mindset of this group was not handed down through the sermons that the ministers taught, or articles and books that the writers wrote, but through the lyrics of the songs the congregations sang.
I was reminded of that when I was reflecting on your first post that I just quoted. Many of us experienced the unconditional love of God in our local twigs. If that love didn't come from Wierwille and Power for Abundant Living, where DID it come from? I am inclined now to think that unconditional love was modeled to the people of TWI by the hippies Wierwille brought back from California. It seems that THEY might be the original "rock stars" of TWI...
The more I have participated on this thread, johniam, the more I have come to appreciate what you wrote in your first post. It seems that you and I have some things over which we we can agree to disagree, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate you as my brother in Christ, and as the unique expression of God's love that you are. You fell in love with TWI and Wierwille. So did I. We just had different experiences coming out of our encounters with TWI.
God has recently flung me back into intimate contact with a religious community that I had to walk away from about five or six years before I ever heard of
TWI. That community formed in the late 1800s, but believed that there is only ONE church of God, and that creeds are man-made and divisive. This group never participated in the fundamentalist conferences, and so never ended up subscribing to the idea of literal inerrancy of the Bible. But the group was very much into music, and there are several nationally known gospel singers who came out of the tradition. It struck me that the mindset of this group was not handed down through the sermons that the ministers taught, or articles and books that the writers wrote, but through the lyrics of the songs the congregations sang.
I was reminded of that when I was reflecting on your first post that I just quoted. Many of us experienced the unconditional love of God in our local twigs. If that love didn't come from Wierwille and Power for Abundant Living, where DID it come from? I am inclined now to think that unconditional love was modeled to the people of TWI by the hippies Wierwille brought back from California. It seems that THEY might be the original "rock stars" of TWI...
What do the rest of you think?
Love,
Steve
Yeah, the love of God in the fellowship is noticeable. And after awhile the absence of it is even more noticeable. VP had nothing directly to do with that. I had brief encounters with him maybe 3 times total. I didn't see any of the meanness described here, however I'm not saying it didn't happen.
Literal rock stars fill a void in world culture. In my first post, I compared Irish writers and twi people with one characteristic of rock stars. That would be the enablement to disrespect things held dear in world culture. AC/DC's Highway to hell and Jethro Tull's Wind up are similar in poking fun at religion. I know Angus and Malcomb Young of AC/DC were raised catholic and I'm not sure about Tull's Ian Anderson, but in a fairly recent interview, he described himself as a cross between a deist (who believe in a creator God, but don't believe He has direct dealings with humans) and a pantheist (one who believes nature is God). But both those songs and many others really connected with their listeners.
The music in twi really helped me transfer from being world minded to God minded. Especially in my attitude about myself. During my wow year we were always listening to Joyful Noise, Pressed down, Good seed, Glad tidings, the Jordan river ramblers, anybody they had, and it seemed to resist the world's message and buffer the word's. It was just what I needed at the time.
As for the hippies. When I got into the dope culture in 1970, the people did seem more loving, cool, and positive than anybody else, but by 1975, the year before I got into twi, the drug culture seemed to evolve into just another way to conform. I can't help but believe that the Doops and Heefners people like that found twi favorable compared to the worldly hippies of the late 60s.
Hey, Steve, one thing you said I totally agree with is that the trustees were primarily responsible for losing the unity we had, NOT the leaves on the tree. They were behind the wheel, so to speak.
"Some people here say that VP/twi was insignificant, Not enough numbers to have discernible impact. Others say it was a cult. Dangerous. Ruined lives. Those are opposite messages."
They're not opposite messages, they're different messages.
VPW and The Way were insignificant and had no discernible impact on the greater scope of Christianity. The Way was and still is a dangerous cult that ruined lives.
There is no conflict between those two statements.
Way, yes TWI did ruin lives; I wonder how many those whose lives were ruined will ever recover??
johniam - you and I think differently... I don't think it's so much a matter of categorical disagreement as it is a matter of thinking differently. From what I've read here at Greasespot, I like you personally in spite of our disagreements. This is a thread you started, so I'm going out of my way to respect that, and you have said much that is worth thinking about... for instance,
"Some people here say that VP/twi was insignificant, Not enough numbers to have discernible impact. Others say it was a cult. Dangerous. Ruined lives. Those are opposite messages. TWI's dark side didn't stop God from blessing people in it. Even the catholic church does much good. They have a dark side. To the present day. TWIs dark side didn't stop the devil from hurting people in it. I don't think of myself as one of the "lucky ones". I got to know God in twi. He's still there. Still answers prayer. Still heals. Putting twi in the box called 'cult' is no different than putting them in the box called 'God's ministry'. IMO"
I would say that Wierwille had tremendous impact on a number of individual lives. Whether that was a large enough number, even up to 100,000, is open to question. I don't think there were ever more than about 30,000 "standing grads" at any one time. If there were ordinarily about 20,000 people attending the ROA, that means that two-thirds of TWI's active followers were camped out on that cornfield. And even 100,000 followers is not very large in terms of religious organizations.
How many people are still following Wierwille? Probably more people than there are Shakers, because the Shakers believe in celibacy... but not by much. TWI is going the same way as Koreshanity, and as grads of the original (1967 recording) PFAL class die off, so will TWI.
Wierwille preached some things that are not normally preached in conventional Christianity, i.e., we are sons of God with power, God has committed to us the Word and the ministry of reconciliation, but in his teachings, Wierwille obviated these things. We were sons of God with power as long as we cleared everything first with leaders who were closer to the root, whose decisions were often arbitrary and nonsensical, and who had no real knowledge of what was actually going on. God had committed to us the ministry of getting people to sign the green card and pay up, by hook or by crook.
Wierwille's impact upon greater Christianity has been ephemeral for two reasons: first, none of his work has ANY scholarly validity because of his plagiarism, and second, he was a really, REALLY crappy writer. He was powerful with a microphone on a stage, but transposed into the printed word, the things he said were at once a strange combination of outlandishness and banality. His legacy will die when the 1967 PFAL class finally dies.
Was God present in TWI? Yes he was. The problem arises when we consider the truth that God was also present EVERYWHERE ELSE! Wierwille was wrong in crediting the things God was doing to PFAL and Wierwille's "ministry." Who was delivering all the deliverance you received in TWI, johniam? In John 14:13 Jesus said "And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son." Jesus didn't say "That will YOU do by your believing and a power of attorney!" Jesus didn't say "That will God do!" Jesus said "That will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son!" Who was glorified in TWI? Wierwille, PFAL and our own believing.
I agree with you when you say it would be wrong to call TWI "God's ministry." TWI was and is no more God's ministry than the several types of Orthodox, the Coptics, the Roman Catholics, the Lutherans, the Calvinists, the Mennonites, the Anglicans, the Methodists, the Baptists, the Wesleyans, the Pentecostals, the Charismatics and the bazillion-and-one other Protestant denominations. We are ALL God's ministries! If there was anything exclusive about TWI, it was Wierwille's multi-level marketing scheme.
TWI was and is cult. Wierwille and his successors made/make their followers deployable to a hidden agenda, and that is the definition of a cult. It's not a matter of subjective feelings. It is a matter of objective evidence.
Love,
Steve
Steve, excellent post!! Â However, I just wanted to add my two cents; I heard VPW teach live several times. Â I thought he was boring, boring, boring! Â Just my opinion; I know a lot of people will disagree with me.
Come to think of it, Charles Manson wanted to be a rock star. Didn't he audition to be one of the Monkees? Imagine the beginning of a Monkees episode. Here we come walking down the street etc. Hey Hey we're the Monkees...all the while their faces are on screen with their first names...Mickey...David...Peter...Charles (with that twisted look that was all his own). That woulda been cool.
John, not the Monkees. Â He wanted to be a Beach Boy. But, he scared them, so they let him be.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
9
19
9
9
Popular Days
Aug 31
10
Aug 30
8
Sep 6
7
Sep 7
7
Top Posters In This Topic
Rocky 9 posts
johniam 19 posts
Steve Lortz 9 posts
waysider 9 posts
Popular Days
Aug 31 2015
10 posts
Aug 30 2015
8 posts
Sep 6 2015
7 posts
Sep 7 2015
7 posts
Popular Posts
WordWolf
Cool but completely fictional. he never auditioned for the Monkees. http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/monkees.asp Please consider fact-checking at least SOME of your statements before hitting "ad
waysider
I think he was responding to the post that asked (in jest) whether he was a poser or a loon.
Twinky
Another excellent post, Steve. Well put. :eusa_clap:/>
For those not interested in "multiple centres of reference" -
Proverbs 15:22 (ESV) (my emphasis):
22 Without counsel plans fail, but with many advisers they succeed.
For anyone interested in wise counsel: Wise Counsel - from Open Bible
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
quote: Again, what gives you the right, or even just the "insight" to know what's in someone else's heart?
Excuse me, but there are many here who seem to know exactly what was in VPs heart.
Steve, thank you for opening up. I feel like I know you better. Those quotes from Isaiah and Jeremiah ignore that we today are members in particular of the body of Christ. We have eternal life guaranteed. Those folks in the OT didn't. God allows many unspeakable things to be done, even by born again ones. That doesn't impact incorruptible seed. From God's pov all mankind is evil from youth. We're dead. His mercy allowed Christ to enter the world sinless, live a perfect life, voluntarily die to pay for our sins, and return for us in glory. God's immediate judgment on OT people is irrelevant. You know this.
You said in the previous post that your respect for VP/twi was turned inside out when a woman told you face to face that VP propositioned her. Next thing you know, VP is not a Christian. You're not the only one here who snapped like that. You never had to do that. I can see that you love God. Again, some things only God can sort out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
This is only applicable if you accept dispensationalism, as set forth by Darby. Wierwille called them "administrations". Same thing, different name.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Well, that's not at all related to the question. However, vpee was the one in the spotlight pretty much all of the time and put himself out there as the "MOG."
There's LOTS of reflection in the GSC forums on his actions.
I'd say to you, "nice deflection," because that's what your response is. But it's not nice. Instead, it constitutes an invalid argument and apparent lack of understanding of
emotional and social intelligence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
So - Johniam - what "faith" was VPW demonstrating by his works upon young women? And upon the young women's husbands, if they had a husband?
or more familiarly:
If one can tell what is going on in a child's head and heart by the child's actions, by the outward demonstration of what the child believes, how much more for an adult? Remember, we're not looking in the short term of a quick and convenient lie about something that VPW did or didn't do - anyone can lie and dissemble for a short period. On the contrary, we're considering the pattern of behavior over a period of years. Over some decades, what does that man's actions betray about his heart? His thoughts? His faith?
And that's what gives the right, or insight, to know what's in someone else's heart. The long-term actions, or works, of that someone. Whether that someone be VPW, Johniam, Rocky, the Pope, the President, the Queen ...
Edited by TwinkyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
You would do well to pay closer attention to what I've actually written, my friend! :)/>
You wrote, "You said in the previous post that your respect for VP/twi was turned inside out when a woman told you face to face that VP propositioned her. Next thing you know, VP is not a Christian. You're not the only one here who snapped like that. You never had to do that. I can see that you love God. Again, some things only God can sort out."
I didn't write that my "respect for VP/TWI was turned inside out." I wrote "That was the moment when my love for The Way International turned inside out." That moment was when it was confirmed to me by biblically proper testimony that Martindale, the leader of TWI, was practicing the same sins as Eli's sons and as the prophets of Jerusalem did prior to the fall of the city in 597 BCE. It wasn't Wierwille... I didn't have ANY testimony regarding him at that time... it was Martindale. And I already knew that Martindale's leadership was making wreck of the whole ministry.
I did NOT write "VP is not a Christian." I wrote, "Wierwille was not Christian." I had originally written, "Wierwille was not a Christian," but after long and hard consideration, I decided to take the "a" out of the sentence. That changed the word "Christian" from a noun to an adjective. I am not judging whether or not Wierwille was a Christian. Only Jesus Christ himself can do that. But I am saying that the words and actions and fruit of Wierwille's life do NOT demonstrate Christ-like attitudes or behaviors.
I never "snapped," as you put it. It took me a lot of time, diligent study, and prayerful thought before I was able to see through the "Dr. Wierwille" that we all thought we knew and loved to the real "man behind the curtain" of TWI. The first thing that gave me pause was the quality of leadership exhibited by Martindale and the Corps Coordinators I had known. This quality was the fruit of Wierwille's specific example, training and selection, and it was reprehensible. Wierwille was not a leader. He had an uncanny ability to manipulate people into doing what he wanted, but that isn't the same thing as leadership. Wierwille didn't teach Martindale, the Corps, or ANY of us, the very first principle of leadership, to take responsibility. Wierwille didn't train people to become leaders. He surrounded himself with yes-men. And Martindale became president of TWI because he did best that thing which yes-men do.
Martindale didn't start out as a serial sexual predator. He had to be persuaded to become one by his mentor, Wierwille. That was some of the fruit of Wierwille's life.
I can see that you love God, too, johniam!
Next episode, what time is it, anyway?
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Here's another... Proverbs 23:7. thanks for those verses, Twinky.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
So you don't want to be in the body of Christ anymore because you'd have to share space with VP...and millions of others? You'll get over it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I never said anything even remotely similar to that. My comment was in reference to dispensationalism, a concept that Wierwille called administrations. It's a (non-Biblical) methodology that compartmentalizes sections of the Bible in order to absolve oneself from the mandates of other sections. I suggest you go back and read what I said more carefully.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
Was the fall of Jerusalem in the sixth century BCE REALLY God's immediate judgement on OT people? Is it REALLY irrelevant to us today? You say I know this. What do I REALLY know?
I know this. Paul wrote in Romans 15:4 that the accounts of the fall of Jerusalem were written for our learning... for OUR learning. According to Wierwille all of God's wonderful matchless Word in the Old Testament and in the Gospels has been totally irrelevant to US since the Day Of Pentecost. Yet here in Romans, written AFTER the Day of Pentecost, Paul, the man who received the revelation of the mystery, tells us that everything written before-time was written for US to learn things from!
Wierwille taught in Power for Abundant Living that Romans 15:4 says the Hebrew Bible, which was all that had been written before Paul, was written FOR us, but not TO us, therefore we can safely ignore whatever parts of it we don't like. In PFAL, Weiwille was forcing Romans 15:4 to mean the exact opposite of what it actually says. If you stop and carefully examine what Wierwille taught, he often desecrated the Word of God that way. Romans 15:4 tells us that the accounts of Jerusalem's 6th century BCE fall were written for US Christians, living in the same time as Paul, to learn something from. What are we supposed to learn from them?
We have to have a little background first. Salvation for Israel in the OT was the Exodus from Egypt. Israel was saved BEFORE the law was given and the covenant of Sinai was cut. People did not have to work to earn salvation in the Old Testament. After the Exodus, they were automatically born into the covenant community. Keeping the law was NOT a means to salvation, it was how saved people were supposed to behave out of thanksgiving for their salvation. Sin did not automatically exclude a person from the covenant community. Sacrificial atonements freed them from the consequences of their sins. Those atonements were symbols for the full atonement that would come with the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. The heart of the law was not for people to keep all the picky little details, the heart of the law was for people to extend the same mercy and righteouness toward others as God had extended to them in the Exodus.
Time went by, the united kingdom of Israel was set up (later to be divided into the kingdoms of Israel and Judah). God had his symbolic home in the Temple at Jerusalem. Because the leaders of Israel led their people out from under the covenant, Samaria, the capital of Israel fell to the Assyrians in 722 BCE, but Jerusalem miraculously escaped the same fate.
So the leaders of Judah taught their people that they were invulnerable because God's Temple was in Jerusalem. They could never "lose their salvation" the way the ten tribes of the north had, whether they kept the heart of the law or not.
So what was going wrong in Jerusalem? First, according to Isaiah 9:16-17, it was the leaders who were responsible for the problems. It was not the "leaves on the tree" failing to run the classes strictly enough. It was the leaders' hypocrisy, speaking the truth of the law, but behaving lawlessly. According to Jeremiah 23, the hypocrisy was exactly the same as TWI's... adultery... teaching that people are to be loved and things to be used, but using people and loving things.
The prophets told the people of Judea that they were immune to having the same judgment fall on them as had fallen on Samaria, because God's Temple was in Jerusalem, and God would NEVER let it fall, even if the people didn't keep the law. The people didn't reform, and Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians, and the Temple was destroyed in 587 BCE. Israel has never fully recovered since then.
As Christians we were saved when we received the gift of the Holy Spirit under the new covenant, not by works, but by grace through faith. After we received salvation, we received a law that we are supposed to keep out of thanksgiving for our salvation. That is the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, written on the tables of our hearts, and it does NOT contradict the 10 commandments.
Wierwille taught us that grace freed us from having to keep any law whatsoever. We can sin however we want to, whenever we want to, and we will be still be invulnerable to the consequences of sin. That just ain't so. When we fail to keep the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, we walk out from under the protection of the new covenant. What will that mean at the bema? Only Jesus Christ can say. But we saw the fruits of Wierwille's hypocrisy, the "covenant community" of The Way International was destroyed, as surely as Jerusalem was destroyed in the 6th century BCE.
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
I thought VP made his case very well. There are scriptures that blatantly contradict each other if they're addressed to the same people under the same rules. By denying this, you "absolve" yourself of having to rightly divide the word. Or even believe there IS a word of God. VP thought all that through. He was right about that one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
In the grace administration, we have incorruptible seed the OT believers never had. David prayed that God wouldn't take holy spirit from him. (Ps51:11) In Acts 15 Peter called the OT law a yoke neither we nor our fathers were able to bear. (v.10) There was no guaranteed eternal life in the OT. Yes, I agree twi lost its community and VPs actions had something to do with it, but that doesn't mean VP wasn't born again. Doesn't mean pfal wasn't teaching the word of God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
VP simply parroted an idea that was launched by John Darby, in the 1830's.. Darby may not have been the first to present the concept but he is generally attributed as being the leading proponent. It encompasses the idea of various portions of the Bible being written to one group with the exclusion of another. It is not a Biblical concept, nor is there any scriptural documentation substantiating it.
You said:
"There are scriptures that blatantly contradict each other if they're addressed to the same people under the same rules."
That's precisely what dispensationalism attempts to resolve.
There are portions of scripture that plainly contradict each other. The only way to make them "fit" is to pretend that different administrations are subject to different rules. The problem with this is that it has no scriptural basis.
You are perfectly free to think VP was "right about that one". However, you have not successfully demonstrated a basis for that opinion.
edit:
" ....that doesn't mean VP wasn't born again."
I never raised that issue.
Quite frankly, I couldn't care less if he was or wasn't.
"Doesn't mean pfal wasn't teaching the word of God"
PFAL was a conglomeration of the (uncredited) works of others , such as B.G. Leonard, Stiles, Bullinger and many others. There is no guarantee their works were correct or incorrect interpretations of the scriptures.
edit#2:
"In the grace administration...."
The Bible talks about God's grace. It never talks about a "grace administration".
That's a product of dispensationalism.
Edited by waysiderLink to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Almost thou persuadeth me... er, well really I should say that pretty much, thou hast persuaded me that the Bible is just one big story that provides (probably) billions of people with something around which to provide meaning to their lives and provide meaning to this life.
When I was 20, there were people, my elders (not in my church or cult) just people who had lived a couple of decades longer than I had at that time. These folks suggested to me that truth was relative and that there are many ways to "find God." Of course, VPee addresses that issue head on in the FLAP class. Over the course of the last 40 years, so much more of life, and discussions like we see on this thread, have convinced me that there probably ARE many ways to get to heaven, if there is or will be such a thing (or place).
Seriously, it has become so obvious that johniam is either a tremendous poser (pretending to be such a twi dogmatist) or is a complete loon. I say that with respect. There's no indication I see in your writing here, john, that your life is out of control in any way. It's just that your writing shows a worldview that I find so completely bizarre.
OTOH, Steve L makes a solid argument with most everything I've seen him post (especially on this thread). But I can't help but wonder/realize that, in the context of myths (many myths are true, but as I understand it now, they all are stories that help people understand social and psychological aspects of life). I wonder how genuinely it really matters who is right?
Granted, I accept that the common understanding at gsc about our common experience with twi is that twi was not a genuine heavenly utopia, rather a subculture built on a charismatic, narcissistic and perhaps psychopathic character's storytelling. But other than that, what does it really matter which meaning a given greek word is correct?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Loon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
krys
I hope I misread this - - because we don't name call here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I think he was responding to the post that asked (in jest) whether he was a poser or a loon.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
The more I have participated on this thread, johniam, the more I have come to appreciate what you wrote in your first post. It seems that you and I have some things over which we we can agree to disagree, but that doesn't mean I don't appreciate you as my brother in Christ, and as the unique expression of God's love that you are. You fell in love with TWI and Wierwille. So did I. We just had different experiences coming out of our encounters with TWI.
God has recently flung me back into intimate contact with a religious community that I had to walk away from about five or six years before I ever heard of
TWI. That community formed in the late 1800s, but believed that there is only ONE church of God, and that creeds are man-made and divisive. This group never participated in the fundamentalist conferences, and so never ended up subscribing to the idea of literal inerrancy of the Bible. But the group was very much into music, and there are several nationally known gospel singers who came out of the tradition. It struck me that the mindset of this group was not handed down through the sermons that the ministers taught, or articles and books that the writers wrote, but through the lyrics of the songs the congregations sang.
I was reminded of that when I was reflecting on your first post that I just quoted. Many of us experienced the unconditional love of God in our local twigs. If that love didn't come from Wierwille and Power for Abundant Living, where DID it come from? I am inclined now to think that unconditional love was modeled to the people of TWI by the hippies Wierwille brought back from California. It seems that THEY might be the original "rock stars" of TWI...
What do the rest of you think?
Love,
Steve
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Yeah, I was referring to myself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Yeah, the love of God in the fellowship is noticeable. And after awhile the absence of it is even more noticeable. VP had nothing directly to do with that. I had brief encounters with him maybe 3 times total. I didn't see any of the meanness described here, however I'm not saying it didn't happen.
Literal rock stars fill a void in world culture. In my first post, I compared Irish writers and twi people with one characteristic of rock stars. That would be the enablement to disrespect things held dear in world culture. AC/DC's Highway to hell and Jethro Tull's Wind up are similar in poking fun at religion. I know Angus and Malcomb Young of AC/DC were raised catholic and I'm not sure about Tull's Ian Anderson, but in a fairly recent interview, he described himself as a cross between a deist (who believe in a creator God, but don't believe He has direct dealings with humans) and a pantheist (one who believes nature is God). But both those songs and many others really connected with their listeners.
The music in twi really helped me transfer from being world minded to God minded. Especially in my attitude about myself. During my wow year we were always listening to Joyful Noise, Pressed down, Good seed, Glad tidings, the Jordan river ramblers, anybody they had, and it seemed to resist the world's message and buffer the word's. It was just what I needed at the time.
As for the hippies. When I got into the dope culture in 1970, the people did seem more loving, cool, and positive than anybody else, but by 1975, the year before I got into twi, the drug culture seemed to evolve into just another way to conform. I can't help but believe that the Doops and Heefners people like that found twi favorable compared to the worldly hippies of the late 60s.
Hey, Steve, one thing you said I totally agree with is that the trustees were primarily responsible for losing the unity we had, NOT the leaves on the tree. They were behind the wheel, so to speak.
Edited by johniamLink to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Way, yes TWI did ruin lives; I wonder how many those whose lives were ruined will ever recover??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Steve, excellent post!! Â However, I just wanted to add my two cents; I heard VPW teach live several times. Â I thought he was boring, boring, boring! Â Just my opinion; I know a lot of people will disagree with me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
Way, bingo!!! Â
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grace Valerie Claire
John, not the Monkees. Â He wanted to be a Beach Boy. But, he scared them, so they let him be.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.