oldiesman

A quick question: do you consider religious groups who do not adhere to all of the above a cult?

I think we have a problem: this is, some verses are written impersonally, like for example: Mat 21:22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive. Mar 11:24 Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive [them], and ye shall have [them]. Those verses do not say "believe God for what His will is" ... it says "believe that ye receive". It is SPECIFIC that one needs to believe to receive. You can't blame VPW that the Word seems to be impersonal in various texts. It says what it says. BUT taking that verse and saying VPW taught a gospel that God is impersonal and can't think, reason, decide and communicate is ridiculous!

This statement is inaccurate when one considers other teachings of VPW, like for example the advanced class and others. VPW taught that God is not personal, that he can't think, reason, decide, communicate etc.?? Who's kidding who, that is nonsense. This is gobbledygook disguised as "wisdom". But that's the problem when double standards are used and one or two teachings are magnified in favor of others.

Oakspear, what you're saying now is different than what Dr. Juedes said which was "TWI is the sole representative on God on earth, the only place there is truth." Having a complete package means having a package of individual parts of the package; it doesn't mean that individual parts of the package are not around elsewhere; which is precisely what Dr. Juedes said, that VPW taught that he was the sole source of truth and truth does not exist in any other place. Its like having a complete package of fresh fruit (lets say apples oranges grapes bananas). Doesn't mean these fruit do not exist individually elsewhere, all it means is that there exists a complete package or the most complete package available, which is exactly what we thought twi was. Personally I do think that VPW claimed he had the most complete package available. But that is NOT what Dr. Juedes said and accuracy is important!

Hi stephaniefaye, This is the United States of America and folks have the liberty to choose their own religious group. If she's not pushing you to join, why push her to get out? In my opinion if she's happy with her involvement its none of anyone else's business. Live and let live.

From that statement, I would say that VPW was promoting that we in twi had the most answers available. Not ALL the answers, not the ONLY place there are answers or the SOLE source of answers, as Dr. Juedes keeps on promoting ... "TWI is the sole representative on God on earth, the only place there is truth."

I can go along with that too. I do believe VPW thought we in twi had the most truth available and I think that's the most factual and correct way to state it. not "TWI is the sole representative on God on earth, the only place there is truth." MOST yes, SOLE and ONLY no.

Its good to have them around and I keep mine for historical and reference purposes, regardless of whether I may agree or not, although I happen still to agree with a lot of it.

The following was posted by Mike in 2005 who was quoting Research Geek from back in 2002, who (Research Geek and Catcup) were at Pikes Peak. I add in this thread as it perhaps adds a different perspective about the "degree mill" that is thought to be Pikes Peak:

I disagree that it is correct to claim that VPW claimed he had the whole truth. Thats ridiculous. How could anyone in their right mind claim that they have the WHOLE truth? I believe that VPW claimed and promoted that he believed he had the MOST truth out of any religious group out there and I believe the use of words like ONLY truth and WHOLE truth to describe what I believe was portrayed as THE MOST truth are erroneous fallicies. MOST yes. ONLY and WHOLE no.

But still that does not translate into VP telling us "I am the ONLY source for truth" as Dr. Juedes seems to be repeating. He did not. It is not logical considering all of the facts that prove otherwise. BEST yes, ONLY no.

Taken alone, that statement of VP may cause some to assume that ONLY Wierwille has taught the truth (even though VP didn't say he was the ONLY one to hear from God); but there is other evidence such as his statement "lots of the stuff I teach is not original", evidence of Bullinger & Kenyon books sold in the bookstore for all to read, evidence of his verbal and written statements about learning from men of God scattered across the continent, i.e, evidence of where stuff originated which makes the allegation that TWI was the ONLY source for truth weak and mistaken. I believe repeating this error displeases the Lord.

Thank you socks for confirming what I said and explaining it thoroughly.

Don't know as the answer is subjective according to each person's beliefs and feelings; but that's beside the point I was making.

No, what that proves is that VPW taught that God is a respector of conditions... all those who respect the conditions will get the results, it is not limited to "VPW conveniently determined that the giving had to be to him in order to count." So, those statements in CSBP go toward proving my point and disprove Dr. Juedes' point.

I believe another inaccurate statement is that twi taught they were the ONLY and SOLE place for truth. My recollection is they were claiming the BEST source, not the ONLY source. I believe CSBP supports that idea. Also, VPW said "lots of the stuff I teach is not original", so logically there is lots of truth elsewhere since he got lots of his stuff from outside TWI. Never heard or saw in writing the claim that TWI is the ONLY place there is truth, I think that is someone's fantasy and wishful thinking and my wish is that folks would be more accurate when describing twi and Wierwille's beliefs.

The statement of yours that I dispute is "VPW conveniently determined that the giving had to be to him in order to count"; not anything LCM said or wrote. Just because LCM wrote something does not mean VPW said or meant or believed that exact same thing and I believe that turnabout may border on intellectual dishonesty. I believe the wiser and more accurate approach would be to admit that the words of LCM are his words alone and not assume VPW said or taught the exact same thing that LCM said or taught.

Fair enough Oakspear. I have researched this topic perhaps more than your average Wayfer, writing multiple letters to LCM, the research department (John Schoenheit), limb leader of NY, etc. asking if tithing works elsewhere. This was in response to LCM's article "the tithe doth still provide". Without going into my "Way Memorabalia" file, the gist of the answer that was given to me was "tithing worked best in twi but worked elsewhere too";.... and I think that was the gist of CSBP. That's why I believe Dr. Juedes statement was inaccurate. It is my opinion a more accurate statement would have been the following: "VPW conveniently determined that the giving had to be to TWI in order to count best". Words mean something, so my feeling is let's try to be as accurate as possible so as to avoid misunderstandings. The more precise we are with the facts I believe the greater the power of the argument and the more likely one might be believed.

But which apostles? He did not say. He taught "the apostles feet"; not "me" or "my feet" (speaking of himself). He did not say "tithing works only in twi". Let's be accurate with what he taught. Dr. Juedes said: "VPW conveniently determined that the giving had to be to him in order to count." Not so. That statement is inaccurate... according to CSBP it counted elsewhere also. "You show me a tithing congregation and I will show you a church that is blessed of God". Page 38

Even saying "tithes went to the trustees" would have been more accurate than saying "tithes to VP". As a former participant, I do remember the heart and intent of the monies were to go for "the outreach of the Word of God" and it was in that heart and mindset that the monies (at least mine) were given. Who benefited? Not only VP ... When folks got blessed and the word moved, everyone benefited. And as it says in the bible, "give and you shall receive" so there was benefit to the giver as well, something Jesus taught consistently. Also benefited many employees of twi who received pay for their work. Also inaccurate was the remark about tithing supposedly only counting in twi. VPW taught otherwise.

I know nothing of the sort. All I know is to go by what he taught and wrote and at this point refrain from making an assumption. And no, tithing to VPW IS DIFFERENT than tithing to twi. He didn't say "tithe to the man of God" or even "tithe to me". He said what he said, let's be accurate. I think TWI was much more than just VPW alone. Words mean something and I oppose fudging words like that.

I agree in part .... Although he did write in CSBP that the best place to tithe was (not to himself but) to a biblical research ministry rightly dividing the Word, that doesn't mean it did not count elsewhere. As I recall CSBP says that tithing is immutable and worked for everyone who applied it. He specifically cited the Mormons as those who applied it and prospered. Also, being an immutable law suggests that it is colorblind and would work for everyone (saint and sinner alike) who met that condition irrespective of religious beliefs, race, color or creed. This is what VPW taught... I dont believe that tithing is an immutable law anymore but let's at least be accurate about exactly what he said.

If someone wants to trash the carnal mind, then I think that would have been different. The carnal mind is trashed in scripture no matter who it is (saint and sinner alike) or where they might be or who they fellowship with. Contrast that with the term "Waybrain" ... appears to be trashing only Way participants irrespective of whether they have a carnal mind or not, whether they do God's will or not. I don't know all of these people but it seems to label all of them nuts because of the religious affiliation. Joe Smith wants to attend fellowships in twi therefore he is afflicted with "Waybrain". Seems like not a very nice thing to say about people who for all anyone knows wants to simply participate in a religion; personally I prefer to get to know people first before labelling in a negative way and even then would think twice because this is the U.S. of America with freedom of religion.

Or as they said in the good old days "two wrongs don't make a right." I agree with WhiteDove that Waybrain is a deragatory term. It's a put down...like the word cult. Sort of like being intolerant of others' beliefs. Although GS putdowns are allowed (as long as not directed at fellow posters) someone once said "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" ... I think that principle works well and is appreciated.

The video was on YouTube but apparently was removed due to copyright violation. (I removed the video... not sure if it is allowed to be linked on here.)