Leaderboard

Yeah......ain't that the truth. Having grown up in a small-town farming community, with helpful neighbors.....NO ONE quibbles about "doctrine." Sheeesh. This whole actions speak louder than words AND, most definitely walking by holy spirit........is why the big-wigs at twi are so plastic, not genuine. Teach, pontificate, teach......repeat.

Nearly a year ago I was in critical care in the hospital with pneumonia. An amazing thing I observed while there was that every single person, from the top doctors to the people who were delivering my meals and taking out my trash, exhibited an un-self-conscious heart of service. I think the Lord was showing me that in serving me, they were serving him, because at that time, I was certainly the least of his brothers. And their hearts of service were of far more importance than any quibbles of "doctrine" that I might have had with them. We often neglect that praxis is more important than doctrine. We were incredibly arrogant in TWI. It was only because of God's mercy that he didn't strike us all dead... Love, Steve

The primary goal of this thread was to point out the blatant error and premise of wierwille's ministry. When you state that you "don't believe VP had it right"......is that **to punk wierwille** also?? If one holds to account that scripture is "God-breathed" and is profitable for instruction in righteousness, then that should be the focal point not "of Paul" or "of Cephas" or "of Wierwille." Throughout the Greasespot Café you will find posters who no longer hold to the "of Wierwille" doctrine or theology......we've moved on. And some, I might add.....have HEEDED the essence of the apostle Paul's epistle to the Corinthians. So contrary to "dissing Paul".....we've embraced his words to the early church to not "follow after the flesh" [wierwille], but in that which is noble, mighty, wise and glorious. The very essence of Christianity IS set forth. In. The. Scriptures. Wierwille's ministry is an OFFSHOOT of Rev. B.G. Leonard. Why do people think that wierwille had the "original" on anything?

Okay, got it. I read into your comment something that wasn't there, my bad! Hmmm...I'm not sure there's anything between the lines to read Ha! Yes, he's not all that popular here! That's not to say that something the Vicster said was necessarily wrong, but he is certainly not considered a reliable source I don't know if it's rubbish or not - I was just questioning select parts of what you said - and anyway, you have every right to post your opinions here, even if nobody agrees

Unless I'm mistaken, reformation theology and expansion theology refer to one and the same thing. (Some calling it one, some calling it the other.) I think it might also be called unity theology. There's something else called replacement theology that I avoided using, as that term seems to be more egregious to some, who claim it's merely straw to be blown down. But, most people follow after one form or another of one of these theologies, whether they either know it or admit it. Yeah, maybe I lost sight of primary goal of the thread, to punk wierwille. Where was I, thinkin' more 'bout what sound doctrine is or might or should be? But then, how do you honestly assess or measure how much twi's teachings and doctrine skewed the very essence of Christianity, if the very essence of Christianity is never set forth right in the first place?

Well......since "the entire first post" is my doing, it looks like I'd better step in and respond to this. Thanks for being candid, TLC: 1) You don't believe that VP had it right 2) You don't believe that Bullinger had it right 3) You don't believe that reformation theology has it right 4) You don't believe that expansion theology [ie Arthur Pink] has it right Got it. Wierwille spent the vast majority of his teachings, pamphlets, retemories, plagiarized books, etc. in the Pauline epistles. He heavily emphasized dispensationalism, wherein the four gospels were "Old Testament...for your learning" in pfal and emphasized it to his grave. Oh, sure....he gave lip-service to Jesus and the anointed Christ, but anyone who sat it hundreds of his teachings and corps/staff meetings knows the thrust of his core beliefs. Heck, if this were the doctrinal forum.....we could delve into I Cor. 1_12-30 and SHOW that the apostle Paul had the SAME PROBLEMS in the early churches.....ie followers wanting to be "of Paul" or "of Apollos" or "of Cephas." Yet, even Paul directs them to Christ Jesus. Sure, you might say....."that's what wierwille did." But many of us are saying......NO, he didn't. I leave you with Rev. Oral Robert's teaching (below). Why was wierwille STILL plagiarizing from other ministers [1978] four years before he retired? [1982] He didn't know Jesus, the Christ, the son of the Living God.