Twinky

Hey Hammy, have a good one.

Yes, I did intend for it to be iin About The Way. I considered Doctrinal and made a decision that that is NOT where I wanted it to be. I wanted to discuss this particular application of TWI rubbish. Brushstroke: If he has opened the door, it doesn't need opening again. Yeah, they never told us that we would follow their law. We lived by grace, doncha know. What I asked was: Any takers?

Thanks, Geisha. It is an interesting discussion with a lot to think about and a lot of side issues being raised in the posts. Thank you all who are posting, for keeping to the main point. There are many others who are following this discussion who are not necessarily posting, but it is clearly food for thought. I think I am prepared to take on board that whether Bride or Body, it is just another figure of speech to represent a type of relationship. Like sonship. BoJC's idea of the Bride being taken out of the Body is a new concept. As to a current thought posted above that we might be "cut off" or "no eternal security", I can't quite see that alongside this thread. A Body doesn't usually cut bits of itself off unless horribly diseased or mutilated such that the rest of the body would be at mortal risk (gangrene, for example). Cutting off someone does not fit either with the concept of a Bride becoming one with the Body: for a husband is to love and cherish his wife in sickness and in health. In the OT even a wife who whored around and was a horrendous disgrace was still loved and her husband went after her to bring her back into his household (Hosea).

LOL, it wasn't long after 1984 anyway!!

When Gartmore opened, lots of us went up. We were all excited. The place was a horrible mess , there were no proper facilities, and it was all rather "home spun". And people loved it. What had been the school hall became a dormitory overnight, lots of little cot beds laid out and people slept as best they could. In the morning the cots were removed and chairs appeared and the hall reinvented itself as a meeting room/auditorium, with a dais at the front. The meeting started. A few songs. Then CG came bouncing out onto the dais. He was beaming and looked really "freshly scrubbed". People stood and applauded, whistled and cheered. This is SUCH an unBrit thing that it was embarrassing. It didn't seem like a "love" welcome but a sort of political fanaticism. (Brits will applaud in welcome but not noisily or vigorous, they don't stand, and they don't whistle or shout. A standing ovation may happen at the end - but not at the end of a church service!) CG beamed and beamed and beamed. The shock wave of ego that had entered with him got bigger and bigger. It felt suffocating. In this meeting, he announced, seemingly humbly, "If there is anything you need to know, or have a question about, you are always welcome to speak with me. My door is always open to you." Later, I happened to bump into him in the bookstore, just him and me there. Being a recent PFAL grad, I had a question about something, can't remember what but it was something very simple, so asked him. He looked at me like I was a turd, didn't bother to answer, and walked away. I felt despised and humiliated. It never got any better and friends of mine who had entered the European Corps were ill-treated or ceased to be friends. Legalism crept in, in a big way. Love and compassion, kindness and caring, disappeared. People were actively dissuaded from being kind to each other and made into a sort of "one size fits all." So it was easy for me to choose, when the split up occurred. And when the Leadership tapes were presented and I was invited to listen, it was easy to see all the things that LCM pointed out. People at HQ had been very kind to me at that point and I felt that I was "at home" there. Not a thing I ever felt on my visits to Gartmore.

We were discouraged from looking at or considering the “Ten Commandments” as being “Law” and Jesus Christ is the “end of the law”. Actually, he is the “end of the law for righteousness,” not for behavior as such. Yes, we are righteous. And we also have to live in this world. It might be interesting to consider how the rules for living set out in Ex 20-22 (as applicable in our time) were broken by top TWI leadership. Exodus 20:1-17 (NASB) Then God spoke all these words, saying, I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. You shall have no other gods before Me. Not an organization. Not a man. And not Jesus Christ, either. You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. Not observed from the beginning by those commanded; likenesses of various heavenly beings, animals and plants put in the Holy of Holies as decoration - but not worshiped. Cuts out statuettes of VPW, the Timothy statue. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain. Includes acting in his name but not in his power Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; {in it} you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you. For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy. Obviously not applicable to Levitical class, who had significant duties on the sabbath. Normal work functions not generally permitted. The busiest day for HQ and the Corps, who had significant duties towards visitors. Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the LORD your God gives you. Did VPW honor his parents? He encouraged Dorothea to run away from hers. Did LCM honor his parents? VPW had to speak to his father to persuade him that LCM’s job as Prez was worthwhile You shall not murder. Perhaps not done, but self-murder (suicide) by a scorned husband whose wife had been suborned did take place and no responsibility was taken You shall not commit adultery. Won’t even begin to go here You shall not steal. Includes obtaining by false pretences – that the money is being used to further the work of God You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. Includes “spiritual suspicion” and all the homo allegations You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor. Includes coveting someone's "ministry" or religious organization ("house"). Some people sold property (farms) and gave the money to TWI, after a little "suggestion" by TWI. Back to the adultery thing Yet how choosy TWI could be. For instance, this verse, taken so badly out of context: Ex 21:22 "If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges {decide.}” …was used to justify abortion. And this verse Ex 21:16: “He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death.” …led to a few rants about how deprogrammers and the families of Way adherents who arranged for deprogramming were worthy of death. I thought it might be cleansing to consider how much of Ex 20-22 was disregarded. Or just the many ways even just the ten commandments graven in stone were perverted. And if in doing so, anyone wants to think how better their life can line up to God's standard - that's all part of clearing out TWI's malicious doctrines.

Well, if he ever decides to apologise, he knows where to come. It won't be TWI, but it will be any (perhaps every) ex-Way site like the Cafe, and the Way Corps site. Neither is difficult to locate. Maybe he's already a lurker here? Well, let's see him post his apology and repentance under his own name (no doubt Paw will check out anybody claiming such a name!!) and ... the radio on that will be an "alert all ears" thing. Warning, Craig, if you're lurking: you know you won't get an easy ride. Be prepared to get back, pressed down and shaken together, in generous measure - that which you doled out to others. Or perhaps we will be more generous than you in our compassion.

Amen, Jeff! Yes, if TWI is going to teach people to serve with gladness, they will do well to heed scriptures like this: Now...if something like this started coming out from TWI, words and deeds, maybe they would have something to teach about service, that would be worth listening to. Note that this passage relates to bishops, the overseers - the limb coordinators of that day, perhaps. And Timothy, as "Prez", knew that he had to set the standard in his own life.

Thank you all for your thoughtful and courteous posts on this thread. There are clearly quite a number of different views and it is interesting how thinking has diverged from TWI teachings. Like so many things: we know in part. Whatever we believe - what is already decreed will come to pass faultlessly, whether we are Bride or Body - or even something else - regardless of what we believe. Sunesis, this can't be right, surely. Is not the Lamb looking for the city, as it is to be his bride? No references to brides seeking cities, that I can recall. Logic says that if the Bride and the Body are united and become one flesh (loads of Bible verses on that) then presumably the Bride and the Body will be together. Not one on the earth and one in the heavenlies?

Yes, you were in a cult. No, you weren't a cult-head. Glad you managed to keep a sound mind!

Jeff - and your post relates to "Serving the Lord with Gladness" - how, exactly? (shakes head, smiles kindly) Certainly unbelievers are capable of serving other people, and may be very good at it. However, are they serving the Lord. gladly or otherwise?

Wow, I just found this thread. I don't spend a lot of time in New Members, perhaps I should do more. Hey guys, don't you think that when someone new tentatively steps into the Cafe, holding out a hand in introduction, that she deserves a decent welcome? That she doesn't need to walk into an ongoing spat about who hit whom? Calm down a bit. Say hello nicely. Save the fight until she has settled down with a cup of coffee! Hey Lucy - Hi! Excuse the local residents. Some folks spend too much time in the bar ignoring the two drink limit. Your baptism of fire-y insults prepares you well. Have fun, hope you find lots of new friends here. :)

Snow??? Where do you live? Instead of a scythe, does the grim reaper have a hot air gun, being as it's obviously cold where you live? To "reap" the snowmen?

This is the KJV verse that has been so greatly used or misused, and became a cover-up: “That the ministry be not blamed” has become, “That TWI be not blamed.” So it was presented. We should accept all things, so that TWI would not be brought into disrepute. In particular, we should not begin legal proceedings, so that the ministry=TWI would not be embroiled in litigation and thereby brought into disrepute with unbelievers. But look. “Ministry” was never meant to mean an organization. “Ministry” meant “service”. It meant work, service to others, serving others. It meant washing feet (like Jesus did). In many versions of this verse of the Bible, “ministry” remains just “ministry” but later more modern versions, recognizing that the word has acquired a different meaning, translate “ministry” differently. Check these out: We do not want anyone to find fault with our work, so we try not to put obstacles in anyone's way. (Good News) Don't put it off; don't frustrate God's work by showing up late, throwing a question mark over everything we're doing. (The Message) Giving no cause for trouble in anything, so that no one may be able to say anything against our work; (Bible in Basic English) We don't give people any opportunity to find fault with how we serve. (God’s Word Translation) And this one, which dates back to about 1909: We endeavour to give people no cause for stumbling in anything, lest the work we are doing should fall into discredit (Weymouth) TWI in setting itself up as THE Ministry of God’s Word has effectively hijacked verses like this one, which don’t refer to an organization but to one’s individual service. Other versions say, “our ministry” rather than “the ministry,” (eg, ESV, NIV, NLT) We try to live in such a way that no one will be hindered from finding the Lord by the way we act, and so no one can find fault with our ministry.(NLT) TWI could, however, have hijacked “our ministry” as well as it hijacked “the ministry” (even though they proudly boasted that no-one could belong to The Way and it had only three members (the BoT). Assuredly it would become “our” ministry if that could be used as a means of quelling discontent or speaking up. It might be helpful to keep in mind that “ministry” means “serving” not an organization. Or even, just “work”, as in the first few verses above. TWI is not a “serving” organization. I ask again, when did anyone last see or hear of top leadership (let’s say, the BoT) serve by cleaning bathrooms or peeling potatoes? Much less washing feet!

Many people did do this, Oldies. Many have served in pureness of heart and honestly believing they are serving God. It has led, as you know, to widespread abuse of that willingness. And let's not forget, as you quote Eph 5, that the MoG (or perhaps WoG) is also a servant and also needs to serve with goodwill, from the heart. I'd like to see some of the top leadership still at TWI serving as others: cleaning the bathrooms, peeling potatoes, hauling boxes around, shifting furniture. I wonder when in his term of office LCM ever did any of those things? When Rosalie last did any of those things? Aren't leaders supposed to lead by example? Would they like to demonstrate their pureness of heart in this type of service? I wonder when any of the top leadership did this: Sure they will say they do all the other things. Do they get out there and witness - to those who are not already righteous in Christ (=the regular congregation)? I mean, serving by witnessing in the mall, or door knocking?

I can work with that. So what we are seeing in the NT is a mature relationship - because we are under grace. In the OT the believers are under the law as under a school master. The relationship there is more teacher/ pupil or if you like parent/ child. The child grows up. Any parent might expect the child to mature into a responsible adult with different "rules" for life which have been internalised from the childhood teachings and considered, meditated upon, by the child. The child has learned to apply the childhood rules in varying circumstances and where there is not always a clear rule. More mature terminology than parent/ child (where there is a great disparity in status) is the spousal relationship where both are on an equal footing (as God so made them in the beginning). So bride/wife and husband may also symbolise that more mature relationship. Not a "child bride". You could have a point here. If we are the Body, we keep looking at ourselves - not outside ourselves. Not at the LJC but at another member of the "Body".

So that's what they went with. I'd have copied their theme picture but they'd probably have sued me for breach of copyright. Here's an extract from their lead article for the new ministry year: Great words, but the truth of it is that they, TWI, have done so much to cause the brokenhearted to be in that condition! I note that "study" is more important than "faithfully living". And as usual, the Lord (Jesus Christ) makes a non-appearance. I wish health and wholeness to all who earnestly seek God. And his Son.

So John do you agree with the above? Or do you not think we are a part of any "Body" at all? Do you think Paul used this imagery inappropriately? Does it matter? So what I'm thinking now is: We are SONS of God (because He says so) We are BROTHERS (maybe BROTHERS AND SISTERS) of the Lord Jesus Christ We act together as a BODY representing the Lord Jesus Christ, on this earth, right now and as such representing him outwards, to unbelievers. We look forward together with other believers, as a BRIDE (even if we are male) looking forward to union with her husband and we wear these different statuses as we might wear our earthly roles - as a child, sibling, spouse, parent, next door neighbor, boss, employee - simultaneously, but we're still only the one person. Yes?

I think you may have misread me, John. Were you thinking of Geisha's and Penguin's posts soon after my first one? In any event, I don't think there are any "sex" or "children" issues in relation to these figures of speech. Spirit beings don't marry nor are given in marriage and that's simply not relevant here. The focus is on our own relationship to Christ - as a husband? as the head of our body? (In view of the violence perpetrated against so many women by their husbands, such violence being condoned or at least not condemned by TWI, it calls into question the whole bride/husband relationship and few women here would vote for that sort of relationship!! But that's a digression.) I do not think that the Lord Jesus Christ would have beaten his wife, threatened her with weapons, or constantly put her down. In fact, we see his relationship with women as being affirming, uplifting, and encouraging, and way beyond any cultural boundaries. And we have greater works available to us to be able to do, than he did. Wouldn't that make us more important than a mere female, in the Mediterranean culture of the time?

Brushstroke, I thought you were a smart and intelligent guy. Whatever are you doing hanging out with Flat Earthers? Or are you making some statement about TWI beliefs? Very funny though. The Kennedy conspiracy theorists have nothing on these guys.

I thought this bore repeating. Like the way you put it, Highway.

'S always interesting when someone brings up an old thread, though. So much on these forums that's current that it's easy to miss something that happened prior to one's personal history here. Maybe this thread needs transplanting into the CES subforum - mods? I wonder if the original participants of this thread still hold the same views, considering the personal prophecy and other things that have happened at CES?

You got it, Tom.

Words: John S. B. Monsell, Hymns of Love and Praise for the Church’s Year, 1863. This hymn was sung in the Acad­e­my Award win­ning mo­vie, Char­i­ots of Fire (1981). Music: Pen­te­cost, Will­iam Boyd, 1864 (MI­DI, score); first pub­lished in Thir­ty-two Hymn Tunes Com­posed by Mem­bers of the Un­i­ver­si­ty of Ox­ford, 1868: Al­ter­nate tunes: Duke Street, at­trib­ut­ed to John Hat­ton, 1793 (MI­DI, score) Shepton-Beauchamp, Eng­lish tra­di­tion­al mel­o­dy (MI­DI, score) I only know this to the tune "Duke Street"

Interesting and yet another figure of speech. I always find it very comforting on the occasions when the vicar at my church gives the farewell blessing, "The Lord make his face shine upon you." It feels like a hug. I like the idea of God's face shining on me and smiling lovingly at me. Difficult to hug someone if you are not face to face. Nu 6:25 The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee In Crosswalk I put in "face" and "shine" and got a dozen wonderful verses, of which this is the last: 2Co 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. Which looks a bit like, "turn your eyes upon Jesus" or "what would Jesus do?"