waysider

I have seen how many people who left TWI, the organization, have not left TWI the mindset and attitude and worldview. Yeah. Kinda like that old Salem commercial-----"You can take Salem out of the country, but, you can't take the country out of Salem."

Oops!

HERE is an old thread that ties into the current discussion.

You are correct HERE

I suppose you could name it Lumpy but how many kids would get the Leave it to Beaver connection?

"I just reach up in Daddy's cookie jar." Good catch. I never thought about it that way before. You're right. He was, in essence, saying that the rules and boundaries didn't apply to him and he could violate them any time he wanted.

As "class instructors", we were directed, by the instructors manual, to pass around to the class, Bullinger's HTETB, turned to the page where Bullinger explores the "Four Crucified" theme. The idea was that students would draw the conclusion that both Bullimger and Wierwille, though reaching the same conclusion, did so independently and without knowledge of each others work. Of course, because Bullinger died in 1913, any copying would had to have been on the part of Wierwille. The real irony here is that the entire concept of the "four crucified" theory has long since been debunked right here on GSC. edit: If you were ever a "class instructor", you were deliberately played (manipulated) on this issue. How does that make you feel?

One of Rev. Wierwille's students In his first Power for Abundant Living class was Dr. E.E. Higgins, whose interest in his research greatly aided him. He notes that she gave him his first copy of E.W. Bullinger's How to Enjoy the Bible.(49) Wierwille has since shown a great interest in Bullinger's work. In fact, The Way's current bookstore catalogue offers for sale four of Bullinger's books. However, Wierwille never mentions Bullinger's 1905 book The Giver and His Gifts, in spite of the fact that it has been in print in recent years. Why does Wierwille neglect to mention this book? Perhaps the answer to this question lies in the fact that Wierwille's Receiving the Holy Spirit Today includes material that is found also in Bullinger's 1905 The Giver and His Gifts. Sections of Wierwille's third edition, published in 1957 with 164 pages, and of every edition since then bear unmistakable similarity to 14 Bullinger's material. This is evident in significant portions of Wierwille's Introduction and Appendices 2 and 3. Every section of Bullinger's book has been included in Wierwille"s book in some form and the content, general conclusions and in many places even the wording closely match.(50) Technically, neither The Giver and His Gifts nor The Gift of the Holy Spirit may have been legally protected by copyright at the time Wierwille compiled Receiving the Holy Spirit Today. Nonetheless, scholarly practice is to quote even uncopyrighted sources, which include such things as unpublished theses, newsletters, archives, government documents, correspondence and personal interviews. One who incorporates another man's work while presenting it to the reader as original work certainly falls short of the scholarly integrity the secular world expects and, more important, displeases God as well. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The material above was authored by John P.Juedes and Douglas V. Morton (1983). You can find it in its entirety HERE. And there is this: ------------------------------------- Wierwille and The Way praise it as the "most thorough and original coverage of the subject."(43) Even. today "Doctor" emphasizes his holy spirit teachings, since he feels that God raised him up to pioneer accurate Bible study in this field.(44) To emphasize the originality of his work, Wierwille insists that he used only the Bible in writing Receiving the Holy Spirit Today: "I prayed that I might put aside all I had heard and thought out myself, and I started anew with the Bible as my handbook as well as my textbook."(44) However, in the very book in which he prayed to "put aside" what he "had heard" he draws thought after thought, and at times word after word, from J. E. Stiles' book, The Gift of the Holy Spirit, written six years before. Both Stiles and Wierwille title chapters of their books "How to Receive the Holy Spirit" and about 18 key points in them closely match in content and even wording. Both books have chapters which list questions and answers, and five of the questions are similar in content. The 250-word answer to question eight in Wierwille's book matches Stiles' answer with almost word-for-word precision!(46) Note these excerpts from question 8 of both books: 13 Stiles. 1948 . 8. Is it not possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when seeking to receive the Holy Spirit? Answer? When people ask that question, we know that they have somewhere come in contact with one of these "faith blasters" who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When we suggest to earnest Christians that they may get something false, when seeking more of the fulness of God, we sinfully dishonor God and His Holy Spirit."(47) Wierwille, 2nd ed., 1954 8. Is it possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when seeking the Holy Spirit? The answer is no. When people ask that question, I know that they have somewhere come in contact with one of these faith blasters who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When someone suggests to earnest Christians that they may get something false, when seeking more of the fulness of God according to God's Word, he sinfully dishonors God and His Holy Spirit."(48) Furthermore, over 100 words of Stiles' answer to question number 19 appear almost verbatim in question six of Wierwille's second edition. Yet, Wierwille never once credits Stiles for the material he derives fro m him, or even mentions Stiles by name!

Speaking of Heaven----

Thanks. My son is a big fan of Jeff Buckley. I never tire of hearing this one.

You just need to speak in tongues more and renew your mind. Then, it will all become clear.

Rodin

Tangled Up In Blues

It's funny you should mention it. That is pretty darn close to what he said in CF&S when he "revealed" the "original sin".

Come out Virginia, don't let me wait You Catholic girls start much too late

At one time (early 1970s) there was a seminar/class for people involved with conducting large meetings where guest speakers would be featured. If it had an official name, I don't remember it. There was a several page printed hand out that accompanied it. In that handout was a list of items that were considered to be staple supplies for any large meeting. The list, of course, included a pre-opened package of mints for the podium. So there you have it. It was actually prescribed and sanctioned by Int. HQ.

Wierwille insisted on having mints on hand, when he stood at the podium, to disguise the ever present stench of alcohol on his breath. And, the roll had to be pre-opened so he wouldn't have to be seen fumbling with it. People began imitating Wierwilles mannerisms and quirks, right down to the need for a dish with a broken mint pack on their podiums whenever someone taught. But, remember, there were no rituals in The Way.

Sister Teresa skoaled you and has you write it down on the chalkboard 50 times. She really shouldn't have been dipping snuff. It's unbecoming of a Nun.

I dunno. That whole 3-fold being shtick all seems like so much "so much". Know what I mean? "Look, kids! You were nothing but a huffin', puffin' clump of skin and bones until you got spirit. Now you're superty duperty special, And it's because you have something that no one can even see. Yeah. You're part of the elite. So much more superior to the old, outdated model. And how can you be sure I'm telling the truth? Repeat after me-----Lo Shanta La Maka See Tay----"

Actually, it's Summer Rain But, you did get the artist right and were the only one to guess so, what the heck----Yer up.

She stepped out of a rainbow Golden hair shining like moonglow Warm lips, soft as her soul Sitting here by me

Maybe what he was really saying was "I wish I could be original." Anyway-----Why was VP allowed to "wish" for stuff and we weren't?

"I wish you could see it in the original." Remember the first time Wierwille said that? I think it was someplace in PFAL., when he was talking about the genealogy of Jesus Christ. Notice that he didn't say "I wish I could------" or "I wish WE could-----". What he said was "I wish YOU could---". It's a subtle way of implying that he alone had seen it in the original or, at the very least, knew what the original actually said. Right there in PFAL he was setting himself up to be someone who had special knowledge that others lacked. When you come to the realization that the lion's share of everything he spoke and wrote was plagiarized from existing sources, it sends his credibility into a tailspin that can't be reversed. He was a master manipulator of nuance. Do any other examples come to mind?