waysider

You completely missed the point, Mike. Or, was that done intentionally to shift the blame?

Blame the Corps! It's all the Corp's fault! Well, here's a news flash. The Corps didn't invent itself. It was the creation of one Victor Paul Wierwille. It was his brainchild. Without him, it would have simply never existed.

It doesn't really matter what word you use, whether it be parallel, balanced, synchronized, aligned or whatever. The essence of the problem is that it's a flawed, erroneous concept. It also doesn't matter that we can never know what was or wasn't in Wierwille's heart. What we do know is that his atrocious behavior and promotion of an aberrant doctrinal brought about immeasurable damage to thousands of trusting individuals. Lives were damaged, some beyond repair. Some met an even worse, permanent fate and will never get a second chance. This is not a game. It's a chance to either set the record straight or be complicit in the furtherance of a travesty.

By their fruit you shall know them.

Where might one find this? (Not counting any feigned humility.) It's not merely what was taught in PFAL. It's also (maybe even more so) the twisted behavior it caused us to incorporate into our lifestyles.

Agreed. I would tweak that last statement, though, to note that his personal behavior functioned as instruction by example and, thus, encouraged others to indulge in harmful behavior as well..

Same old load of horse spit I had to listen to, all the way back in 1975, when I voiced concern over the direction of the FellowLaborer program. Substitute the name of any infamous villain from the past (Dahmer, Gacy, Manson, Stalin...) and try to justify their actions using the same line of reasoning. Wierwille wasn't "one of the good guys". It's really just that simple.

Payne Stewart comes to mind.

One would think a golf aficionado, such as yourself, would be keen to recognize argyle.

They were argyle. Weren't you paying attention?

You can go all the way back to the very early days of GSC (20 years ago) and see people discussing this exact error. But, hey, I guess some people just weren't paying attention.

What makes you think this obvious discrepancy hasn't been discussed already, ad infinitum?

Was his body language in the collaterals? Incidentally, as you probably already know, he wasn't really a Dr.

I'm not going to do that. You made the claim. Now back it up.

Are you telling me not even you, yourself, used this when you were witnessing or running a twig? as if there was something radically different about the way you witnessed or ran a twig that set you apart from the thousands of other believers that were doing just that?

Now you're just making stuff up. If he was truly God's spokesperson, as you have asserted, there would not have been room for such misunderstandings Well, MY hunch is that you just made this claim up to suit your agenda.

Can you quote the section of the collaterals that supports your claim?

Okay, now I know you MUST be yanking my chain. This was a major element of PFAL and was woven through the entire class. As such, we used this concept countless times while witnessing..."Holy men of God spake..."Some were more eloquent than others.... yada, yada, yada."

I was in this fellowship meeting once and this guy I didn't know spoke in tongues and interpreted. His tongue had a whole bunch of words I recognized from high school Spanish class. (I don't know if his tongue matched the interpretation, on account of I didn't get such good grades in the class.) Isn't that wonderful?... (The tongue part, not my bad grades.)

He did? As a friend of mine whose native tongue is not English likes to say, "I must not have tensioned when he said that."

Au contraire. Wierwille did, in fact, teach, in the class, that he saw unbelievers being more abundant than believers.

I thought the red drapes story was meant to demonstrate the law of believing and the concept of needs and wants being parallel. So, now you're saying it was really about spiritual abundance? How does this relate to the unbelievers having more abundance than the believers? Curious minds would like to know.

How does this explain what Wierwille said when he saw the unbelievers being more abundant than the believers?

HERE is an interesting look at the authorship of the Gospels.

In Power For Abundant Living (PFAL), Wierwille said he saw unbelievers manifesting more abundance than the believers. Was he talking about spiritual abundance? If so, how was that possible?