johnj

By quoting Psalm 22:1, Jesus was telling his listeners to read the whole Psalm. Perhaps he even quoted more of it. It's an amazing prophecy of the crucifixion. There are many details in it which are exactly what occurred in crucifixion... my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth, my strength is dried up, they pierced my hands and feet, he's with the transgressors (men crucified with Him), but with the rich in death (Joseph's fancy tomb), people ridicule him, etc. Any Jew would think that all that pain was indeed proof that God had abandoned Him- because why would a present God let an innocent man go through that? We always read this Psalm at the end of worship on Maundy Thursday (the night before Good Friday). People who listened to Him would understand that His crucifixion was at that very moment fulfilling Psalm 22.

TWI's Aramaic Interlinear translators fought Cummins over the reading of Mat 27:46, knowing it reads "forsaken/ deserted." The Aramaic lexicons they use have "forsaken." The Aramaic word also appears in Mat 26:56 (the same Gospel) translated correctly as the disciples "deserted" Him and fled. Their inconsistency in translating shows how "spare" was false, but included to please VP & Co. The TWI Aramaic interlinear is very orthodox Christian compared to TWI. In it, - Thomas says "my Lord and my God" (John 20:28) - Baptize in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit (Mat 28:19) - Jesus says, "before Abe, I was" (John 8:58) - John 1:18 reads "the only begotten God" - the Spirit is "he" (John 16:13) - Peter would glorify God by his death (John 21:18) - the Spirit of His Son cries Abba (Gal 4:6) You can find on article on this in the research section of www.abouttheway.org

Several of VP's exorbitant and false claims to amazing accomplishments and extraordinary education were written down in E Whiteside's "The Way- Living in Love." When she interviewed him, VP was in his full blown "blowhard," "snow" mode. Spinning yarns about himself and presenting them to her as though they were fact instead of fiction. This is the same interview/ book in which he spun yarns about the blizzard in Tulsa which he said stopped all trains and buses from leaving town. Quite a feat, since the temperature that week was over 50 degrees. He knew he was lying, but, it seems, couldn't help himself. One of many times that happened. However, he repeated the education claims on his book jackets. Most of the book jackets were too embarrassed about the source of his "doctorate" to mention the name "Pike's Peak." I would have been embarrassed to mention it, too.

VPW and TWI didn't really want mathematical precision in interpreting Scripture, because their own desires to make the Bible say what they wanted trumped Bible accuracy. Instead, they wanted people to think that VPW alone had the accuracy, so that everyone would abandon any other teachers and churches and give all their money, devotion and obedience to VPW and TWI. This is the primary, though unstated, goal of PFAL and WAP. Very self serving.

I wouldn't defend the strict rules that caused the particular problems of blood donations listed above, however... It appears the rules are purposely overly strict in order to reduce the possibility that a blood donation will make a patient worse instead of better, especially since there are diseases in blood that are untestable, permanent, disabling or terminal. Sexual diseases lead the way, including AIDS. A nurse told me that one reason they discourage donating for a particular person (that is, when blood goes to or comes from a person you know) is because the donor may not be free of diseases. For example: your husband needs blood and you talk your friend Gene into donation for him, not knowing that Gene sees prostitutes occasionally (he seems like such a nice guy...), is infected, and doesn't know it. They figure the love or guilt that would prompt Gene to donate won't work if he knows the blood won't go to hubby anyway. They conclude you're safer with a stranger's blood who gives out of general good will than someone closer to the patient. Some of the scenarios sound unlikely, but the idea is that they've probably happened somewhere sometime. You'd be more upset by getting a disease from a friend than by getting blood from a stranger. Err on the side of caution. The folks making the rules really do want people to heal. 11 gallon donor, John

VP was not a writer. His "books" came in 3 ways: 1) he plagiarized most of PFAL, RTHST, ATDAN and parts of other books and magazine articles 2) he babbled off the top of his head, and someone else transcribed them (for example, the chapter in JCING on miscellaneous verses Trinitarians use- you can find this on tape #295) This is why the "research" is so shallow and un-academic 3)he had other people research and write for him, such as JCOP. VP as "author" is myth.

Apparently, VP's only qualifiction for authors was that they used initials intsead of full names-- E.W. Bullinger, K. C. Pillai, J.E. Stiles, V.P. Wierwille, etc He didn't care how wierd their teachings were, as long as he could plagiarize from them without them complaining.

No, it's not important enough to mention this. Apparently the reason Simon was mentioned at all is because the people in the early church knew his family, probably because they had become Christians-- Mark mentions that Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus, assumng that a lot of people knew who Alexander and Rufus were. Mark is pointing out a couple more witnesses of the crucifixion that people would know. We study the Gospels line by line and forget how very short they are. The whole account of the trial before Pilate and the crucifixion is only 2-3 pages, roughly as short as a magazine article. Each biography of Jesus (each Gospel) is only 30-60 pages long. Compare that to typical biographies today which may be 300-1,000 pages long. The writers were all pressed for space and gave only the bare bones, condensed version of any event or day or conversation. For example, the Gospel of John is basically just 15 or so conversations with Jesus, approximately one per chapter- Nicodemus in ch 3, Samaritan woman in 4, Lazarus in 11, Pilate in 18, etc. Just the highlights.

Matthew 27:32 As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross. John 19:17 Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). What's wrong with this picture? Am I the only one that sees a contradiction? _____________ I don't see a contradiction. All gospels say Jesus left Jerusalem for Golgatha carrying his cross. All Gospels say Jesus arrived at Golgatha where he was crucified. Three Gospels (except John) add the detail of one thing that happened on the way, namely Simon carried the cross on the second part of the trip. The fact that John doesn't add the detail that Simon carried the cross part of the way is not a contradtiction. There are many details found in only one Gospel that are not in the other three. For example, Luke 23 adds another detail of what happened on the way to Golgatha, namely that he spoke to some grieving women on the way. That adds to, not contradicts, other Gospels that don't mention that detail. The addition of details doesn't mean they contradict each other. We all at times tell the same story to more than one person-- in longer, more detailed versions to some people, and shorter, more abbreviated versions to other people. If your friends gathered together later to compare versions and pick you apart for your "contradictions," how would you feel? Would you conclude that you couldn't tell your own story right, or that they were trying to make something out of nothing?

Wierwille didn't think through much at all of what he wrote or taught, leading to many contradictions. Regarding alledged contraditions in the NT.... Many things that are seen as contradictions (by VP, EWB and others) are supplemental material, not contradictions. If people read the Gospels like they read newspapers, instead of trying to pick them apart, most of the "contradictions" go away by themselves. Let's say you hear 3 accounts of a football game which read this way: #1 - "Kurt Warner ran for the first touchdown of the game. Larry Fitgerald caught a pass for a second" #2 - "The Cardinals won by a three touchdown margin. The coach said "the defense played poorly but well enough to win." #3 - Larry Fitgerald scored three touchdowns and Kurt Warner scored another. The coach said "the defense played poorly" What really happened in the game, and in what order? You could say they contradict because #1 mentions Warner's touchdown first, and #3 says it happened last. #1 mentions only 2 touchdowns, but #3 mentions four. #2 says the defense played well enough, while #3 just says it played poorly. In fact, the accounts are not contradictory and each is accurate as far as it goes. Both EWB and VP mess up the understanding of stories like 2 crucified by insisting that all details in the Gospel accounts 1) must be chronological 2)always mention the whole, exact wording of the sign on the cross and quotes of people (never paraphrases), 3) you can't accept the plain meaning of the text. They were right in seeing seeing some details as supplemental, but wrong in that they insisted the texts say more than they do. In the Bible, as in ordinary conversation and story-telling, we don't give utterly compplete, utterly chronological accounts every time, but we do get the basic story across. Instead, we give partial acocunts, incomplete quotations, and may choose to tell the most important or meaningful things first even if they aren't chronologial. If you wonder about (or believe) the idea of 4 crucified, please take a look at my article on it at www.abouttheway.org

Have you noticed how old cg and the ex-members of TWI's old "President's cabinet" are getting? (How far off is medicare?) And still flogging the same old dead TWI horse? There were never many people in TWI to begin with (I suspect there are several hundred individual congregations in America which have seen more distinct people pass through their doors than TWI did in its total history). There are a limited number of ex-wayers still in splinter groups. And a small percentage of those are interested in Geer, and an even smaller percentage of those who are able to get to his classes. It is hard for me to picture any "money rolling in" to cg these days for recycled PFAL. Some folks, it seems, can't let go.

Chris Geer recently published a 2 book set, In the Footsteps of Patriarchs, Prophets, Believers and Kings, Vol 1 and 2. They are part of his Advanced class materials and were released before the class. He was working on a very long student guide and very long recorded class at the same time. He still periodically publishes "Glimpses of Truth, A Journal of Christian Studies." If you are wondering what a "Journal of Christian Studies" looks like... the Nov 2008 issue was a four page recounting of Joshua crossing the Jordan river and attacking Jericho. About two-thirds of that were simply quotations of the book of Joshua, so it says very little. If you've ever seen a true "Journal" in any discipline (theology, psychology, etc)... Geer's version is nothing whatsoever like them. He lives in South Casco, Maine.

VP had only about ten good years, from when TWI started to grow around 1972 to when he passed the reins to martindale and started to die of cancer (an 18 month process). Had he lived longer, more things would have come out, as they did with other cult leaders like Joe Smith (Mormon). It also takes time for writers to gather and publish the information, which brings things more into the public view than talk does. With talk, people always wonder if it's just rumor. As a writer, one has to be careful what you publish. Accusations of sexual indiscretions are hot potatoes, especially when some of them could be grounds for lawsuits or criminal actions (as some were). It's too easy to be accused of, or have a lawsuit filed against you for, slander. This happens even today when there ae lots of testimonies of vp's sin and abuse of power. Publishers are especially hesitant when vpw and his brother (or son or best friend, who may be getting sexual perks too) have complete control over millions of twi's dollars and no accountability or transparency whatsover in how they use the money. But most of all, people are gullible when it come to charlatans like vp, and he set up a cultic structure which turns the Leaders ("The Teacher")into gods.

Former TWI president Martindale resigned after female followers of TWI filed lawsuits against him, alleging he exploited them for sex. His first thought must have been- "but I haven't done anything wrong." According to TWI theology, he indeed had not done anything wrong. The article The Way's Theology of Sex: How Way Leaders Used the Bible to Promote Promiscuity and Adultery http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/sut_sextheology.htm"[/url] describes in detail how leaders used Way theology to persuade women to have sex with them, and how the Way's sex class prepared students for promiscuous sex. It includes accounts of Kristen Skedgell's sexual experiences with TWI leaders from her book Losing the Way. The Way's "Biblical Research and Teaching" gave guys a great tool to use to seduce vulnerable young women. Oddly enough, the theology did not seem to apply to old women, too.

here's a quote from an article on www.abouttheway.org "The Way International sold The Way College of Biblical Research-- Indiana Campus at Rome City in northeast Indiana in December, 1999. The Fort Wayne Journal Gazette reported that Sylvan Springs paid $750,000 for the 197 acres of land, 30 buildings, furniture and equipment. Sylvan will use the facility for family enrichment programs. " There are more details in that and other articles on both Rome City and Emporia, documenting prices and amounts TWI said it paid on renovation. Did fees paid by students cover the costs of both property and ongoing operations? Not likely, especially in the same of Rome City. RC was open only about 10 years before TWI imploded and splintered. Plus, even when campuses are empty or near empty (as they were for a few years), there are fixed overhead costs for utilities, maintenance staff, etc. You can't let it look like a wreck when you want to sell it. At any rate, selling a property for only one-third of the investment costs is bad propertry management no matter what your income was while you had it. Wise busienss is to profit by both net income and property appreciation.

TWI paid about $1.7 mill for Emporia, $2 mill for Rome City purchase price plus renovation) in 1974 and 1977. TWI sold them later for $750,000 each in 1991 and 1999 (not counting ongoing repairs on the old buildings). Figuring in the fact that 1990s dollars are worth much less than 1970s dollars (and the fact the campuses spent years vacant), a whole lot of well-meaning tithes were lost by leadership error. As much as the trustees talked about "the best," they seemed to have no eye for value.

There is a lot of superficial, pop Christianiy out there. But the reason we see it is because by its nature it likes to be noticed (like the Pharisees Jesus mentioned praying aloud on street corners). Superficiality likes to be noticed because that's as far as it goes. But there are also a whole lot of Christians out there with a very deep faith, who live closely according to Christ's teachings even though it costs them, who truly love God and love their neighbors as themselves. But you don't notice them because by their nature they are humble, not attention-geetting, not superifcial. Some of them wear Christian T-shirts and others don't. I've met a lot of them in church, because they tend to gravitate to Christian fellowship and Bible teaching and worship and service. It's in their nature to be in the Body of Chrost, receiving and giving. Offhand, I could name you a few, like Barbara and Barbara and Mary and Taylor... but of course, you wouldn't know their names.

"Kingdom of haven" and "kingdom of God" are synonymous, as the excellent Biblical study above (post 2) shows in great detail. The reason Matthew used "heaven" is because he was writing primarily to Jews, who avoided using the Name of God so that they would not break the command on not misusing his name. They did other things to avoid this also, such as saying "The Name" where one would normally use YHWH or Adonai. The story of the origin of the pretrib rapture stemming from a 16 year old girl in Scotland and JN Darby is accurate. Check out the book "The Incredible Coverup" by MacPherson. (I've also seen it, or a version of it, under the name "The Unbelievable PreTrib Origin.") Amazon lists it.

Actually, if you read the NT closely, you will find all these things. The centralized body of leadership was the 12 apostles. The key Bible word is "oversight," based on the Greek word episkopos, which when slightly mangled in English is "bishop." When Phillip did the odd thing of evangelizing Samaritans, Peter and John went to oversee it. When Greeks came to faith at Antioch (an unheard of event), the central body of oversight (apostles) sent Barnabas to check things out. When a conflict arose between Paul who taught Grace and Judaizers who demanded that Greek converts be circumcised, they went to the governing body of apostles at Jerusalem to resolve the matter. There were also divisions. In 1 Corinthians some say "I follow Paul," others, "I follow Appollos," others "I follow Peter." Paul tried to unite them under Christ. But others went off to form their own groups. John said "they went out from us because they were not of us," and Paul warned elders in Ephesus that some would leave to draw away disciples aftyer themselves (as VPW did). There were also church politics. The Greek widows complained that the Hebrew widows were treated better than them (Acts 6) so the apostles (the governing body) designated (ordained) seven men to settle the matter. The oversight of the apostles continued in the overseers ("bishops") they ordained, because the Church needs some eladers to oversee things. The Jerusalem council was continued by many church councils from the first century until now. The first century church had the same struggles Christians do now, and set up oversight and council models to be contnued as a means to solve problems that arise. Denominations in the positive sense are churches who band together to do things that individual chruches or Christians cannot do by themselves. For instance, Titus and Timothy oversaw the network of churches Paul planted (Bishops by various names serve the same function of oversight over networks of churches today), and several of them together supported Paul's mission much as denominations organize churches to support missionaries today. Oversight bodies (like bishops) and denominations are often criticized today, but part of the function they serve is based on healthy Biblical models.

I noticed that the church statement referenced in the first post allows an ex-minister to have an active role in church ministry under the pastor, just not to hold the position of pastor. It places him under oversight rather than placing him into a positoon of oversight. That's an improtant distinction, and a sort of compromise between being a minister and not ministering at all. My church body, the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod also follows the practice of removing a person from office for adultery and not allowing him to be restored to office in the future. But he can still be part of a church and its ministry in many ways. A couple of the posts above seem very hard on ministers who commit adultery, and seem to suggest that it is always conscious, premeditated sin showng some kind of retrobate mind. I think adultery is that way sometimes (and apparenly was with Wierwille). But I also think that in many cases it is much more complex than that. People, including ministers, have deep emotional needs. we want to be loved. We want intimacy. We are vulnerable emotionally. We don't want to divorce. And what if a minister's wife is the opposite of all these things-- withholding love and intimacy, perhaps being emotionally distant or even abusive (overtly or in a passive-aggressive way)? A big emotional gap can develop making a person more vulnerable to a woman, and can be relief and comfort to a hurting heart. I am not saying this makes adultery OK, but that Jesus' words "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak" is true of us all, minister or not.

TWI's "ultradispensational" teaching on seven administrations (dispensations) makes Jesus' words no more authoritative than any Old Testament prophet, because his words are not to born again believers today- they are just for Israelites he spoke to before Pentecost. This means that believers may learn from Jesus' teachings on adultery and other topics, but they are not authoritative today because "they were not addressed to us." In the same way, the dispensational view casts the same negative light on any passage that is not found in the seven "church epistles" written by the apostle Paul. It's a handy tool to easily dismiss any Bible verses found in 20 of the 27 books of the New Testament that make the Directors uncomfortable. Did LCM (and others) deceive- or were they deceived? One indication is that they hid what they were doing from public view. They initiated people (esp women) as the lust or need arose for it. They were not just being private, they did not want to be discovered or to answer for what they were doing. When people hide what they are doing, it is usually because they want to deceive.

When people with Biblical knowledge become involved in sin, they have to somehow reconcile the difference between what the Bible commands and their disobedience. They must repent and change, or live in guilt and hypocrisy (knowing something is sinful but doing it anyway), or convince themselves (perhaps against their own conscience) that the practice is good, not sinful. Joseph Smith, founder of Mormonism, chose the latter. After he was sexually involved with many women he finally said he had a "revelation" from God addressed to his wife in which "God" approved of his adultery. It is likely that Wierwille latched onto distorted views of certain Bible passages like "to the pure all things are pure" in order to rationalize his existing sin. Likewise, his teaching that "Christians should be prosperous" was developed to satisfy his greed and materialism. So it may well be that the current theology of The Way International came to be in order to allow the founder to have a guilt-free life of sin. It is likely that current Way theology did not come about as a result of Wierwille's search for truth, but as a result of his search for a way to feed his lust and adultery. Joseph Smith used "revelation" to convince his followers that men could have multiple sexual partners through polygamy. While Wierwille's followers believed he taught "by revelation," they saw him primarily as a Bible teacher, not as a prophet. So Wierwille used Bible passages and Way theology as a means to get religious women to have sex with him, because this was the "language" they responded to. VP, LCM and others did not really care what the Word said on the matter- he cared what his lust said.

The primary purpose of PFAL was not to teach the Bible, but to drag people away from whatever Binle teaching they had before so they would obey and send money to VPW himself. PFAL was all about self-promotion. For example, a few sessions taught very basic, universally known principles of BIble interpretation, such as interpret the verse in its context. But all the examples VP used were oddities, like 4 crucified. The purpose was to get people to think, "hey, VP is the only Teacher in the world who knows this stuff, everybody else is stuck in tradition.... so let follow VPW and send him money! The irony is, though people were told to beleve that VP and TWI were the only source of truth.... VPW was actually reading straight out of his Bullinger Bible during PFAL. The plagiarist poses as the MOG with revelation. So going back to PFAL is going back to VPW's self-aggrandizing.

VPW , LCM and others used DECEPTION as their main tool. They consciously tested the waters to see which women were vulverable to deception. As one woman above mentioned, VP would fondle or touch their hand, or hug, or kiss a little too long and see what the reaction was. If the woman was wise enough to shut him down, he stopped, hiding his predatory intent and action. But if she seemed soft enough to be deceieved, they went on to cultivate the potential conquest. But what is really terrible is how they used the Word of God as a tool to deceive and seduce. To any Christian, this is not just immoral (as, say, using alchohol to seduce), but also blasphemous-- using a good and godly thing to manipulate women into sex. Was CF&S just nuetral toward promiscuity, and just misued by a few predators? Take a look at Kristen Skedgell's book and other conversations Way men and women had about sex. They always used CF&S to DEFEND promiscuity, never to oppose it. This is a good indication that Wierwille's theology and the content of the class was consciously structured to promote sex outside marriage, not to oppose it as the Bible clearly does. The theoloogy of CF&S and Wierwille was immoral at its core, but was diplomatic enough not to do it blatantly. That is what deception does-- it promotes evil indirectly, not blatantly.

The Bible talks often about "fruit," that is, the results of a person's character, beliefs and theology. The "fruit" of how people live is indeed an indication of whether their theology is true or false. Not the only indication, but a very important one. Jesus said that bad fruit comes from bad trees. Wierwille and Martindale clearly thought they were following Way teaching (the "tree") when they practiced free sex (the "fruit"). The theology and the behavior was a matched set. James 3 says that wisdom that comes from heaven is full of good fruit. TWI leadership who knew Way theology best yielded much bad fruit. When leaders used Way theology like administrations and body/soul/spirit to promote promiscuity, it worked largely because people could see how the theology and the promiscuity fit together. The CF&S class was 18 hours long and cites 113 Bible passages. Adjusting for overlap between them, about 52 sections of the Bible are quoted. That's a lot of verses. However, Wierwille never once mentions the 11 that most directly prohibit adultery and sex outside marriage, including: + 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, "neither the sexually immoral... nor adulterers... will inherit the kingdom of God" + Galatians 5:19, "the acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality" + Hebrews 13:4, "marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral" + Ephesians 5:3, "there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality" + Matthew 15:19, Mark 7:21, " adultery, sexual immorality... these are what make a man unclean" + Matthew 5:32, 19:7-9, Mark 10:4, 11-12, "anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to commit adultery" + Matthew 5:27-28, "anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" + Exodus 20, "do not commit adultery" The only passage Wierwille cites which mentions immorality at all is 1 Corinthians 6:15-20, which prohibits sex with prostitutes. It certainly was not just oversight that Wierwille cited 113 passages He consciously left them out. This class was the main contact most people had with TWI's theology of sex. Clearly, Wierwille's theology left the door wide open for adultery and promiscuity without restriction. People have enough sense to recognize what is NOT said as well as what is said.