oldiesman

Rascal, what is your definition of a "genuine" Christian? Is it a born-again Christian?

Another point, Mrs. Wierwille didn't say her husband wasn't a Christian, didn't say her husband didn't walk by the spirit, and didn't say to throw out his teachings or regard them as false. Quite the contrary.

Doojable, if Mrs. Wierwille said that I can understand why ... he WAS mean to her. He cheated on her. That's mean. But does Mrs. Wierwille say he was not a Christian or doesn't KNOW he was, like some here say? NO.

Its a notable point, but doesn't address my question to Rascal about detection of fruit. I would add, that works of the flesh do not negate the fruit of the spirit. It goes back to my question to you about time. Are you saying that if a Christian sins, walks by the flesh one day, it's not possible they can walk in the spirit the next? or the next week? or the next month or year? I say they can, and believe they do. Rascal said I saw "corporate manners" in VPW and not fruit of the spirit. So how does Rascal detect genuine fruit of the spirit then is my question? She said she knows "genuine" Christians, and suggests I saw a counterfeit. So all I'm asking for is clarification on how to detect the genuine.

BTW, you folks who are so concerned about staying on topic; have you noticed that this thread is chock full of off-topic postings? Yet not a word of reproof was said to these postings, especially those of DWBH who veered off topic early on in post #37, and again and again in posts #50, #72, #84, #200, #425 and #520. On and on about the evils of CFF and other off-topic stuff and not all that much about forgiveness. He's not the only one, there are others. Please, if you're going to engage in reproof about staying on topic, at least be even handed about it with all posters, not just the ones you don't like? Thank you.

Wordwolf, saying you're not sure Dr. Wierwille is saved says something about your belief system, which I'm trying to clarify. OK, don't answer. I guess I'll just have to continue to ask for clarification as these issues arise until the question is answered. I have patience.

Wordwolf, if you're suggesting I'm here to tempt you , please lighten up. All I'd like is clarification on some theological positions.

Wordwolf, you may have me confused with another poster... I never said that these sins don't matter, and there is no penalty or accounting for them. Galatians 5 says that Christians who practice the works of the flesh will receive no rewards at the gathering. This is what I believe the bible teaches; I think Rascalian Theology about this issue is false. BTW, this is what TWI taught as well, (no rewards at the gathering). Twi DIDN'T teach there was no penalty. You may have been absent when they taught these things. I would ask you to please define "born again Christian" as you see it. Its important to clarify your position since you're not sure about Dr. Wierwille being born again. Rascal says she doesn't think so. It's certainly important and raises a whole host of other questions about sonship. If you don't know what born again means, you don't know. If you do, please clarify. Even if we don't agree, it's good to hear folks clarify their position about it. Also would like to hear how you identify and detect fruit of the spirit. You obviously think that I don't know how, since you characterize my personal experience with Wierwille as him simply "being a nice guy". Rascal characterized it as "corporate manners". Assuming that's true and he's a counterfeit, how does one detect the genuine? If you know the counterfeit you should also know the genuine. Rascal said she knows the genuine so I'd like to hear from you both. Thank you.

Rascal, You still have not clarified how to detect genuine fruit of the spirit. I stated that I saw genuine fruit of the spirit in Dr. Wierwille; but you said that was "corporate manners". Wordwolf said it was him "being a nice guy". Assuming you and Wordwolf are correct, then please explain how we detect genuine Christian fruit of the spirit. If you really know the counterfeit then you must really know the genuine too. Tell us how to detect it. Give some examples of peoples lives. People you know. Thank you.

Rascal, Asking for clarification on one's theology is a snare? I don't think so. You still haven't clarified your position about what fruit of the spirit is and how we can detect it. Please give examples. Understanding your theological position is important. Thank you.

There's no need to have an attitude ... all I'm asking for is clarification of some beliefs and theological positions.

But a case is attempting to be made that Dr. Wierwille was not a Christian. So then what is a born again Christian? What is your definition of one? Please give 3 examples of folks who you believe to be born again, and explain why you believe they are. Thank you.

Bowtwi, you are incorrect, I didn't call anyone a liar. Rascal accused me of misquoting her, which I didn't, and then I provided the exact quote I used. She said I misquoted her by deleting *after the new birth*. I didn't misquote her. I didn't delete *after the new birth*. I used a quote of hers from several months ago that didn't have *after the new birth*. So if anyone should apologize it should have been Rascal for jumping to conclusions. Rascal hasn't clarified her point about fruit of the spirit and how it can be detected. I believe this is important to understand what her theology is all about, so I'd like to get clarification on that.

At the same time? No. It says in Galatians that when a Christian walks in the spirit, they won't fulfull the lust of the flesh, and vice-versa. Do you really believe that if a Christian fulfills the lust of the flesh one day, or one week, or one month, that that means a Christian can't walk in the spirit another day, another week or another month? If so, please provide the scriptures. What seems reasonable to me isn't the issue? To me it is. My answer to the rest of your post is above.

Well, I'm entitled to make a judgement about the man based upon my experiences with him, just as someone else is entitled to make a judgment based upon theirs. Seems reasonable to me.

Thanks Jonny, but you know my avatar is Suzy Parker, you guessed her during the contest back in December. How long will she be up there? who knows... but I like her looks don't you?

Wordwolf, you say your uncertain whether VP Wierwille was a born again Christian. But what IS your definition of a born again Christian and how does one know for sure? Please define. Take 3 people who you believe are born again and please tell me why you believe that. Rascal, you mentioned fruit of the spirit in the past dozens of times. Please describe what fruit of the spirit is, and how we can detect it. You said in the past that it wasn't good works. Take 3 people you believe manifest fruit of the spirit and please tell me how we detect that and what are the attributes. Thank you.

My answer to that question would be my own personal observation and fellowship with him. Along with his 40+ years teaching ministry, 15 of which I observed; I also have observed fruit of the spirit; love, joy, peace, gentleness, meekness, goodness, faith, etc. in my dealings with him. I've spent some very short time with him in 1973 and 1975; spent a whole month with him and Mrs. Wierwille in June of 1984 on a motorcycle trip. If he was the man *of the flesh* that some posters relentlessly portray of him, then I saw a different man when I spent time with him. I know him in a different way that contradicts the way he has been portrayed here. So yes, he certainly may have seen the error of those ways and asked God for forgiveness and moved on. But even IF he didn't, I believe it still would not negate his standing as a child of God because of his belief in Jesus Christ, and I believe it wouldn't negate the truths he taught. The sins of a teacher do not negate the truths in the teaching. The teachings should be viewed separately and stand as truth or error on their own.

I agree Mike. Galatians 5 doesn't say they who do such things shall not "enter" the kingdom. Says they shall not "inherit" the kingdom. Another verse says "no inheritance" which suggests no rewards, bonuses. Perhaps we should start a thread sometime on that word "inherit" in Galatians 5 so folks who may want to view another choice besides the Rascalian Theological view of a Galatians 5 eternal death sentence may participate and do so.

I am posting on a Sunday! Wow. No I didn't. Below is the entire post which says nothing about *after the new birth* at the end of the sentence. YOU please be HONEST. In Rascal's past post it's evident that Rascalian Theology supports the idea that there are no qualifiers to Galatians 5. "it says uncatagorically that the people who do the things that wierwille did have NO inheritance in the kingdom of God ...shrug" Now a qualifer is added, i.e., Paul converted, and didn't murder anymore after the new birth, so Galatians 5 doesn't apply to Paul. Well ok, but remember, Paul did continue to sin after the new birth. He still had the old man nature after the new birth and was still stinky on the inside. But it does sound a bit dismissive, like whitewashing Pauls horrible acts, because he converted. It just seems a bit of a double standard ... that some posters could be so relentlessly condemning of Wierwille and others while dismissing other equally horrible acts (and worse). And so my feeling is if one is going to have such relentless moral outrage over sin, at least be consistent across the board. BTW, Wierwillian Theology teaches that when one is converted, born again, no matter what they did or how horrible the sin was in the past, they receive a clean slate. Rascalian Theology agrees. So would appear that Rascalian Theology uses parts of Wierwillian Theology when it fits!

Not only that, according to Rascalian Doctrine (from a past posting) "people who do the things that wierwille did have NO inheritance in the kingdom of God ... shrug". Well, Paul murdered. That is a lot worse and much more damaging than young sex, so why whitewash that? "read it ... there is no room to wiggle." Have a nice weekend, one and all. :)

Ex, please feel free to PM anytime, the invitation is always open.

He sure did. He murdered Christians in the name of God. I think that's a helluva lot worse than young sex.

But we agreed to it. If we didn't, we could always leave. Ya can't seriously claim victimhood when there was always a way to escape from being "a victim."

dmiller, VMP = Victim Mentality Propaganda The key for me to believe something is mind control, is if free will is taken away. I suppose we can claim we were brainwashed by just being there, but that's not enough for me. Who chained us to the seat? Who locked the door? Who held a gun to our head? Remember, this is the U.S. of A. with freedom of religion, and we had the freedom to walk out anytime.