sky4it

For me it was 20 years ago, so its kinda a mute point. I have traveled the weary road of the First Assemblies and Lutheran Charismatics, and found that I can get disenfranchised their as well. However, it never has been the rhetorical doctrinal diputes with other Christians that occured with the Way. More like the proverbial why is this person gossiping about me when they should be keeping there mouths shut. And after that i went off verbially in there face, I could look at myself in the mirror and feel just fine. Kinda nice to hand out one of those rebukes on occassion and not get all spiritual about it. YYYYEEEEEEEEEE Hawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

So come. Face to face. Eyeball to eyeball. St. Louis, MO. Anytime in a public place. Bring anyone you wish. I will bring myself, my Holy Bible and maybe a tape recorder and 2 or 3 witness I suppose I should bring too. - reprinted part of the post from liar liar. Liar Liar: Your right big fella i cant come to St. Louis. How about right here in this room right now on this thread. And you can quote me all the Greek in Greece and I will still say that Weirwelle's doctine is full of holes. You language certainly seems to reflect that if I dont believe Weirwelle's every word, I am not saved. What bunk. read my topic on My beleif's in the Lord and The Way International and tell me one way that I haved erred. You cant can yah?

Mark: Agreed. :)--> I am new to this board. but i posted my story and beliefs on what i beleive were serious doctrinal errors under a new topic, My story and beliefs about the Lord and Way International. Hope you guys enjoy.

sorry gang, my 1st page is second and second page is first, so read them that way. I thought the last post would appear first my mistake.

I was 17 years old when I took the PFAL class Prior to this class I had been saved and had taken the Bill Gothard Basic Institute on Youth Conflicts. I also had read many Watchmen Nee books and the like. After high school, I attended some way twig fellowships, and borrowed some tapes from a guy who was big in The Way there. I also attended briefly and left a big Way convention in Minneapolis. During this time , I attended a Assemblies of God Church from time to time also. I was wrestling deeply with the teachings of Victor Paul Weirwelle. I enrolled and took 15 credits of biblical Greek. Throughout this time my views about The Way and its teachings were profoundly changed. Before I get into what I think some serious errors are, let me make a few comments. I know that mainstream Christianity has criticized The Way as a cult without really having a basis for understanding the teachings of the Way. I think this was wrong of them. Neither does it allow those of you that have learned "from the Lords hand" something good, to feel that your time is redeemable that you spent. For some of you clearly it was. For others clearly it wasn't. Lets let the Lord be judge, who will render unto every man according to his work. Personally, I think those of you who move on can take a suitcase full of experience and make good of it. After all, isn't that what our Lord is really about, mending broken hearts? I believe there was some serious error in the teaching of Victor Paul Werewille. Two of the cornerstones of his teachings come from Peter and Timothy, I will address them first. I ) II Peter 2:20 provides one of the corner stones on which Victor Paul hung his hat. You know the one, " Knowing this first that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." From this he taught that the Bible interprets itself . Clearly this is not what this scripture says. In no place does this scripture say that the Bible self interprets. What does the scripture say then about itself and understanding it? It says a lot. I Corinthians 2:13 says " Which things also we speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual with spiritual." Alas , the Holy Ghost is the teacher. Neither do we have to be concerned with excesses of words, because by definition the Holy Ghost teaches us what these words mean. II Corintians 3:6 says , " Who hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth but the spirit giveth life." Ask yourself a questions: The spirit giveth what or who life? How about us life. How about the spirit giveth the letter life. We know that the Sword of the Spirit is the Word of God. Without the spirit though its just another sword and not even God's sword. In addition, God did not make us ministers of the letter. That's what it says right? And we all know it says what it means and means what it says. PS, Let me add one more thing, I think I also have the spirit on that one. We know from Corinthians that then you people have the right to judge. That's what it says. It says in I Corinthians 14:29 that when someone speaks and says they have the spirit, "Let the other judge." Because you and me have this thing inside us called a conscience and we use it to decipher between good and evil as it says in Hebrews. Refreshing to think that God seems to like the idea that we question things with our conscience. . Sufficient to say that the "word became flesh." If you want to know what his words meant isn't it best to go to the author and ask? Let me give you a simple illustration of how the Bible does not interpret itself. I want to do this because Victor Paul said there were no inconsistencies in the Bible and if he found one, he would dig and dig until he fixed up the letters. Here is my example. Two scriptures that say exactly the opposite of each other. Galations 6:2 " Bear you one anothers burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ" and Galations 6:5 " For every man shall bear his own burden." Despite two different Greek words for burden, both have the meaning of taking a load off of someone else's life. The contradiction is erased not with words but with grace and remember its by grace that we are saved. Why by grace? Because the grace of God by the Spirit teaches us when to say no and when to say yes to others. The difference maker is experience. We know that its not good to carry the load of others who are abusing us. We also know that providing were not tired out, its feels great to lend a helping hand to a friend in need. Without experience, you cannot make the word of God click. Thank heavens, that God didn't digitize his word so that we were like robots. Its what makes us grow and learn. It's also fun. I loved it when I learned to say no and others got mad at me and I knew God wasn't. Because I knew they were abusing me and it felt great to make it stop. Gang, this is Biblical also. Romans 5:3-5 says that the work of God in us is experience. It takes experience and doing it to work the word of God not "words." It's in the application man, not the words. The Bible is like a big bag of jewels, with each facet being discovered more clearly with experience. 1

II. The other cornerstone that VP Weirwelle laid in his teachings was II Timothy 3:16,17 & II Timothy 2:15. I realize that you guys know this like the back or your hand, but I will put it here so I can explain the error. Respectively, " All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof , for correction , for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." And "Study to show thyself approved unto God a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." A) Interestingly, the thought on the first scripture relates clearly to doctrine which creates in us "righteousness". In no place does it say that its profitable for "research" and mathematical disputes about semantics of languages. The only profit in scripture is directed towards "the man of God being made perfect." It does not say becoming perfect in recitations about the written word of God either. It simply says perfect and the context is righteousness. And we all know that V.P. was big on context wasn't he. Furthermore the direction of the scripture is to be "furnished unto all good works" It is not directed to being the biggest know it all's that ever walked on the face of the planet. To direct it as such was a huge error. In addition, Werewille appears to be a victim of his own writings by wrongly dividing the word of truth and directing such words as though they were significantly of a better standard than those around him. This scripture never indicates that it is to be used to create a crossbar or standard that is elitist, but rather that one may be righteous. If you were to read E.W. Bullingers , The Witness of the Stars," and his other book on the significance of numbers, you will find that they fall quite short of providing scientific evidence for things about creation. Why? Because the Bible isn't a scientific book, its a book whose centerpiece is "righteousness." It appears that Wierwelle really fell off the map on this one. B) With respect to the second scripture in Timothy, about "Studying" and "Rightly dividing the "Word of Truth", where does it say to only divide the "written word?" We know that the Word was made flesh in the person of Jesus Christ and the Word was God from John Chapter I. Therefore are we to "rightly divide" God and Jesus? The answer is clearly yes. Neither did Jesus have much problem with it when he said, "except you eat my flesh and drink my blood you have not life within you." and again " withersoever the carcass is there will the eagles be gathered" Of course, even V.P. Werewile himself argued that there were figures of speech for if we ate his flesh and drank his blood that would make us cannibals. Still, were did Werewille receive the proper diction to define what was a figure of speech and what wasn't? That fact was he never could. And for me to say that this particular scripture is in part a figure of speech referring to dividing the "Word who is Truth", is no more different than Werewille pointing out what the figures of speech were in order that he might make the scriptures consistent. Furthermore, Werewille falls victim to his own writings, because if he can define what a figure of speech is, that is inherently taking scripture for "ones own interpretation"; which the man profoundly said was wrong to do. If all this isn't enough lets look at the context. Because we all know how big VP was on context. The very next verse says, II Timothy 2:16, "but shun profane and vain babbling: for they will increase unto more ungodliness." Once again, the scripture speaks about "godliness" That is, the thrust and focus of this entire scripture. I never once heard someone from the way tell me , to put down my bible for a while, this is about godliness. The only thing studying the Bible did was encourage me to study the bible more. Because don't you know, "Its the Word man, Its the Word. Clearly the word is not about the word, absurd as that sounds. Its about godliness man its about godliness. I am suppose to study with my focus being on godliness not about striving to have "the perfect doctrine." Because having a perfect doctrine will not make you perfect unless you apply and practice it. Lastly, there are 7 different tenses in the Greek , but only 3 different ones in the English language. According to Werewille's theories, wouldn't we all be better of knowing the Greek tenses? And that my friends is where this boat really sinks, for if you would try to understand them all, 95 percent of the people would be left out. Furthermore, if the gospels were originally in Aramaic they are twice removed from that language. Whiter or not the Apostle John and Peter and James even wrote them in Greek , I know not, neither do I care. why? Because its about godliness man, godliness. And what would you say about the old testament , that we all were suppose to become Hebrew scholars also? No , because its about godliness man, godliness. Furthermore, to sit and babble on about these languages is to do precisely what the scripture warns about not to do, because the context is godliness man godliness. I sincerely hope some of you have found this helpful. 2