Naten00

Many of the people who I talk too. Who have left TWI still hold onto his books. They tell me how great his books are. My wife if she is present usually asks (the one who was in the way) something alone the line about his checkered past of lying about his credentials. How can you trust anything he writes. Usually we just get something along the lines of shrugged shoulders. It just seems like not just people have "too little knowledge" it is as if leaving the group they want to hold on to just "too little knowledge"

It is impossible for all learning to come through only teaching. Who taught Franklin about electricity before he discovered it and if it wasn't Franklin who discovered it who taught the person who taught Franklin? Nothing would advance. Because all information would stay at the same level as their mentor or teacher. Unless the person went beyond what he was taught to discover or learn something new through other external means. Oldskool had it right when responding to me quoting VPW..... critical thinking

I always talk to my wife about points in the gospels about something that contradicts something that TWI teaches and then she tells me it wouldn't matter for me to bring it up because they were taught that the gospels where not made for this administration. I have to hit myself in the face..... I forgot the "logic" if something dose not agree with your presupposition in scripture say it was meant for another time.

I love the sarcasm Anyway I was listening to VPW speak on You Tube in his accuracy vs religion for some research and he said this.... and I quote ..... to the best of my ability "Your believing is because of what you have been taught and no one can go beyond what they have been taught" and I was thinking really....... I always thought it was the goal of the teacher for the student to go beyond what he was taught and be independent. Sounded like it would go well with the idea "too little knowledge is a dangerous thing".

My point was that it was a misquote and that both sides do this but usually people point to Christians for doing it (even if they are right)...... I don't think he (Jefferson) was a Christian by any means... Regardless they used false information in order to represent a claim right or wrong. Both sides do the same thing. Not only with Jefferson but the other signers as well to assemble how they viewed things. should be interpreted. TWI isn't the only one giving false information. Thats why it is important to do the research yourself :).

Just like this article that was posted by the NYC...... People can be narrow minded on both sides. Look at their attempt to put words in Jeffersons mouth. Always wanting to try to prove that the founders where anti God and religion. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/10/atheists-billboard-thomas-jefferson_n_1035168.html?1319731892&ncid=webmail1

I remember having a conversation with someone who is apart of a splinter cell group (for 3 hrs). His first remarks was about how much he knew studying for 28 yrs or so..... Then to tell me that all seminaries and bible colleges are worthless....... He didn't ask me my back ground till an hour later. I quickly learned their indoctrination to hate everything educated and I was told that the people who went to those schools where not thinking for themselves....... Ironic I guess but anyway ....... I realized with my background he wouldn't take anything I had to say seriously. Already knew it all.

----------------------------------------------------------------------- In fact, it is generally accepted that the "founding fathers" were Deists, not Christians. As I would agree with everything else.... I disagree that all of the founding fathers where Deists. Jefferson and Franklin I would agree with you that they were Deists. John Adams I would say he is a Christian or at the very least a strong believer in a personal God. In his letters to Abigail he talks about the prayers of Congress. He wrote " It seemed as if Heaven had ordained that Psalm to be read on that Morning" He would continue in the letter "It will amuse your Friends to read this Letter and the 35th. Psalm to them. Read it to your Father and Mr. Wilbirt." In another letter in July 3, 1776 he ends it " But I must submit all my Hopes and Fears, to an overruling Providence, in which, unfashionable as the Faith may be, I firmly believe". In his other letter about the declaration of Independence he writes "It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty.." I just don't see a Deist saying these things between his wife. To the article posted. I have read and I do agree with a lot of it. I even posted it on my facebook wall. I think this issue of reasoning is not just to those in Cults but also in Christianity. Where their beliefs rest on Pastors and since why when people get introduced into TWI it seems so knowledge based and "reasoned" at a glance that they trust the information that is presented before them. Source The Norton Anthology AMERICAN LITERATURE seventh Ed. Pages 616-629

Very True......... It just seems Francis is just more honest in the book from both sides. I can't weigh too much on Francis as it is not confirmed in my head. I hope I represented it that way as just information I found. As with all books I usually get swept away with other topics and never get to exhaustively go through them...... At least I was able to read both books through. Although the main issues is from my own research. Regarding the greek word αιων and the issue of Holiness. Anyway...... I would love to have your book review of Erasing Hell ....... Let me know what you think.

What do they think about adopting less fortunate kids. I know from experience hearing someone in the way speak badly about a cousin or something adopting some kids that would be "trouble". What a bad decision that would be. I was thinking..... to myself....... Isn't that what it means to be Christian and isn't that what God did with us? Adopt us as sons? Would it be just this person......... or is this a Way thing?

I read the book Love Wins.... I think it is a great thought provoking book. There is a lot of mis information on the subject matter of the book. He does believe in Hell just one that the lock is on the inside.....I think some of this can go alone with what C.S. Lewis writes in his book but to a more extreme. Is his views Universalist? Yes.... I would say so... Since in his theology everyone soon makes it into heaven. 1st critique of his book is that he isn't honest with the historical views of certain words on hell and the definitions of certain greek words. For instance on page 34 (on my IPAD) he addresses the issue concerning heaven with the word age. Continues the use on page 83 in the term "eternal punishment" in Matthew 25. He says that it should not be eternal and that it should be more like a period of time. When doing my research on the word I find it in places like the end of the Lords prayer. Matthew 6:13 δοξα εις τους αιωνας αμην. This is how Bell would translate it with his definition: glory in the period of time (aionas) amen. I don't think Jesus meant to say glory for a period of time. I am sure in that case the context indicates exactly eternity or forever. A month later or so Francis Chan had his book out with the help of another colleague who is more of a scholar theologian called erasing hell. He pointed out that that greek word αίὠν aion is a debated word in that community... I found that piece of info missing form his book. He also continues talking about the writings of the 1st century rabbis and their view of hell. In terms with the word Gehenna. In his book he quotes rabbis of that time using the word as a literal eternal hell. He also says that the idea of that word as a dump didn't turn up until around the 1200s. Everyone used the word Gehenna as hell. Not everyone thought it was eternal but that is what the word was used for. Although in Bells book on page 64 he says it always meant a garbage dump on the next page he writes " So the next time someone asks you if you believe in an actual hell, you can always say, "Yes, I do believe that my garbage goes somewhere...". Why didn't Bell address these issues? I do not know. I just don't get the impression Bell is being 100% honest with what is before him. 2nd critique of his book is his view of God..... I tell people the issue I have with the book is in the title. Love Wins.... I don't think Love Wins. I think God Wins. The word holy only appears twice in the book. How many times in the bible do you get God being Holy compared to God being Love? Holiness wins. For the word only to be used twice on such a central topic. I think bell ignores his other attributes. Are they mentioned........ yes. To Bell they don't carry as much weight. There has only one attribute that has been raised to the 3rd degree of repetition. Holy In Isaiah in the throne room and the same in revelations. Again I don't think Bell has Gods character weighted correctly as it is in the scriptures. What I found interesting is that Chan knows Bell and called him about his book. They had a good talk I guess. I found that interesting. There is more but I think those are the two big things I have with the book. It has been some time since I have read it. If anyone wants page numbers from Chan's book Erasing Hell his (rebuttal to Bells book kinda) let me know and I can get it for you. I don't have the book nor the time to look them up. I think it is a great book asking important questions that no ones else has at least publicly. I find in either case reading books I disagree with challenges me to know what I know better or that I am flat out wrong. I just ask people with any book including Chan's book look deeper.

I would like to go just to see what the fuss is about. I never been there..... Just heard the stories. But it looks like they wouldn't let me in.

Well, definitely when considering the gospel of John. Written very late...... Although on a similar note I do find it interesting how he completely ignores the perceptions of the early church fathers Ignatius and Polycarp (these two authors have letters soon after Johns gospel)....As far as I remember the book only mentions Ireneus (forgive me for misspelling). Please correct me if I am wrong and give me page numbers. Yeah my wife said that they viewed the Gospels as the Old Testament. IN either case I was confused how.... True or not.....how would that fact......effect the Truth of who Jesus is and how we apply it to our life. Just because in the OT God said "I Am" dose not change the fact that he is the " I Am". Thanks for the help.... I am trying to grasp the logical flow or illogical flow of their presuppositions (if that is possible). I couldn't really grasp their view of Jesus in the JC is not God book. It seems that they (people in The Way) have been given a straw man in terms of the concept of the Trinity (regardless if someone regards the Trinity the best answer true or not). Thanks Waysider and others so far this has been really helpful. Nate

Some Theologians see it as before the birth of Jesus Christ. Jesus didn't technically exist. He only existed in the form of or apart of God and didn't become Jesus until his birth. Is this a way for me to understand how VPW interprets it? That he stopped being Jesus and became something totally different (except in VPWs view Jesus never pre-existed in the form of, as, was, ect. God)?

I am very aware of that. Sorry I didn't address it. I am still trying to understand how they view the whole Jesus Christ vs Christ Jesus thing. My wife was asking if I have every heard about it a couple months back and so I went on my journey researching. Have not really grasped the concept they teach. I try to understand what others believe even if I do not believe it. So that is something I still have not grasped the concept. I have found other sources that teach that. I do see the different wording but I just don't see their thought flow in determining two different people or identities or what not. If you can help me understand it...it would be well appreciated :). Thanks Nate

Sorry for the delay of the post. I hope all is well and I value your insight and opinions. Thanks Nate

It is impossible for Jesus to be just a mere fore thought in scripture. Jesus in his conversation with Nicodemus Chapter 3 of John said this "12If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. The Next verse Jesus says that Son of Man (referring to Jesus) being lifted up like Moses lifting up the serpent refering to the cross. Jesus makes a clear distinction between Nicodemus and himself. I am from heaven... Why because he is going to ascend into it. We all know that because he did in Acts. Then John the baptist says this in verse 31 of John 3 He who comes from above is above all. He who is of the earth belongs to the earth and speaks in an earthly way. He who comes from heaven is above all. 32 He bears witness to what he has seen and heard, yet no one receives his testimony. Speaking about Jesus in literal language here again separating the rest of mankind because He (Jesus) is from heaven above all and the rest is of the earth and belongs on it. It is impossible with those two statements alone for Jesus to just exist in the foreknowledge of God. There is a lot more quotes from Jesus about him coming down from heaven. Why does Jesus say he came down from heaven? If he was just an artificially inciminated child made by God...He still would be lying if he said something like " I am the bread of life that came down from heaven". Because if he was literally made here on earth. So then John 3:12-13, 31-32 and all of the other verses would not be true. That is not private interpretation.

Learning the greek language is extremely important in understanding the fullness of the words and not having someone tell you what the words mean but knowing them. It is interesting to see how certain words are used in greek philosophy and writings and implications of those used in scripture broadens the horizon especially when speaking about Christ. This by the little I have picked up so far. I think next year I may start my Masters in Biblical Studies. Where are you going to school?

Never been in TWI but my wife has..... I have read a little of the PFAL binder. Found it interesting how it interpreted the verse about Isaiah talking about the vastness of God and how unsearchable His ways are. The red binder explained in some way we can know all of God. The idea that God can be put in a box came to my mind even though they didn't say it in their book. So the idea of a complex Trinitarian being who exists as one and is one would be a huge stumbling block. I do agree with you that even so still through all the years of research and study about the correlation between the Eternal self of Jesus Christ and His human self is held in a balance only God can truly grasp. I have been trying to understand it more and more through these years. Especially through marrying my wife and learning about TWI, interacting with people from TWI and reading VPWs book. This stirred me to start to learn greek in its own language so I can know the truth on my own accord. There is a whole lot more information out there than I think people realize. Long before the counsels. Any way I like your illustrations of the tension on a string. If you don't mind can I use it?

I think it is in the definition of who God is. Is God all-loving..... Well if he was all loving then what about Justice and Holiness? I would say God is Love but he is not all-loving. Justice must take place but his love prevents him to execute it before the appointed time. Where we all would fail. One of my favorite teachers Dr. Ravi Zacherias says that Christianity is the only religion where love and Justice meet and that is at the cross. If God was just a just God then no Cross needed. If God was only loving then just forgiving and God not needing payment for sin. I would say God is a Holy God. I was speaking with someone who is now in a splinter group from TWI (I have never been in the way with wife was and her family is). He was appauled that I believed that God would cause harm in order for the good. I asked him about when Jesus in John 9 healed the blind man from whose blind from birth. Jesus said he was blind his whole life for the purpose of being healed. He asked me do I really think God would cause someone to be blind in order for him to be glorified. I said It dose not matter what I think that is what it says. I can accept it or not. Someone could say in this verse God allowed it to happen but you still end up with God being so powerful him allowing it for the purpose of His glory is as if he did it. What is for my Good? What brings me to the full knowledge of the Truth? Is it really prosperity or is it going through life with all the struggles that come with it and have Jesus fulfill his claim at the end of Matthew "low I will be with you even to the very end of the age". Honestly I used to be angry at God until I read this verse Ps 115:3 "God is in heaven and he does whatever pleases him". It isn't about me and no amount of believing will correct that. God will do what He will. Unless the bible is false and the creator created me to worship me but that makes no since. It is funny we demand our own creations to worship and glorify us but get angry at God when he demands it out of us. I notice that in myself. In some way I don't think he even demands it. It is just intrinsic to who God is. It won't be should I or will I. It just will happen when we see Him in His total Glory. Lastly Jesus promised a hard life. Even telling the "rock" Peter that he will have die a painful death in order to glorify God and then says follow me?...sign me up!.... He even said that the rain will fall on the just and unjust alike.... What type of fair is that? Horrible things have happened through abuse and horrible hate in my life but its His walk with me that keeps me going. Through fearing the holy character who He is it do I find undying love and peace.....Now I understand in Proverbs it says the fear of the Lord leads to life and those who have it rest satisfied.

Love it!

My wife has those red book binders. Would what you said be in those red binders? That makes total since to why they are so resistant to listening to someone else even if they agree with them. My eyes have been opened! Sounds like a great way to keep someone in the dark.

When I first read the book JC is not God I was questioning my own beliefs. I just didn't stop their in my search. I told my wife that in Christianity there always an opposing book. So I took my hunt to finding that book and I found it on Amazon.com. The book Jesus Christ is God book covers a lot more than just the Deity of Christ. It talks about Weirwilles scrupulous college past and claims and sources. He even has a section over the Law of Believing. In sort to come to the truth one must look at both sides. In order to come to my conclusion I didn't stop there. I started to study koine greek and learn it in its original tong as I am continuing to do till this day. I have found that there are a lot of fundamental errors in the book concerning contextualization, greek language, definitions, greek grammar, he didn't mention all of the church fathers (Epistles of those right after the apostles) nor did he quote them honestly. It has been a wile since I have done a study on it. But I don't think this forum is about doctrine. So I will leave it at that. In my pursuits I have learned and found a lot of information that the general church public (including The Way) is ignorant of. It is just that and there are many reasons for that. The Way does a good Job at ummmm pointing that fact out. Although that is the hook I think. This has been my experience when researching and questioning my own presuppositions that I find out either A I am wrong or B I am now more sure of what I believe. To go to your comment on why people freeze I think it is ignorance or going on what other people tell them. People become angry when they don't have an answer it seems (happens to me). At some level everyone is guilty of that (including me). I have friends of other faiths and denominations that we dialogue and debate over our differences. It seems though you can't do that with the people in The Way. I tell people if you really care about someone you will invest in their religion no matter how much you disagree with them. Not for trying to convert them but because you care about them. I am newly married to my wife in a general since of 3 years. This Way thing is new to me. In my discussions with the family it becomes quite frustrating and when cornered many times they just tell me to read a book. It seems like they never ever ventured out to understand why the other person believes differently. They just go into auto mode. I just wanted to know if there was a book that they would be open to read that would kinda nudge them out of their one track its what VPW says. Some people here gave some great advise on some books. I am going to look into them and possibly read some of them once I get over my other books lol.

They named a road after the guy??? Sounds like a little bit of worship.

Thanks for the book..... My wife (who was in The Way) said it sounded like a good book to give along side with a book like Crazy Love by Francis Chan. I have had people suggest to me reading their WAY books and I have read the book Jesus Christ is NOT God, some of the Promised Seed Book and some of the foundational class stuff. I am sure that they would not read something as direct written to people in The Way as Jesus Christ IS God book. So I was wondering if there was a better option for further dialogue. I know it is a challenge for any person to read something other than what they believe in. Right or Wrong. It seems to me that once you open that door it seems the flood gates of reasons in terms of using critical thinking seems to click on. Thanks for the help Nate