oldiesman

Catcup: Perhaps you misunderstood, I didn't say all expounded scripture is God Breathed, I said all scripture is God Breathed. But, I do believe that in various teachings and segments, Wierwille expounded scripture, which is God Breathed. Therefore, since all scripture is God Breathed, then what Wierwille expounded, in certain segments, is God Breathed. Same level of truth. It's the spoken word.I don't think Mike is worshipping Wierwille; just believing what he wrote in PFAL is God Breathed. I think he goes too far, but I think it's like what I suggested before, that believing the words of Paul, or Luke, or John, or Malachi, doesn't mean one is automatically worshipping those men, or engaging in idolatry. Same holds true for believing PFAL is God Breathed. It's a belief. If Mike is truly engaging in idolatry, what other gods are Mike worshipping? Does believing that Ephesians is God Breathed, mean one is worshipping Paul? I challenge the idolatry accusation; Mike may be dead wrong ... but being dead wrong doesn't necessarily equate into worshipping other gods. On throwing everything out, yeah, you can do what a juror's options are, and impeach everything Wierwille says because of his plagiarism and sins, disbelieve everything he says and start over. That's your prerogative, and it appears some have already done that. But for those who do not choose that specific course of getting rid of everything and starting over, doesn't mean they've lost all their marbles, among other things. :)-->

Not the way Mike does; but I do believe those principles/teachings that are accurate according to scripture are God Breathed, because they are expounding scripture, which is God Breathed. I think Mike believes that PFAL is like the Mormon's bible, like another testament of Jesus Christ. I don't quite go that far ... But, even if Mike believes that, I think it doesn't mean he automatically is engaging in idolatry; no more so than the Mormons automatically engage in idolatry for what they believe. Would you agree? :)-->

Steve!,If Mike engages in idolatry because he believes the words of Wierwille, a la PFAL, are the words of God, then wouldn't idolatry also be believing that the words of Paul are the words of God? of Jude? of Malachi? of John? etc. In other words, why does he have to be worshipping other gods to believe VPW received revelation and wrote it down? And you're the one who gives praise to Wierwilles name all the time; albeit mockingly; but I haven't heard Mike do or say or suggest anything like that. :)-->

I haven't the foggiest idea why sex is bad between consenting, single adults, other than God doesn't think it's a good idea. :)-->

Oakspear: I think you're making a bigger issue than what exists. What happens if some folks already have figured out for themselves that some of Wierwille's teachings are biblically accurate, or at least biblically reasonable? For those folks, Wierwille taught the truth, in those areas. No need to start from scratch then, because of Wierwilles sins. In fact, it would be a sin to throw out truth, because of someone else's sin. :)-->

Let's consider examining the reverse. Years ago, I remember wanting to date this gal who was a churchgoer, who also strongly believed in the trinity. She wouldn't accept my non-trinitarian beliefs; wouldn't go any further than being a casual acquaintance. So the chasm certainly works both ways.Do trinitarians look on non-trinitarians as cult members? Yes. Outcasts, wierdos, even possibly non-Christians. I actually think there's more persecution and ill-will towards non-trintarians, than the other way around. Finally, as a test, verbalize your non-trinitarian beliefs in a trinitarian church for any length of time, and see how long you will be tolerated. :)-->

Don'tFenceMeIn: I don't know what CES teaches about abortion, so I wouldn't assume what I said agrees or summarizes their concept of it. If you want to know, I suggest you email them or JAL. :)-->

Don'tFenceMeIn: The teaching that abortion is not murder, is not a doctrine of devils; and last time I checked, didn't force anybody to get their abortions. It did give folks free choice, which is a godly proposition. Those who had abortions were all adults, signing consent papers. VPW had nothing to do with those decisions. Please stop shifting blame to VPW. If you or anyone else made a bad choice, years ago, it's time to take responsibility for your actions.

Rascal said: If this is true, then why all the intense, unrelenting wrath against Victor Paul?God is the Ultimate Heart Searcher, not humans like us. For you to speak so boldly of VPW's motives and "true spiritual nature", like you know all about them and that's the final word, indicates a vast inconsistency with the above statement, not to mention what the scriptures say about forgiveness, mercy, tenderness, kindness, gentleness; or just plain humility.. :)-->

God wouldn't do that cause that would be plagiarism.We need to get Jesus in that heavenly PFAL class ... Mike will run it, Dr will teach it. Raf you wanna bring the cookies? HAPPY WEEKEND, ONE AND ALL! :)-->

Assuming you're speaking of the Sins of Wierwille and Others, true. But I don't always unrelentingly relate the Sins of Wierwille and Others, to "what TWI really was", as some seem to do.I guess that's some of the difference between myself and some others. But I'm willing to say there was both godliness and evil going on simultaneously. If some folks will admit that, then I think we have a basis for learned communication amongst ourselves. :)-->

def59 Haven't checked it out ...One thing that hasn't been said here that perhaps pertains to the discussion is the fact that twi is/was one of many many Christian denominations that spreads the Word about Jesus Christ. I know mainly of my experiences with it, but it can help today as well for someone who needs to hear all about Jesus Christ and God's plan for salvation. Yeah, you don't need twi, there's always another church around the corner and on television. But on the other hand, let's not limit God to how we think He should work. Twi just might reach out and help someone, even today, and that's not too shabby. We don't always know how God works in peoples lives. :)-->

I don't need someone to teach me what twi really was. I was there, and witnessed what it was. :)-->

I have a real understanding and abiding appreciation of the scriptures from TWI-1. I first knew about Jesus from the Roman Catholic church, but didn't appreciate anything about his life, and wasn't taught hardly anything about him except he was a vengeful saviour. And all I did was religiously go to church most Sundays, religiously like a robot, but still in the dark to some key truths that, had I been taught all along, would have quenched the need to get involved in another Christian group. I wouldn't have wanted or needed TWI-1 at all, had I been taught those truths all along. So, I'm thankful for the early church, monks from the Middle Ages, the early translators, and Victor Paul Wierwille, his teachers, and other saints from twi, including my own family. :)-->

Oakspear: Those decisions were made after time, and after proving them wrong. It's so obvious to me that tithing for prosperity, as espoused by VPW, is error. Prosperity doesn't hinge on tithing. It's so obvious to me that "the law of believing" isn't a law like gravity, which is what VPW was espousing. Regarding other doctrines more common, as we learned from Wordwolf's response to me, a lot of Wierwille's doctrines are common themes in Christendom today ... so for me to reject those themes, I'd have to reject Christianity, which I have not done ... If you're asking me to question Christianity itself, no, I haven't done that, but I haven't found anything better either. Do you have any suggestions? :)-->

Raf: True. But ask yourself this: had folks like me, and others, already been observing and benefitting with these things, would we have needed or wanted to get involved with twi when we did? The teachings were not present in my life before Wierwille's influence, so I say he's a part of influencing, teaching, expounding these excellent Christian teachings and doctrines to me. ...An observation: some folks think its wrong that positive godly experiences of twi be remembered and shared, but instead it's better to have all those goodies supplanted by the abuse and evils. But I believe we should just state it as it was ... both good and bad. :)-->

I really don't know that answer, but, it was twi that was the group that taught the benefits of Christian doctrine, when I really needed it. Judging from the way folks are in general, that might have been next to impossible. It's very very hard to change minds, especially those minds running organizations. People at the top tend to support and perpetuate the accepted traditions. Whether Heefner and Doop could have done a better job overall is speculative. We don't know what would have happened. Just a general observation: they weren't thrown out of the ministry by Wierwille's actions, weren't marked and avoided; just removed from their positions. I think they remained in some way after that, didn't they? At least they could have. Lots of good folks left. What about Dave Anderson? He left in 1973. We don't know what "would have" happened if these things didn't happen; all we could do is communicate and bear witness to the things that DID happen. :)-->

Wordwolf, A lot of the benefits of Wierwille's ministry and teachings are common Christian themes today .. that's true. But back in the early 70's, I didn't see those things as common at all. Coming from a Roman Catholic background they certainly weren't. I remember VPW saying the Way Ministry wouldn't be needed if the organized churches of the day were teaching this stuff. I believe that to be true, for if the RC church had been teaching some of the doctrines that Wierwille was, I probably wouldn't have been attracted to twi in the first place. ESPECIALLY salvation by grace, speaking in tongues, the integrity of the scriptures, etc. etc. The fact that the benefits and godly fruits of Wierwilles teachings are common in Christian circles today, doesn't diminish the impact it had on us folks who needed to hear it. The godly fruits of Wierwilles teachings are a part of history and there's still some of us around who appreciate its effects. I don't throw that out because of Wierwilles sins. And the fact that you confirm that a lot of these benefits are common benefits of Christendom today, only confirms that Wierwille was right on and a blessing, on many significant issues ... :)-->

Here's some: Folks getting born again, understanding that impact and being certain, to know that you know that you know you're heaven bound, no power from hell can stop you from going Folks knowing that Jesus Christ's death and suffering was the complete payment for man's sins Folks understanding more about the bible, believing it's accuracy and integrity Folks understanding the difference between salvation by grace, and salvation by works Folks understanding from scripture what their rights (5 sonship rights) and responsibilities (preaching the Word), are in Christ Folks understanding from scripture what it means to manifest holy spirit Folks understanding from scripture that the dead are not alive now Folks understanding from scripture the differences between "son of God" and "God the Son", and the various implications of both Folks understanding about Jesus Christ our Passover, Jesus Christ our Promised Seed Folks understanding, respecting and appreciating various other very good bible teachers, such as B.G. Leonard, Stiles, Bullinger, Kenyon, Jones, etc. etc. ... :)-->

Oakspear: I've thrown out not what I feel is inconvenient, but what I now sincerely believe to be error. "Tithing for Prosperity" is erroneous, "The Law of Believing" isn't all that certain, doesn't work like gravity, etc. Eli eli, etc. There's probably more. But but but there are so many truths that I've clung to, that are very hard to just cut out of my life -- would be like cutting out my heart or liver. I'm willing to listen to all arguments and viewpoints against what we were taught in twi; but unless it makes sense to change in a certain category, it's pretty hard, and might be pretty foolish, to do so just because of Wierwille's sinning. ... :)-->

Because it's reasonable to acknowledge that Wierwille moved the Word, and helped folks, who desperately needed help at the time. He was part of the body of Christ that helped folks come to the body, and learn more about that body. So did Bullinger, Stiles, Leonard, and all the rest. Wierwille was part of all that as well. :)-->

I suppose another way of saying this is, if you make the Word "your own", as VPW suggested we do, then you have come to the conclusion that what he taught in certain topics is truth, and you've gotten that in your heart by "independent" means, other than what you think is twi brainwashing and mind control. ... :)-->

The truth does stand without Wierwille. Wierwille is dead. But it doesn't mean he didn't teach it at one time ... :)-->

Well, we're talking about whether he was a doctor or not, not whether he hurt folks, which we all say he did from time to time. But I would phrase it another way: "The fact that he hurt my brothers and sisters in Christ, which I do not rejoice in, doesn't cause me to question the truth that he taught." :)-->

Oakspear: What's so significant about independent effort as opposed to twi, if what twi said in a certain topic was true? Unless you think we weren't taught the truth in twi in a certain area, which is certainly possible, what's the problem with taking it as it was, from twi?Your apparent zeal to divorce yourself from every aspect of your experience in twi is your choice, but it doesn't have to be that way for someone who is satisfied with certain truths being taught there. I'd be happy about, and say the same good things about, every other denomination that teaches truth, in a certain area. This reminds me a little of the Apostle Paul who said he was happy Christ was being preached and he gloried in that, even from not-so-reputable sources. With that attitude, he'd be happy that twi was around even today. Go ahead and question everything. But my view is that what I believe today is firmly set in my heart, and only when one comes up with some serious, rational challenges that make sense, I'll continue to say "where's the beef". The whole concept of questioning everything is reasonable. I think we should do that anyway, irrespective of Wierwille's behavior, which is the context you have put this discussion in. :)-->