Twinky

@ DWBH: what do you think about the above comment? A further thought this morning: the OT prophets, such as they were, appear to have stood outside the formal synagogue or temple system. Not always - or even often - priests and Levites, just men getting on with life. Ordinary men to whom God spoke. One man who was in a priestly position (Zechariah) was struck dumb when God (via an angel) actually spoke to him. Jeremiah was the son of a priest, but is not noted as a priest himself; Isaiah makes no claims; Ezekiel was a priest; Amos was a shepherd; Daniel was an administrator... and so on. What were the rabbis? Teachers... but with what credentials? Some clearly were of the "priestly" caste (Gamaliel, Paul) but Jesus, with no such creds, is also called Rabbi. Jesus's cousin John, was he called a rabbi? His father Z as noted was a priest, but John was noted as a "wild man" not for his priestly standing.

I think you're probably right about the RC church (and its predecessors) having institutionalised and brought in a lot of our culture of who does what in the church. I am baffled by most church nomenclature and tradition, and think a lot is still about a "power-grab" and desire to exercise control by hierarchial institutions - despite big advances to "devolve power" and much more open church leadership. Thank God we aren't still in the medieval intensive control or the separation of church and laity by rood screens and other devices (look it up if you don't understand). [by "predecessors," I mean whatever preceded the east/west split in the RC church (council of Nicaea?) (sorry, I don't know much about early church history!) - and whatever had been incorporated from much earlier versions of worship (both pagan and Christian).] Probably, additionally, an understanding of Greek and Roman cultural backgrounds at the post-Acts time would also help - what, specifically, would Paul or Peter or anybody else have been addressing? 1 Peter calls "the exiles" to whom he's writing a "royal priesthood" - I don't know if that can be applied to Gentile believers, who weren't part of "God’s elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia" (1 Pet 1:1). Paul as you know describes "ambassadors" with the "ministry of reconciliation." But who exactly are these ambassadors? We've been taught that it's all Christians - the letter (2 Cor) is written to "the church of God in Corinth, together with all his holy people throughout Achaia" (and extrapolated to all of the Christian churches then and now) 2 Cor 5 gives us the familiar verses: 16 So from now on we regard no one from a worldly point of view. Though we once regarded Christ in this way, we do so no longer. 17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! 18 All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: 19 that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. 20 We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. 21 God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God." He's writing a letter saying we have the ministry of reconciliation - we, as in Paul and those who are with him? (it's clearly aimed at you, the Corinthians) or we, as in all Christians? (the latter, as usually taught - but is that correct??) Could it be, then, that there is merely the one ministry - ambassadorial, exercised by the ministers who are the "royal priesthood," and everything else is to support that one ministry? (Which maybe we all have, or maybe it is restricted to some individuals or some historical group(s).) "When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men... 11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 for the perfecting of the saints (KJV comma omitted) for the work of the ministry (of reconciliation), for the edifying of the body of Christ." Which still begs the question, these gifts to the church, of prophets, etc, (whose job description is "the perfecting of the saints for the work of the ministry of reconciliation") - do they have more specific "job descriptions" or is it just the function that they are fulfilling at any given time (of teaching or pastoring etc). Are they all encompassed in the role of "prophet" in the OT (and perhaps "rabbi" by Gospel times). Is an OT prophet the same as a NT rabbi? For surely, both have wise words to say, to help and guide those who seek advice of them; to give leadership. I can see both prophets and rabbis being "prophets, pastors and teachers" - also evangelists if a narrower interpretation of that is given (speaking well, giving a good message - not including what we'd call "outreach"). Apostles, I'm not so sure about. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Apologies if this sounds a bit rambling, I know what I'm trying to say, not like me to be so inarticulate. I'm trying to (re)read things in a way that sets aside preconceived ideas and ancient wrong teaching; trying to find my own fresh take on things. The answer is simple...because the things of God are simple. Even if deep.

That was precisely what happened for me! I was so desperate (M&A'd by TWI) that I wanted to write a huge long grovelly letter of apology in hopes of being readmitted. I couldn't remember their zip code. Googled TWI and GSC popped up as the first item. The name sounded intriguingly familiar... the reading was horrifying but had a ring of truth... the rest is history. That long grovelly letter never got written. Thank God for Pawtucket and for GSC and all who run the cafe now.

Well, I had hoped that this could be a serious discussion, not a slug-fest. Something (as its in Doctrinal) (ie not in the TWI forum) that maybe could have been useful. But hey, have at it. Fight yourselves silly. Don't discuss the question, discuss anything but the question. If anybody ever brings this back on topic, PM me so that I can keep up. Or PM me if you have any intelligent comment to offer and want to discuss outside the developing fisticuffs. :asdf:/>

DWBH, please don 't attack TLC; better if you just ignore him! But since you encourage further discussion, this is what I asked you: Your Jewish background and the many other things that you bring to the table can give a particularly good insight into what "gift ministries" might be. I would like to hear what you have to say about, perhaps, how Jewish backgrounds might come into play. Does it just stop nowadays at "rabbi"? What is a rabbi, if that could be fitted into any of the "gift ministries" - or would a rabbi be (a bit of) all of them. And that could give some useful insight. Thanks, Twinx

Welcome, Collateral Damage. This is a safe place to explore what you really think and believe. It's good that you and your wife have got out intact and on your terms. If you haven't been a lurker and have already spent some time quietly reading here, do explore some of the older threads. You will find much that will shock and appall and anger you - and answer some of the niggling questions you never dared ask. Have a cup of coffee while you're reading: Great avatar!!

DWBH, please don't bow out! I take on board your comments about Paul. Yes, we have to consider where he is coming from. As well as to whom he is speaking, and what they might (or not) believe, and therefore what issues needed to be addressed. Paul calls himself (1 Cor 15:9) "the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because..." And yet, he is accepted as such by the other "leadership" (for want of a better word). As perhaps also are some of those accompanying Paul, whom he took with him to Jerusalem when they agreed the appropriate doctrine for (former) Gentile believers. Your Jewish background and the many other things that you bring to the table can give a particularly good insight into what "gift ministries" might be. I would like to hear what you have to say about, perhaps, how Jewish backgrounds might come into play. Does it just stop nowadays at "rabbi"? What is a rabbi, if that could be fitted into any of the "gift ministries" - or would a rabbi be (a bit of) all of them? I must go back into my copy of the Didache and see what if anything that says.

Satisfying, isn't it! I pulled loads of books and teaching notes etc apart and stuffed them in the woodburner. Tapes and videos too. Wasn't going to risk anyone getting their hands (and head) into it.Have fun, MRAP. You are allowed to go well over the two-drink limit :beer:/>.

I don't think there has ever been a Win 9, T-Bone. My laptop went in for a complete overhaul over the Christmas period, and as part of that I had Win10 installed, as Win8 and its various updates was causing me no end of problems and seemed to clash with some of the other programs or add-ons. Happy to say that Win10 has never been a problem (so far; it's 3 months in) and I love it. So much easier to use. More like Win7 but much much better. Very glad I upgraded to Win 10. No incompatibility issues (and no other programs/add-ins changed either!). So if anyone is considering upgrading to the free Win10 offer, I'd say, go for it!!

Please have annother look at my starter post: Would it be possible for responses to address this question, please? Chockfull, I hear what you say!! And yet, I am sure there are some people who are far more gifted at teaching (expounding the gospel) than others, just as there are some who are better at what's known as "pastoral care." And some people (evangelists?) can talk to practically anyone and get them enthused by the gospel. So, I am equally sure there must be "apostles" and "prophets" - whatever they are in the current face of Christianity. Perhaps the current need in the Christian church is for evangelists, pastors and teachers. Or perhaps we conflate the roles of apostle and prophet with evangelistic, pastoral and teaching roles?

Wherever did you get that drivel, DWBH? Taken out of whatever context it appeared - if it had been in any kind of mainstream church newsletter, magazine, circular, bishop's letter or anything else - I'd be wondering what kind of arrogant, elitist, exclusive nutjob wrote it and how fast I could get outa there... Lol, "it never ceases to frustrate me that we aren't reaching more of them" - has he ever considered why his efforts are frustrated? By whom?

The real question is NOT "Why did TWI collapse so quickly?" - because it didn't,it has been on the take for more than 60 years and still is mouldering on - the real question is, "Why did it last so long?"

At a very basic level, critical thinking might include: "How can this task be done better?" or even, "Why is this task being done at all?" Non-critical thinking might include: "Will this satisfy this leader and how he wants this task done?" For example: stringing chairs. Was that level of precision necessary? >Skyrider posted about using the dents in the floor made by previous stringings, as a quicker way to do set-up. >Others might think of getting chairs with loops on the legs, so that they become one long line. >Others might think of getting other forms of seating, if appropriate. >Or choosing a different venue. >>Or whether the reason the chairs were set out was necessary at all. Or maybe, non-critical thinking was simply, "If this chair is slightly out of line, I'll get chewed out/ a face melting/ there'll be trouble."

T-Bone! How nice to see you again. :wave:/> It's been a long time since you were last posting, at least in this forum. I think it was you who used to say, TWI was like MiracleGro for all our personal faults. So we went into the Corps as mean and oppressive, we got much worse at that while we were in. I think your wise saying plays into this thread very well. Explains why some became more mean and bullying than others. Cos they wuz so before they went in. Those that weren't so - they themselves became more bullied and oppressed.

I've never thought much about how mini-Corps kids were affected in their thinking patterns. I know how my own barriers were broken down; but at least I had sound principles to (re)build on post Waybrain. But if you never had those boundaries before - if you were raised in TWI with TWI morals, values and boundaries - how hard that must be to adjust to out-of-Way thinking. Hats off to you Bolshevik, and D@n@ F0rt, and other young people of your ilk.

MRAP, wannabe Corps didn't necessarily intend to give up anything. They may well have really wanted to serve, and serve more effectively. It may be that they'd had a good twig or branch leader (there were some!) who was inspirational. Or maybe they'd just really wanted to serve God better in the communities where they found themselves - personal and professional. Once in rez, however, the usual trick of moving the goalposts took place. It got to be, "a dog returning to its vomit" if you wanted to return to your community or especially (gasp) to your profession. After all the training and hard work they'd put into getting us to this superior spiritual elite (cough), for us then to throw it away by going back to where we came... Now some might have returned to exactly where they'd been but others wanted to minister more effectively in their communities. For myself, I have a lot of hard-earned and dearly gained professional experience in a "caring" type profession - I liked working to fight for people's rights and to stand up for the "little man" who was not treated well by people or organisations with a lot of money or power. People in real need. What a great inroad into people's lives I'd had. And I hoped to be able to bring them to the real Hope. I can't even begin to tell you of the disgust that was heaped on me when I started to apply for work after being in rez. Clearly if I'd gone to flip burgers at MacD's that would have been more acceptable. There were talented and skilled people in all walks of life that had entered the Corps. Were they given an opportunity to serve in those kinds of roles? No!!!!! What a waste!! Yet these could have been great opportunities to reach out to the needy and desperate. Yeah, like TWI really meant what it said when it said that stuff on the green card. (We really need a vomit icon in the emoticons!) My experience in this wasn't unique. But you could return to your old community if you were from an elite group that was influential or likely to bring in big money or bring in "big" names or you were part of one of the families that were highly connected in TWI.

When I found the site, my impression was "copycat" - his report of being on a ship that lurched and a shaft of sunlight... etc, is more believable than snow on gas pumps in June. I don't want to waste my time studying his prolific articles (collaterals rehashes, perhaps?). Just wondered if anyone had met the likely author, whose name I got from a book cover he photographs. Some people who have been around for decades perhaps - DWBH, Sky or Catcup might know of him.

You're doing all right, MRAP. It takes such a long time to disentangle from all the junk we learned. It takes humility and a willingness to accept that we were wrong (even if we were badly misled, deliberately taught wrongly) before we can begin to see aright. For people whose first brush with Christianity was via TWI (not saying yours was), the model is truly outrageous. It's good you had those ladies in your twig to model something more loving and Christlike.

:offtopic:/> Skyrider, empty your Inbox (GSC messenger). Looks like you can't receive any more messages.

Anybody heard of George MacIver? Seems to be an American Wayfer who's historically had some Brit connection(s). By accident, I came across this website today: The Teacher Seems to fancy himself as some great one. No specifics on the site as to who runs it, though. Comments on a green card please.

I have come to see that this was a technique that was applied to all in-rez Corps programs - possibly WoW or FL and other programs, whatever was running at the time. Look for some aspect that hadn't been done as well, or got the demanded results, then slam the whole group, tell 'em they were all spiritually asleep and not good enough, threaten to throw them all out, and keep them stewing for a little while. Then, when they feel suitably anxious (don't forget, many had given up decent jobs, housing, and alienated or burned bridges with family and friends), then "graciously" accept them back on sufferance. They'd all be so grateful that the rest of the training (indoctrination) could be ratcheted up a notch or two. It's just bullying and manipulation. And those who refused to be manipulated (theyd had enough and actually packed their bags and left) - well, they obviously weren't the gullible ones that TWI sought to indoctrinate. Those folks were still useful, though, because you could call them spiritual weaklings (when in fact they were quite the opposite) or homosexuals or cop-outs or whatever other slander you choose, before you say that God wouldn't even spit in their direction but call them brave or foolish (or some such) for stepping out of the protection of God's household. More manipulation.

Two good posts at #39 and 40, MRAP. Glad you were able to get out. "Ship" on those who banned your friends and guests from attending your wedding. Despite what we were taught - fear can be healthy inasmuch as it gets us to think about what's going on. And having thought, we can decide to fight or flee. But like so many of our "gut responses" this is one we were taught very early in PFAL to ignore. So the "unease" (aka "red flags") that we had was quashed before it got to full-grown fear of leadership (because that would be giving place to the devil). And, unseen and hidden, it became a fear of doing or saying the wrong thing.

Thanks, Oakspear. EVANGELIST (PREACHER ?) from euangelizo ... eu = good; angelizo = bring tidings, messages I can see "Preacher" as one who brings forth good tidings, or messages. Though all Christians should be bringers of good (or glad) tidings. It would be true to say that some people appear to be particularly adept at what we call preaching, giving the good message from a pulpit or similar. Others are perhaps more adept at speaking to other people on a smaller basis, maybe one on one, and giving them the good word, the message of hope, or whatever you want to call it. So both could reasonably be called Evangelists. PASTOR Occurs only once in the NT and then in the plural, in our passage about the gift ministries. Poimen = uncertain origin, but translated "shepherd(s)" every time except this one occasion where it is translated as Pastors. I'd agree with you, Oakspear, that a wedding officiant is hardly a "shepherd" to the wedding couple, nor a pastor to the same. More inthe nature of (administrative) "helps" - if anything :)

From a previous thread: Engendering this response from DWBH: Perhaps we could have a sensible discussion about those famous "gift ministries" – Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers. And let's not forget about these other "gift ministries" that got very little press in TWI: From this whole chapter (sometimes headed Concerning Spiritual Gifts) we see again that there are Apostles, Prophets, Teachers – and also Workers of Miracles, Healers, Guides, and Speakers in Tongues. No mention of Pastors or Evangelists! But lots of mention of other "gift ministries." PLEASE PUT ASIDE ALL TWI-TYPE DEFINITIONS and let's see how mainstream churches (if such a thing exists) defines in particular these ministries " – Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors and Teachers. Who are these people (if they are still existing today) and what is their role? Who decides this? How? What "qualifies" them for these roles? Are the people of both sexes or are only males considered suitable? Has any prophet spoken something that should/should not be done and it has observably come to pass yet? Or is a prophet simply someone of special wisdom? Maybe you go to a church where it is believed that these roles don't exist/ died out with the first bunch in C1. Have you formulated an idea of what these people did? Say what you want and if you want to define any role, please make it clear what role or roles you are discussing. I accept DWBH's point that there are no limitations or qualifications from God's point of view. However, there has to be some particular thing that makes these particularly gifted people different, or more outstanding, in that role, from the general congregation. Otherwise, we would all be doing the same thing, with the risk of there being uncertain sounds and us being clanging cymbals (1 Cor 13). I TRULY DON'T WANT THIS TO BE A TWI-BASHING THREAD – can we have a sensible unhistrionic discussion please?

I agree with you, Skyrider, that there could be pressures within twigs. A lot depended on the maturity of the people running the twigs. It was suggested to me that I give up my professional training (a two-year fixed contract) that would secure my professional career (that already had four years hard study preceding; I was one year into my prof training at the time. Idiots!!! (Of course I didn't give up my job; I gave up that twig!) They could have prayed that the manipulative senior partner, bent upon deriding his junior staff, would have a change of heart... or I could be kept out of his orbit... or ... something. But no, that didn't occur to them. Other people were more supportive including a lovely Corps couple whom perhaps you'd know. They were a bit older and very sensible. Other twigs do seem to have had genuine kindly support - with no pressure. But again - I'm talking of locations outside the USA.