oldiesman

I agree Cool. I think we ought to be able to know how to live and do the right thing, without "fearing" God in the process.

I do not mean to suggest that CES (or more appropriately, STFI) is guilty of the word for word liftings like VPW did.What I'm referring to are the teachings that are the same thoughts/ideas/beliefs as twi, but without giving twi any written acknowledgement. IF plagiarism is using the thoughts/beliefs/teachings of a group one learned from without giving the proper written acknowledgement, then it might be worth examining whether STFI is guilty of much the same thing twi did when it taught the teachings/beliefs/thoughts of those who VPW learned from, without giving proper written acknowledgement in his writings.

I think it's very funny and worth reading, even for us who believe twi was on the right track once upon a time.

Mr. Hammeroni, I think you are correct.Most of what they teach is TWI doctrine, with a few words changed here and there, but the same meanings. some examples: gathering together = rapture mystery = sacred secret Couple of items that stick out in my mind right now that are completely different from twi is the "personal prophecy" belief. also teachings on premarital sex and adultery. There could be others. But the fact that their teachings are so harmonious with twi leads me to suspect/ponder that they might themselves be guilty of plagiarism? They do teach a lot of twi stuff without mentioning twi. is that plagiarism? Don't know. Otherwise, I think they've taken the baby and thrown out the bathwater, in large part.

I've done enough arguing for one day. Have a nice weekend folks.

Rascal if you refer to my words, please quote them in context, as I wrote them.What you did would be like me surmising that you worship fetuses, but that wouldn't be fair and might be a misrepresentation of your position.

I never dismissed their pain. But, their pain is really irrelevant to the argument of whether they had a choice to make decisions or not, which is what this topic covers. Please read what I wrote in the context it was written.

Goey, why didn't you say all that in the first place? :D--> From what I understand of the gist you are saying that God set hurricanes in motion long ago for a good purpose and man shouldn't be living where it's "natural" for hurricanes to be. Is that correct? I can accept this viewpoint, although I still leave room for the possibility that hurricanes could be a byproduct of the calamity between Gen 1:1 and 1:2. Also fits with a point I made before about New Orleans being a calamity waiting to happen because their levees were inadequate. Garth and Goey, I didn't suggest or mean that God or Satan pulls the strings NOW on hurricanes. I think hurricanes could have been caused when things got out of whack between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2. Goey's explanation is just as good, I really have no problem with it. In any case, I believe that God doesn't want people destroyed, so people should make certain not to live in these centers of calamity where occurrances like this cause great damage, whether from God or Satan.

I can understand "I don't know".I cannot understand "There doesn't need to be a spiritual cause for natural phenomenon." Especially since we believe in a supreme spiritual force who cares about people.

Goey, that answer doesn't satisfy me, and I submit it wouldn't satisfy any believer in God wanting to have answers as to why these tragedies happen. It's like saying its perfectly natural for God to create a natural phenomenon like a hurricane that kills many people and causes great damage. Why would God do that? I don't think God did that in nature, now or in the past. I believe everything in the natural world comes from or originally came from something that does not appear, i.e., the spiritual source caused the natural. Planet earth is natural, but who brought planet earth into being? So to explain a hurricane as merely a "natural phenomenon" glosses over the spiritual realm. I just read the verse.I read what is written and come up with what it says, regardless of what VP taught. Jesus said when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. That needs an interpretation? It's right there in the verse. However, I am open to hearing what your "interpretation" is, since you have one that apparently differs from mine.

The scripture says that when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you shall have them.Not VP. The scriptures say that. It's very clear, just read what is written. If you think that's false, you're entitled to your opinion. But for me, rather than thinking that that promise is false, I would rather think that something was not available. Or that I was praying amiss. Or something else. Not that that the scripture is false. In other words, if it never comes to pass, it's still God's Word. Otherwise, if I am missing something, please explain.

I'm sleepy. When CM gets to the point, please give me a hollar.

CM, I don't know what you're talking about, but if you finally get to your point, it may be interesting. Please proceed. :)-->

CM, it's ok to use words as a form of communication. :D-->

Coolwaters, I never said that I opened VP's mail.Are you ok?

In that case, sometimes people pray for things that are not available.I remember when my mother was very sick in the hospital, I prayed as hard as I could for her to recover. She didn't. But I knew in my heart that I was believing. So what's the answer? The answer was, it wasn't available. In the final analysis, I would rather believe that something is not available, than to believe that the scriptures err.

Nope, just hearsay.But I really don't have to cite a single example. The bible says that when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you shall have them. If Jesus says that when you pray, believe that you receive and you shall have, and someone else says that that is not possible, the reader must decide who to believe, Jesus or someone else. I decide Jesus was correct, whether I see it or not. If you decide otherwise, go ahead and believe what you want, its your choice. But I haven't seen the scriptures disproven yet. I think this is what "faith" is all about, you don't have to see it, to believe.

Belle, I've mellowed since my twi days and am not out to prove everything from twi is right anymore. I believe most things, but am open to hearing where it errs, if it does. I will consider another view, maybe I will believe it, maybe not. Be that as it may, I believe the teachings on the administrations do not effect my eternal standing with God one way or the other, so it's not a big deal to me at this point. I do not go out and teach people or talk about the administrations. I try to stick with the basic stuff. :)--> But if you want to write that it's not the best to believe that and you give a compelling argument, please do, I will read what you write.

Mr. Hammeroni, it occurs to me that most of these women actually wanted to have the abortions to stay in the corps, or didn't really want to be mothers, or didn't look on these abortions as an evil thing. That was then. How it was viewed then is the proper way to view it since that is the context they were in. It's so easy for us to view it 30 years later and say that it was evil but it wasn't meant to be an evil...the corps wasn't meant to be evil.

That belief is certainly open for debate.This is what we do not really know yet. But I still believe twi was once on the right track. God is the ultimate Judge.

We were a group that took the scriptures very seriously. So yeah, when the scripture said it, we believed God required it. I thought twi was pretty libertarian about it. you can do your utmost for his highest, or not, it was your choice. twi version of doing your utmost was going on these programs, wow, corps, etc. The Corps was suppose to be the greatest commitment you can make because you were giving everything else up to move the Word it is in that context that these things are to be viewed not Molech Worship. Coolwaters, where do you get your stuff?I rode on a motorcycle trip with Dr. & Mrs. Wierwille who were in their motorcoach (I was on my motorcycle) for one month in 1984, that's it. I never read and answered his mail. :P-->

It was pretty serious stuff we once were involved in. "let good and kindred go", remember? "consider everything else loss for Christ" was the attitude of commitment. Looking back on that now, I'm pretty astonished that I was that commited at one time to a noble cause. I've mellowed since then.

Dang Mr. Hammeroni you just made me spit coffee all over my business shirt.

Coolwaters, you are a speedy typist. :)-->

Yeah I can see that.Women who made a serious commitment to move the Word and that commitment was paramount above everything else, join a program wherein you can't have children. These women did not want to have children. They wanted to move the Word, above everything else. Otherwise, why join the Way Corps? And so they get pregnant in a program wherein they can't remain pregnant and strongly desire to remain in the program, a program where movement of the Word was paramount above everything else. I think these women who had their abortions paid for where treated VERY well because they had a choice. Some of our collective abs helped them continue their commitment. They had a choice to remain in the greatest program they believed in at that time, to have a second chance to remain in the program. Their potential children were secondary to their first priority, which was love God/neighbor and do the Word, which at that time in that circumstance meant to stay in the Way Corps.