Leaderboard

I agree - saying we are not a mix of all that stuff from before but we now have something special worked out with what Jesus Christ accomplished is a big spiritually defining deal! Besides all that he achieved for us spiritually, I think there might be a practical interpretive tool that the Gospels/his earthly life provided. I’ll get to that further down – but first I want to mention something that got me thinking along that line. I just finished reading an interesting book “Making Sense of the Bible” by Adam Hamilton and will probably reread it a few more times down the road since I found a few of the author’s ideas very intriguing. One of the ideas is about how God inspires people today may not be all that different than it was in biblical times… That alone is a lot to think about... And spoiler alert - in case you haven't noticed - a while back I started leaning to a more liberal theology ( which I shared on another thread concerning the Bible ). Our current knowledge of the world often presents challenges when studying the Bible because of the much larger frame of reference that we have. I feel - to be honest - within that larger frame of reference - I must differentiate between the human and divine elements of scripture. Viewing the Bible through an historical lens might recognize certain changes as religious developments. But that’s not to say God is developing…evolving… or has been brainstorming all along the way as if flying by the seat of his long flowing robes, making sure “the changes to policy and procedure” memos get out on time, informing folks of the current way God behaves or superintends his creation…I’m thinking more along the lines of how people mature in their understanding of God. What if the “fabric” of the God-inspired scriptures isn’t so seamless? One of the things that Hamilton’s book got me to think more deeply about is the idea of a dual authorship of scripture. I believe scripture is inspired of God - but there’s the human element of each author. What exactly does that mean to us when trying to understand it? How much of a nuance do we allow for when taking into account the author’s humanness, individual style, historical outlook and cultural context? One of the problems I have with the fundamentalist’s viewpoint of scripture as being inerrant even when speaking of the things of science, history, geography, etc. - is that this viewpoint ignores the human component of authorship and might give the impression that the God who created the cosmos is an ignorant old coot who forgets details and glosses over errors. What does all this have to do with an “administrations” viewpoint? maybe a lot...I dunno – maybe it's important when it comes to practical application. Some scholars suggest one of the things we should do in trying to understand the scriptures is try to understand what a passage meant to the original recipients. But if we look back at when a certain passage occurred and just say that’s how God ran things at that time – we might miss its relevancy for today. For instance, in “The NIV Cultural Background Study Bible” (editors John Walton & Craig Keener) when handling the fall of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3 say that one can imagine a variety of ways that people might strive to “be like God”; some commendable, others inappropriately ambitious or subversive… and that in the ancient near east the aspirations of wisdom and godlikeness were defensibly laudable pursuits… and that back then it was common for folks to meditate on ways in which people succeeded or failed in achieving wisdom and godlike noble qualities. TWI / Fundamentalists take a lot of stuff as very literal – so they focus on the forbidden fruit. What was it exactly? And if not speculating at what the fruit was they usually have a very rigid interpretation of the fall of mankind saying in an act of disobedience they questioned God’s word. While I do agree it was insubordination, I don’t think it was a specific fruit or item in the Garden of Eden – even though it says “you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” since Genesis 1 Informs us that mankind was made in God’s image and was given a very comprehensive mandate to “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” – and besides the fact that we are given very little details of the drama unfolding in Genesis 3 – leads me to believe there’s more here than just someone refusing to simply follow God’s Word without question. I mean that pretty much puts the kibosh on critical thinking. And in my opinion critical thinking is pretty much the cornerstone or foundation of how mankind still continues to fill the earth and subdue it. In my opinion asking questions...challenging ideas are all part of the critical thinking process for any discipline - theology, philosophy, the sciences. Even in matters of faith the intellect has its place.II Corinthians 5:7 says we walk by faith and not by sight. It does NOT say we walk by faith and not by reason...I go back and forth - sometimes it's faith in pursuit of reason and sometimes it's reason in the pursuit of faith. oy vey ! …For me among other things what the story of Adam and Eve shows is the danger of pursuing a shortcut to success. They were already godlike – made in the image of God….this is overly simplistic speculation here – but what if they were freaking out over God’s comprehensive mandate – wondering how they were going to accomplish all that and perhaps the tree of the knowledge of good & evil represented a way to circumvent a lot of long hard work. I dunno…just thinking out loud. ..anyway it seems to have a lot more relevancy for me today if I see the fall of mankind as a life lesson – there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Well, I know there’s a lot more to it than that – just gotta lighten up sometimes. When I get into my critical thinking mode and look at the grand scheme of things in the Bible - why is it I sometimes get bugged by the inconsistencies between one book and another and sometimes find it very difficult to nail down “ the biblical view” on certain topics? Also the character of God seems to change within dispensational or covenant theology...but maybe that's just the way I see things...this point is not a deal breaker. If Jesus Christ is the Word made flesh then why does it seem the loving and forgiving God he reveals is quite different from the law giving , sometimes violence advocating , sometimes outright vengeful God of the Old Testament? It’s also interesting to note that Jesus Christ himself never wrote a book of the Bible... I don’t mean to trash these theologies – but maybe I’m looking for a viewpoint that looks for common ground. Again this is not a deal breaker for me. At the end of this post I will offer some redeeming qualities of these theologies. So anyway, with Jesus Christ being the Word made flesh I find myself trying to work out a Christ-centric theology as an “interpretive filter” when I study the Bible – maybe that’s the common ground...maybe similar to that what-would-Jesus-do thing. May not be the most scholarly way of practical application but it might help me see what’s relevant to living the Christian lifestyle today. In other words, how would Jesus address a certain issue? Take for example how Jesus reinterpreted some Old Testament stuff in Matthew 5: 38 to 48 - what the law said about an eye for an eye. == == == Going over the draft of my post several times – and not wanting to give anyone the idea that I am totally opposed to dispensational or covenant theology - I kept thinking about Galatians 4 Where it says “But when the set time had fully come, God sent his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption to sonship.” I have sometimes wondered why Jesus Christ was born in the first century. Recalling all the prophecies in the Old Testament, all the laws that were laid down, all the accounts that exposed the human condition – I see all that as God’s way of preparing people…helping to guide them in their spiritual growth...in that regard dispensational or covenant theology goes a long way in showing how people grow practically, intellectually, emotionally, socially, spiritually as well as gaining a deeper understanding of God. that's all I have for now...I've tried to edit out the duplicate paragraphs the best I can...sorry for the mess of copying and pasting from my laptop to Grease Spot - - I think next time I will copy the entire draft to Grease Spot, minus the links to outside references - then I will go back and edit in the links...anyway thanks all for listening to my ramblings...time to go to bed...sweet dreams everyone

A cult survives by hardening the line between "us" and "them", and making "them" so repugnant that we're glad we're not "them." That way, even when "us" are badly oppressed, we're still glad that at least we're not "them". For cults, only "us" qualify for salvation. In twi, for decades now, to leave twi is to leave " the household of God" and forfeit rewards, salvation, or both. People who stay in twi are so lulled to sleep that they don't question how wrong that is.

When new people come to GreaseSpot Café for the first time......and read "the other side of the story"........I'm sure, for some, that it is jolting. Surely, it wasn't that bad, was it? And, if you thought it was THAT bad.....why did you stay all those years? Why do you attack Dr. Wierwille's work and ministry? Those are valid questions.......yet, some refuse to stick around for further discussion or answers. They have their reasons for how twi changed their lives for the better and cite a couple of claims to the affirmative. BUT.......those who stick around for a lengthy discussion generally admit a list of things that they, too, disapproved of when it happened. We've seen these types of discussions time and again over the course of nearly 20 years. Just the FACTS........1) nearly 550 clergy have LEFT twi speaks volumes, 2) over 3,300 way corps have exited and moved on with their lives, 3) serial plagiarism of wierwille's "research" has been widely documented, 4) sexual abuse and predation by wierwille, martindale, don and howard testifies to twi's moral/spiritual corruption, 5) hoarding over $64 million of assets/investments in this non-profit organization (cough, cough), 6) books, articles and testimonies that detail the trappings of a cult, 7) the untoward secrecy that lies within and how twi treats its employees like slave-labor, 8) full-time corps fiasco......no debt-policy, no-pregnancy, 15-minute time management fill-in sheets, 9) favoritism to certain staff and corps.....while others got "retribution assignments," 10) AND.......then, you realize the twi-revisionist history in play that EVERY WIERWILLE STORY OR EVENT has been altered, fabricated or sensationalized for marketing wierwille's mystique image......there is this gut-wrenching awareness that you've been scammed by a man with pathological issues stemming from his childhood. Read Mrs. Wierwille's book......without the rose-colored glasses. Seems like, unwittingly......she reveals the myth behind the man. In all my years with twi......never saw wierwille walk by the spirit of God. NONE of the big 6 manifestations. Not one! Even his "speaking in tongues" was suspiciously repetitive. Ugh. .