All Activity

I would like to request some caution here: the topic of this thread is questioning TWI doctrine, but if we start getting into arguments for and against the reality of claimed supernatural experience, I am concerned the discussion will no longer be "About the Way" and would instead fall rightly under "Matters of Faith." I'm trying to head this off now because I don't want people to come back later and say "why did you let so and so atheist say this and not let the Christian say that?"

I lived for years with the pain and fear than my unbelieving adult children and grandchildren, who being ineligible for a ticket for the rapture trip, would have to resist the mark of some dreaded beast all the while they were experiencing the great tribulation when God's wrath is poured out and life becomes worse than anything in the history of mankind. And if they were lucky able to survive all that, they would then have to face annihilation or the lake of fire or an eternity in hell or whatever God's judgment had planned for them. But, when I realized that there was no evidence that this bogeyman of a god even existed, that fear vanished.

Probably it would be freeing. By the time I started raising children I was already involved with TWI, so all my adopted and biological children grew up with TWI doctrine. However, despite being mostly Waybrained, I tried to encourage my children to think and come to logical conclusions. It took with some of them, but not with others! By the time I remarried and was raising a stepdaughter, my wife and I didn't attempt to indoctrinate her in anything. She still managed to catch the Christianity bug through friends, got baptized while she was in Air Force basic training, and still considers herself a nondenominational, generic Christian, although I doubt she cares about doctrinal specifics. Of my children with my first wife, none have stayed with TWI. One son is an atheist, another might be, but doesn't claim the label. My daughter considers herself Catholic, but doesn't really participate. The others never talk about it. My granddaughters are raised by parents who would probably not identify as atheists, but are not involved in any church and to my knowledge never talk about religion. One of the girls told my wife that she doesn't believe in any gods. They're probably the closest in my extended family who I would consider having been raised atheist -- more like raised doctrinally neutral

I like Gervais' approach. He doesn't try to beat people over the head with atheism, or even try to convince anyone, he just states that it's the conclusion that he came to.

This thread was started because one specific man (William Barlow) did not want to be gullible about what one specific group (twi) was teaching. Instead, he wanted his questions to be open for honest discussions. He learned the hard way that this was something the deceivers and manipulators leading twi did not want in the least bit, so they "upped and awayed" him from the corps training program and demanded that he attend fellowships under one assigned leader so they could control him once he was back home. Point being is that to avoid being deceived or manipulated by religious people who are out for your loyalty, time, money and ability to think rationally, one needs to gain a good understanding of what gullibility, critical thinking and skepticism are all about.

Hopefully, this will stoke someone's memory: Larry Todd Joe Anthony Rick Todd Bama Dillert Jeffrey Moss Sam Harmon Nick Arden Jason Steele Tom Elder Dee Bishop Matt Helm Vernon Demerest George

Nothing from Nothing "Well, since she put me down, I've been out doing' in my head." George

Jesus was accused of everything. We have accounts of supernatural stories. There are a million more. One person saw the Messiah. Another saw a drunk and a charlatan. Nothing new under the sun. Interesting the above account of Mike has a lot of Bob Jones's admissions of failures.

I was there one night when a guy was raving that his back was healed through a Chris Reed word of knowledge. I've seen and heard extensively from all of them. I was at the Lakeland Revival when Todd Bentley was drawing International attention. My first visit to Morningstar was 1997.

"I'm not tryin' to be your hero 'Cause that zero is too cold for me (Brr)"

Test your gullibility. Watch the clips above. Let me know how you scored.

Point taken - thanks. One way to get rid of a scandal.

Prominent? Perhaps. Often not reliable, though.

You're asking if I'm stupid and gullible? Sometimes. Eban Alexander and Mary Neal are a couple doctors and researchers claiming to have had death experiences (more than mere NDEs). Sill, there are countless others including Colton Burpo, Don Piper and a favorite, Ian McCormick. There is a whole stream of Christians claiming to go to Heaven without dying- Justin Abraham; Mike Parsons; Nancy Cohen, etc, etc. Eye witness testimony is perhaps the most prominent evidence used in law courts. By design, the gospel was to be spread by word of mouth. Without 'skepticism' it is impossible to please God. That's not what it says.

Yes. Many here have talked about it being schismatic. Lots of people left over the issue. IIRC, TWI didn't want people reading it and were ....ed JS even wrote it. Again, that JS even felt like he had to write it is the whole problem. That grown adults didn't know what to believe about adultery and that they needed clear guidance on the issue is an even bigger problem.

I've read it as well (years after the fact), but I have no interest in discussing it now. I was just wondering if anyone remembers the push back/warnings against reading it at the time or just being able to bring up the topic of adultery without any mention of the paper. Being in Canada, I don't think it was well-known that the paper even existed, but then again I was out by 1986.

You can find plenty of discussions on that paper here. I read it, but don't remember it. I'm sure it's fine and its conclusion biblically supported. But I'm unimpressed. That it was controversial speaks volumes. That anyone would need a theological paper to arrive at an ethical or moral conclusion about adultery speaks libraries.

It's so true - Mike Bickle was the worst of them. If you listen to his link above, it sounds like he's doing stand-up comedy when he talks about his visit to heaven. What's even more sickening is that Bickle used his "golden chariot" prop from his story to help groom a 19-year-old female into having an affair with him by prophesying she would one day ride with him in it. I realize I have gotten far off the topic of this thread but William Barlow and his parents were leaders in twi when John Shoenheit's paper on adultery was covertly being circulated. I wonder if any of his pages of questions were about twi's stance on adultery since the paper got John fired for writing it. twi actually threatened the corps to not read it. Some here might have experienced this. So much for asking questions.

Ah, hence the word "trip" in your post. I haven't heard anything so far about drug use with these guys but adultery and/or CSA was committed by all of them except Rich Joyner (as far as what's been reported). However, he and his church has recently been named in lawsuits for turning a blind eye to sexual grooming and assaults by a former youth group leader volunteer. The man went on to plead guilty to 10 counts to sexual conduct with a minor and assault and battery and was sentence to nine years in prison.

My point is that profound events of disillusionment are not and cannot be so flippantly recounted. One may feel an urgency or excitement about retelling an experience, but ultimately realize any attempt is futile. Words become embarrassingly insufficient. This is true for the religious/mystical experience, psychedelic trip and the astronaut's spacewalk.

Dimethyltryptamine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyltryptamine

Good point. DNR (that one I know) - your condition was even more serious than what I had thought before. So, so thankful you are still here Waysider.

My mind has gone in search of what DMT means in the Land of Acronyms and Text Abbreviations. Help bring in back home to me please. Thanx Also, your highlighted line above - a wise person I know once told me "the one claiming to speak for God is surely the one who does not."

I listened to the video below again and I think it's all about being honest with yourself like I mentioned to Raf. This One Failed Promise Should Stop Christians In Their Tracks! "And The Sick Will Be Made Well" On one hand, you have the apologist saying: “Why does God heal some and why he doesn’t heal others is God’s sovereign will his choice. We might not understand. The question is are we going to trust him? So please don’t think that if you’ve asked God and he hasn’t healed you, it’s necessarily because you have a weak or lack of faith. That’s bad theology.” On the other hand, you have Brandon calling God on not keeping his promise. Which of the two ways is the most honest? God gives specific instructions for what to do when you’re sick (James 5:13-15) - if you do this, you will be healed. So, when God does not heal you after you've followed the instructions, it rightfully becomes an issue of God's trustworthiness. Like with any human who regularly does not follow through on their word, it is rational to lose trust in that person. But with God, the fallacy of special pleading gets applied (aka selective adherence when someone claims an exception to a general principle or rule without sufficient justification). Is this being honest? Shame also enters the picture when you're told (however gently) "how dare you question God?" God's ways are not man's ways. Just keep trying and trusting. But where is the honesty in that when you compare it to what James clearly says? Is it being honest to believe without question in salvation that is prescribed in Romans 10:9-10 but turn around and not hold God to what he prescribed about healing in James 5:13-15? There is no difference - they are both clear promises. One can put all their faith in "the abstract, unverifiable and unfalsifiable" biblical claim of eternal life, and yet make excuses for every biblical claims of healing (see below) that is demonstrated not to work. How is this being honest? Is not the honest thing to say is that an untrustworthy God cannot be a real God? ********************* More verses in the video about healing: Psalm 41:3; Isaiah 38:5; Mark 6:13; Exodus 15:26; Psalm 30:2; Jeremiah 17:14 Verses in the video about what God says about asking for things: Matthew 7:7-8; Matthew 21:22; Mark 11:24 (faith the size of a mustard seed is all that’s needed – Matthew 17:20); John 14:13; 1 John 5:14