johnj

VW's Itching ears... I remember a tape of Walter C teaching on athletes of the spirit. VW was in the background egging him on, sounding like a cheerleader. It sounded to me as tho VW was getting his itching ear "fix" like a druggie does. I hope WC felt silly doing it, because "athletes" is a terrible and silly exercise from a scholarly and linguistic viewpoint. VW was never as interested in finding the truth as he was in finding something new and different. Then he could pitch it to the world as something unknown since the first century which he alone got by revelation (even the plagiarized parts) and was teaching to the world. This is also apparent in his various renderings of Mat 28:19 (make dsciples, baptizng in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit." The Greek texts all agree on this. But VW's renderings don't even agree with each other. It struck me that he was not near as interested in finding the true reading of Mat 28 as he was in not wanting it to say what the Greek and Aramaic texts say it does. Itching ears take you away from the truth, and don't care too much where they end up, as long as it's somewhere else. You see this in Mormon founder Joe Smith also. As he went along he made up men becoming gods, polygamy, his own army, an illegal bank (he got a "revelation" from God to leave down just before the police got to him), etc. If he hadn't died young, there would have been no end to his itchy new stuff. But his successor Brigham added other new stuff, like blood atonement- some sins Christ can't atone for, so you atone for your own sin by being shot or having your throat slit (this is the basis for the state of Utah using firing squad for executions, because their blood would be shed for their own sin).

Note the details in Pillai's story: 1. It keeps the coins in a bag in its mouth. A bag in its mouth, not found in the stomach because it could not be eliminated once swallowed. 2. Fishermen did and still become rich when they catch such fish. Neither a shekel, nor tetradrachma will make you rich. In the Biblical story, the coin paid a simple tax, not made Peter and Jesus rich. A tetradrachma may have been what Judas was paid- 30 of them. A tetradrachma was about 4 days' pay for a common laborer ("tetra" = 4). Both Pillai and Lamsa mix myth and legend (we'd call it urban legend today) into their teachings and can't distinguish between the two, perhaps because their culture didn't distinguish them.

How accurate and helpful to Biblical research is KC Pillai? + Pillai admits to be raised as a Hindu in India. Indian culture is dominated by Hinduism, which is utterly opposite from Biblical worldview, and Islam. His views are dominated by Indian myth more than by Hebrew or Christian culture. Here are two of Pillai's teachings. You decide if 1) they seem credible, and 2) what kind of thinking Pillai would have to have to concoct them. + Pillai says there is an actual fish that finds real money in lakes, swallows it, and keep it in a bag in its mouth. Some fishermen even today become rich if they catch this fish. He also claims that the white stone spoken of in Rev 2 actually refers to a stone a man received after paying a fine for molesting an unmarried girl. Why a receipt for the penalty for a criminal act would be used to reward someone who has overcome is not explained, nor is such a practice mentioned in the OT. + If both Pillai and Lamsa claim to have preserved true Biblical culture, why are they so different? And why are their stories very different even though they both claim to have preserved the original Biblical culture?

In the discussion of other people who taught PFAL (I wasn't the one who used the word "admitted") one of my pooints may have been overlooked. TWI did not sell it and distributed it only through approved twigs. This by nature limits its distribution. If he really wanted to get the word out, he would sell (or give) it to anyone, and would not charge a large fee (it was $100 for a time, perhaps even $200 briefly). One product of the twig limitation was that donations went to TWI/VPW and did not stay at the local level. I have a hard time imaging that VPW did not have the idea in mind that it would be great if all the after-class donations went to him. His distributuion method was in itself centralization

vpw talked about zero corps in Whiteside's book "The Way Living in Love" (she should have been marked and avoided before she titled the book- the title would be different then!). It was 9 people in 1969. Of course, vpw blames the young people and takes no part of the responsibility for its failure on himself. He says they "never got it together among themselves. They didn't have the cimmitment, that discipline. They just kept fighting among themselves." (p235-236) Early on the PFAL class was taught by people other than VPW. Putting it on film and controling it through approved twigs (rather than selling it) gave vpw a means of control and was a tool to centralize TWI also.

There is some truth to this, but it doesn't follow that if every Christian and church was 100% great that heresy would not arise. When the apostle Paul spoke to the elders in Ephesus he warned them that "from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away discipels after themselves." (Acts 20:30) So, while the imperfection of the church is a factor, the main error is cult eladers who want Christ's disciples to become their disciples instead, as VPW did. You don't promote yourself as "the man of God" and the greatest teacher since the first century unless you're out to do that. Heresy and cults arise first from sin in the leader not from sin in the church. Otherwise the leaders would build the church rather than replace it with themselves. Note in Acts, distorting the truth as VPW did is the primary way to draw disciples after themseklves. Another key verse in understanding VPW is 2 Tim 4:3, "men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them, a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from trth and turn aside to myths." VPW had itching ears. Even if he never started a cult, and even if he knew the Truth, he likely would have itched and looked for myths. He did this his whole life. And PFAL is little else that a summary of his myths. If he'd done PFAL later, he'd hjave added athletes of the spirit and every women in the kingdom is the king's. VP's ears were probably itching in India, but I think when he picked up inhaling the Spirit from Stiles, he started his streak of itching ears myths that never stopped until he died.

The early Rock of Ages were pretty loose, relaxed, with varied people coming together for fellowship and teaching. Over the years people became more and more alike, way-brain. Now compare a SNS at New Knox' auditorium. Everyone seems to dress, look, talk, act alike. (Even down to the funny choir outfits with the multicolored scarves.) Like a convention of business suit tailors. This is one effect of the way tree- everybody knuckles under the leadership and becomes alike. TWI did not make itself grow. VPW latched onto a genuine movement of God, the "Jesus Movement" of the late 1960s and 1970s. Young people were flocking to the Lord as the "counterculture" movement was driving other people into immorality, alternative religion and anarchy. The Jesus People were a spiritual revival and led to renewal of worship, which is always a facet of spiritual revival. (Worship renewal was led my Maranatha Music/Calvary chapel and other contemporary worship music using guitar/ keyboard/ bass/ drums instead of organ/ piano.) VPW literally stole people from the Jesus movement (first in San Fran). The way tree and VPW replaced the Jesus movement (which was genuinely spiritual and not managable) and tried to impose VPW's likeness on people in place of Christ's likeness. VPW squeezed out spiritual life. He wasn't the onyl one- other cults/ cult leaders like Berg and "the Children of God" perverted the Jesus movement too. "From Vesper Chimes to the way Int- the founder, history and activities of the way Ministry" is a 80 pp monograph (short paperback) available for $3 plus $2 shipping from 7070 Palm, Highland CA 92346. Or for $12 we can send 4 monographs plus all the articles re TWI from the www.abouttheway.org site "Vesper" is early history of TWI thru the inauguration of LCM. It's stuffed with footnotes and documentation.

The Way Tree was established by VP Wierwille in about 1971 to give him authoritarian control and centralized power over everyone in TWI. Early leaders such as Dave Anderson, Steve Heefner and Peter Wade left because of this new authoritarian structure with Wierwille (and his yes-men, his brother and Ermal Owens as trustees) at the top. Heefner left in 1972 because of "tight controls, centralization and money disputes" with "one authority and no avenue of recourse" (Ft Wayne Jorunal-Gazette Mar 14, 1979) Anderson left in 1973, aserting that Wierwille began to use the Way Tree to contriol everyone in TWI, saying "By the time I left The Way, there was no longer any room for challenge. There was one leader with complete and absolute control. The Man of God whose revelation was unquestionable, could turn liberty into license without the possibility for correction from anyone on earth. In 1965 I heard 'the greatest of these is love,' in 1973 I heard 'the love of God does not work- we're going to put some teeth in this ministry'" (Anderson, letter to the editor of The Evening Leader, St Mary's Ohio, Jan 17, 1979) Peter Wade added, "since 1971 when VP Wierwille decided to put 'some teeth into the ministry' and succeeded in draining the life out of it, TWI now deserves its chapters in recent books such as 'Youth, Brainwashing and the Cults'... five top leaders departed in one year'" (The Evening Leader, 1979) This was part of the reason for the complete failure of the First Way Corps (the 2nd Corps was renamed the 1st to cover its failure) (all these and additional material is included on pp 32f of my monograph, "From Vesper Chimes to TWI") Before 1971 there was a "Board of Directors" (not trustees) which actually had some influence over the direction of TWI. But that was terminated by Wierwille when he put himself at the top of The Way Tree. It never was a tree, with roots at the bottom, it was a pyramid, with himself at the very heavy top, burdening all under him. A very self-serving structure. He used TWI to serve all his desires, for ego gratification, money, women, travel, hunting, keeping control of his family farm, (it would probably have been lost or sold had TWI not taken it over), etc. John

I updated and enlarged my article about Chris Geer at: www.abouttheway.com scroll down to Splinter Groups menu

It is striking to me how strongly people have responded to this article on the "law" of beleiving. Perhaps this response hints at how entrenched the idea was in TWI, and perhaps also at how much damage it has done to people (to themsevles or to people they know). My article does not say that VPW promoted atheism. It does say that "the law of believing" is an atheistic system. In VP's view, Christians and non Christians "operate" it to do good or to do evil. While VP mentioned God's promises, they really don't make any difference to the "law." He told the story of the mother who caused her child to be killed by her negative believing. Does that mean that she knew the promises of God were "available" and used her believing in God's promises to kill her child? Certainly not! VP was very ignorant and undiscerning in many ways. The "law" of beleiving is atheistic. He "bought" this idea from New Thought teachers who, like Christian Scientists today, do not have a personal God who hears and responds to prayer. Yet, VP contradicted himself. Sometimes he'd talk about promises as though God is involved, but when he talked about the "law" God was certainly not involved-- because people used their "believing" to do good or evil while God stood by as spectator. One of VP's key probems was that he had "itching ears." 2 Tim 4 warned us about people who "will not put up with sound doctriorne. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." VP's ears itched all the time, and he snapped up very false teachings like the "law of believing" even though it contradicts Scripture and goodness. Later, he snapped up other itchy notions like athletes of the spirit and the idea that adultery was OK if you could do it with believing. If he had lived and stayed in power, he would have come up with more and more crazy stuff, much like other cult leaders did (another minister like VPW, Berg, came up with the "biblical" idea that girls in his group could get new members through offering men sex). If you haven't read the whole article on the law of believiing, please do so. It has many helpful details in it (more than the audio interview does).

"False prophet or good minister..." is a very important question. Some people think that no one should criticize VPW or draw attention to his plagiarism, adultery, lying about his status, etc. (For example, my post above on how VPW alluded in the 1955 ed of RTHST to "a man" (Stiles) who taught him about the Spirit, then left this out of his 1957 ed and claiming that he had studied the word and researched it himself without any one's guidance or teaching.) They say (as someone said above) that God wouldn't be honored by this, or that you shouldn't criticize the dead, etc. The Lord clearly considers evaluation of a Cbristian leader's life to be very important. For example, Titus and Timothy list the qualifications for becoming an overseer or deacon. A few are skills, like "apt to teach." But most are character- having one woman/wife (same Greek word), respectable, gentle, not a lover of money, etc. If a man does not fit these qualifications, he should not be listened to or followed as a Christian leader. Furthermore, if someone is a leader, Paul say that the chruch can entertain accusations against him (by two or more witnesses, to assure evidence). The implied purpose is to remove the person from leadership if the accusations are true. If you don't, the person will infect the chruch with false teaching. Paul doesn't condemn the people who make accusations, just outlines how to do it properly. People in TWI, including most people who frequent GSC, have considered VPW a leader, teacher, and more than that-- the greatest of them. VP claimed the same when he said that God audibly told him that God would teach VP alone the word as it had not been known since the first century. Indirectly he was claiming to be like an apostle, and many considered him to be so. They even made bronze statues of "The Teacher" that people bought and displayed in their homes. (My guess is that people who bought the statues didn't have any statues of Jesus or Peter or Paul, just VP) So it is valid to evaluate VPW as the Bible does- according to the character qualifications in Timothy and Titus. VPW falls miserably short. His adultery, lying about his status and events (like snow in Tulsa), plagiarism, self-aggrandisment, false teachings (like the law of believing) and desire for control all add up to the conclusion that he does not qualify as a Christian leader of any sort. Because of this, people should not listen to him, "learn" from him, follow his example, etc. He may or may not be a Christian, but should not be considered a teacher or leader. And God is indeed honored when leaders are deposed because they've violated the qualifications of leaders in the NT, because it keeps the church purer than it would be otherwise. Character affects teaching. It's clear from many people's testimony that VPW was guilty of multiple adultery, and because of that he privately taught his next-tier leaders that adultery was OK (see Schoenheit's paper on this). His sexual sin defended and promulgated more sexual sin in others' lives. I know clergy who have been removed for doing a small fraction of what VPW did, which was right to do, though painful. It is right to evaluate VPW's actions and words and see that he is unfit as a teacher or leader in the same way.

Do you- or anyone else competent in medical knowledge here- know if eye cancer (which led to VPW's liver cancer) can be caused by syphillis or another venerial disease? If anyone wants to see VP's death certificate, it can be found at www.abouttheway.com

How early did VP go bad? In the 2nd ed of RTHST in 1955, VP credited "a man" for teaching him about the Holy Spirit (he did capitalize the Holy Spirit back then, and JE Stiles was the man VP refused to name- probably because if anyone read Stiles' book and RTHST, they'd see that VP plagiarized it, and VP wanted to hide his academic theft). The 3rd ed of RTHST two years later in 1957 leaves out the phrase about the man who taught him. In its place, we read VP says, "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 textbok." So in 1957 VP consciously decided to deceive his readers into thinking he had originated RTHST instead of stealing it. Besides conscious deception (lying) this shows a desire to promote himself as others' expense, arrogant and self-serving. He didn't slip, he made an early choice, and future lies like the non-existent Tulsa snowstorm showed he continued to make that conscious choice, and in fact formed his "ministry" around it.

TWI put on a protest march which they said included 150 from TWI. Martindale threatened to sue Canada for excluding its personnel for TWI's Canadian location. Source: The Way Magazine, Mar-Apr 1983. It even had a photo. TWI was never short on bluster. except for maybe Mary the mother of Jesus and Mother Theresa. But girls gone wild certainly get more attention. except for maybe Mary the mother of Jesus and Mother Theresa. But girls gone wild certainly get more attention.

A few people have said things like those above... "aparently TWI sued... the court did not endorse... what took place in court." But in fact NO ONE has ever produced actual evidence showing that any suit was ever filed, much less that a judgement was made. Speculation on what "must have" happened is no evidence at all-- it is only IMAGINATION. So I challenge all of you to either: 1) produce actual evidence that any suit was filed (this would be public record and include the date, place of filing, the names of those who filed and who were filed against, etc) or 2) stop imagining things and presenting them as "evidence." Using terms like those above only mislead people and lead them to say to others "I heard that..." when all they heard was speculation. In addition, arguments from silence are not valid either. TWI has never challenged anything on my web site which is critical of them and never filed a suit against me. So can we assume that they acknowlege that everything I say is valid? Back when Canada kicked TWI out of Canada, Martindale boldly stated that they would sue Canada to stay. This was printed in The Way Magazine. Yet, to my knolwedge TWI never did so. So even if TWI threatened to sue anyone, this does not mean that they actually would or did.

What documents did you read? Who signed them, and what specifically did they say? The details are important. You mention lawsuits that went on for 10 years. Who filed the suit(s)? Who were they filed against? Where and when were they filed? Lawsuits are public record and they generate many motions which are also public record. Judgements or closure of suits are also public record, even if details of settlements may not be. Who do you know of who specifically saw legal documents that were filed with a court? People on this thread have said contradictory things, and some admit their memories are foggy or they only heard something from soneone.-- very vague and not reliable.

Someone said that BOT signed over rights of publication of PFAL and Wierwille to The Way of Great Britain, and that VPW assigned Geer to rework PFAL. But no one has produced any proof of this, other than Geer's verbal statements which are not corraborated. However, we do know that Martindale reworked and replaced PFAL himself in the Way of Abundance and Power in 1996. So apparently he did not think the BOT gave this task to Geer. At any rate, The Way of Great Britain did not publish Geer's Walking in God's Power. European Christian Press and The Way of Great Britain did publish Wierwille's Take God at His Word. But it did not publish Geer's WIGP. So even if The Way of Great Britain had permission to publish such things, it did not publish Geer's class and Geer was no longer a part of it when he published his class in 1995. Here's a quote from Geer's WIGP, Intermediate Class p 105: Matthew 28:19... there is no record in the New Testament in of this command ever being carried out by the apostles or anyone else in the early church. Many scholars believe that this portion was not in the original manuscripts when '...holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.'... the apostles always baptized in the name of Jesus Christ or in the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts 2:38... Acts 8:16... Acts 10:48... Acts 19:5.... the manuscripts from which Eusebius quoted (Eusebius died c. AD 340) could not have contain the words... for he quotes Matthew 28:19 eighteen times without once using them." Does this sound familiar? Hint: check Receiving the Holy Spirit p. 293-294. (Actually, Wierwille plagiarized this from Bullinger, and Geer plagiarized it from Wierwille.) Geer never puts this section in quotes, nor cites where he took it from, which is normal academic practice even if it's not copied word for word. Even middle schoolers know you can't copy others virtually word for word without citing the source. (Geer did change a handful of words, but anyone with even the slightest objectivity can see that he was copying Wierwille. No one could get this virtual word-for-word correspondence without doing so.) The real corker is that Geer duplicated so much of PFAL and RTHST, yet never once mentions Wieriwlle, PFAL or RTHST in the books/sylabi-- instead he includes copyright notices identifying himself as sole author and threatening anyone who reproduces it. Such hypocrisy. Actually, the comment about Eusebius is false. Eusebius did use the whole phrase "baptizing them in then name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" four times, in Contra Marcellum (twice), De ecclesiastica theologia and in a letter to the church at Ceasarea. Plus two important ancient NT Greek Manuscripts, B and X (Hebrew aleph) have them, and Eusebius is assumed to have be the man who commissioned them. Apparently Bullinger did not know fo these occurances because the works were not in English.

Who said that Wierwille asked Geer to revise or redo the class? Was Geer the only one who claims he heard VP say such a thing? From the standpoint of TWI (which VP and Geer were both part of at the time) it would have been a momentus thing to redo the class. When TWI finally did so (Martindale's WAAP) it was a tremendous occasion. If VP had authorized Geer to redo it, why didn't he tell the trustees or put it in writing? (Surely the trustees wouldn't have taken Geer's word on this. I suspect no one but Geer's followers would.) If Geer is the only person who allegedly heard VP say this... and since Geer is the one who would gain from this (TWI certainly didn't gain from it-- they lost from it), then this is a (self-promoting) conflict of interest. Anybody can SAY VP verbally and privately told him to redo the class-- so what? Furthermore, TWI held the copyright on PFAL, not VP. Geer never got permission from TWI to revise and reissue it. Also, it doesn't matter what Geer says on a tape from a meeting with a small group of his followers. There is certainly nothing whatsoever in the book/sylabus that ever mentions VP, TWI or PFAL. This would be essential if he was really "authorized" to redo the class. It would also be essential if he was honest in presenting himself as an editor of a prior work rather than as the author of a new one. Why would he reference Lamsa in the sylabus but never VP, unless to mask VP's original authorship and pose as the author himself? (Of course, VP didn't originate it all-- he was just reading out of Bullinger for much of the class tho he never mentioned that fact in the class).

One of the posts above doesn’t think “PFAL Piracy” is a good way to describe Geer’s class WIGP. We hear the word “Piracy” often used today to describe theft or duplication of intellectual property. Sometimes this is exact reproductions like music CDs, other times it is engineers who copy the substance or essence of a new product, usually with minor alterations, and sell it as a competing product. Take a look at several of the chapter heads of Geer’s class listed here and ask yourself: “Did Chris Geer make these up on his own, or did he copy them from PFAL?: (numbers are chapter numbers, words in parentheses are my notes that outline things in some of the chapters): 1. the Word of God is the will of God, 1.5 the integrity of God's Word, 1.6 the workman and the word of God (rightly dividing), 2.1 the interpretation of God’s Word (private interpretation 2 Peter 1:20), 2.4 biblical truths we must adhere to (to whom addressed), 2.6 Man’s contributions to our modern Bibles (chapters & verse numbers), 3.1 in the verse- where it is written, 3.2 in the verse-figures of speech, 3.3 in the verse- orientalisms, 3.4 in the verse- biblical usage, 3.5 in the verse- scripture buildup, 3.6 in the context, 3.7 where it has been used before, 4.1 the others crucified with Jesus Christ, 4.2 Paul’s thorn in the flesh (like Wierwille, Geer tries to establish that it was not an illness but was “buffeting” such as beatings), 5.1 ... taking into account to whom it is speaking, of whom it is true, and to whom it is addressed, 5.2a My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? 5.3 consider whether things are similar or whether they are identical, , 6.1 how to receive the things of God, 6.2 the law of believing, 6.3 enemies of believing, 7.1 in the beginning (spirit- soul- body), 7.2 the ruin of a relationship (Gen 3- Eve leaves out, then adds to God’s word) 7.4 administrations, 7.4a administrations and the Passover (3 days and 3 nights), 9.1 why it is called the administration of the mystery 9.2 why it is called the administration of the grace of God, 10.1 rights, privileges and abilities of the sons of God, 10.2 the renewed mind, 10.3 the new birth, 11.3 ... about spirit being made available, 11.4 speaking in tongues, 11.5 Jesus Christ gives instruction about receiving holy spirit (breathe in), 11.6 Acts 7:54-8:24 (2 words for “receive”) What do you think? Did Chris Geer make these up on his own, or did he copy them from PFAL? The cover and copyright pages of the WIGP book identify Christopher C. Geer as author and print this detailed copyright statement: "Copyright Word Promotions Ltd. 1995. All rights reserved. No part of this Student's Study Guide to the Walking in God's Power foundational class may be copied, reproduced, stored in any retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of Word Promotions Ltd." Geer shows some knowledge of referencing other authors when he uses footnotes to identify a few authors he disagrees with on one topic. However, although Geer claims to have produced the book, it is obvious to anyone with any knowledge of TWI that he took all its content, lock, stock and barrel, from Wierwille's PFAL. No footnotes, bibliography or acknowledgments identify Wierwille or PFAL as Geer's source. Geer never cites Wierwille in the text of the book. Someone suggested that Wierwille gave verbal permission to rework his class. There is no evidence of this. But if Wierwille had done so, Geer should have identified himself as an editor of a previous work (PFAL), not as an original author, which is a common practice in the academic world. Geer doesn’t actually copy Wierwille's PFAL book word for word, and Geer does tweak a few details. But WIGP reproduces almost all of Wierwille's class, topic by topic. WIGP is PFAL piracy. Some of the charges above of errors in my article on Geer’s class are simply judgement calls on specific words I use rather than errors. One post claims that “coup” is an error. In common use, a coup is an attempt to exert control over a group or government. I think Geer’s actions were an attempt to gain control, something he couldn’t do formally because the 3 trustees wouldn’t fire themselves and appoint him as trustees. Another claim is that “followers” is a bad word for Geer’s followers. I thought of using “readers” instead, but Geer’s followers are more than readers. I’ve read hundreds of authors over the years, but I remember few of their names, don’t use their classes, don’t get their newsletters and wouldn’t vehemently defend them if I saw their names in a forum. So I think “followers” is a reasonable word to use for many, though not all, of Geer’s... well, followers. Someone else might pick words others than “coup” and “followers,” but these are reasonable choices, not errors. Geer and Wierwille come to basically the same conclusion about Paul’s thorn in the flesh, that it was not illness (this is the main point that these two men who want to defend “the law of believing” want to make) but was buffeting such as beatings. The post above said I was in error because Geer won’t license his class to all ex-wayers. But my article doesn’t say that he licenses to all ex-wayers. Ex-wayers are Geer’s audience, because they want a class that look, sounds and tastes just like PFAL... and Geer (and some other ex-way leaders) provided it. People who think that “Lutherans” follow Luther in the way that people in TWI followed Wierwille don’t know much about it. The average Lutheran has probably read only two things by Luther- the Small Catechism, which is the length of a short magazine article (the book-sized “Small Catechism with Explanation” was written by Schwann not Luther) and the words to the hymn “A Mighty Fortress is Our God.” The majority of Lutheran clergy have probably read less than 400 pages of Luther’s writings, a tiny percentage of the reading needed to get the required Master’s Degree (equal in size to only two “collaterals”). The majority of “The Lutheran Confessions” which are the theological foundation for Lutherans today were not written by Luther; most were written or approved by committees. Luther never wrote a “foundational class” (nor intermediate nor advanced) to be used in churches (although the tiny Small Catechism is often used in classes). The Lutheran church has never targeted TWI. The normal reaction I get from Lutherans when I say I study TWI is “what’s that?” The few exceptions are some churches located near TWI campuses or locations. Some pastors had some vague knowledge of TWI when Rome City was open, because it was near a Lutheran seminary in Ft. Wayne. But most campuses are closed now, so TWI and its splinters are back under the radar again. Even when TWI was at its peak, it was quite tiny and unknown (optimistically less than 1/10 of 1% of US population).

The Mosiac legalism of some "Hebrew roots" people like Michael Rood is attractive to some people. I think there are a few reasons for this. One is that it's easy to get a handle on and easy for people to feel as though they've done all they need to do. Keep Sabbath strictly, observe three festivals a year and don't buy pork and you can be pretty certain that you've done all that God requires of you. It's much simpler and easier to satisfy than something so general (and much more demanding) than "love your neighbor as yourself." It commonly leads to the same kind of smug self-righteoussness that Jesus condemned in the Pharisees. Also, human beings like the idea of earning their keep (which is self pride). It's tougher to admit that we're dead in our tresspasses and sins and desparately need the grace of God in the redemption of the cross to rescue us. Law-observers it seems at first enjoy obervances like the feasts. But in the long run legalism is so constricting and ends up splitting hairs. What can you do on the Sabbath and what can't you do? Eventually rabbis have to rule on these things. Orthodox Jews have done so for years and ended up so convoluted. For example, the rabbis have ruled that if you have a hook and eye on your clothing, and the eye falls off-- then you can't wear that garment on the Sabbath becuase it would be work to carry around the useless hook without its matching eye. Rabbis in Israel recently ruled that flying over cemetaries at a few hundred feet at takeoff renders people unclean. They threatened a boycott of airlines until flight paths were changed to avoid flying over cemetaries. (Apparently there's a legalistic height limit on this, because you're sure to cross over plenty of cemetaries at 35,000 feet on a cross country flight) It's only a matter of time until the legalism ties you up and shoves you in a box.

Dear nandon, Bolshevik, Templelady, Thank you for your kidn words and thoughts. Thanks also to those who added kind words to the earlier John Juedes thread. They are an encouragement to me. Web sites are generally anonymous- I don't know just who reads it and why, nor the reactions they have to it (other than the email I get). So it is helpful and encouraging to hear of some people who have benefited from it. Along these lines... please consider thinking of a friend, relative, teacher, etc who has been an encouragement to you in some way over the years and send them an appreciative email or note thanking them. We all need encouragement from time to time. John

There are more people who use their actual names in posts here than was apparent to me before. At any rate, I didn't mean to imply that it's bad to use a screen name. (It seems some people aim to be amusing anyway) My note about screen names was just one of several points in a larger topic, namely that www.abouttheway.org and I take responsibility for what we write and don't hide behind anonymity. John

I recognize the problem of publishign anonymous letters. Anonymity reduces accountablity (as you've seen here on greasespot, where everyone is anonymous, except for me). I don't like to publish anonymous letters, but do so for a few reasons: First, the stories in some of them are very private, sexual abuse being a good example. By comparison, law courts commonly do not publish the names of alledged victims (such as when Kobe Bryant was accused). So the choice is to insist on publishing names and embarrassing people, or not publishing. Not publishing protects the abusers and (in some cases when they were still in power) allowing them to continue to abuse. This doesn't serve justice or help the vulnerable. I don't publish all stories sent to me. I satisfy myself that the ones I do publish have the earmarks of being accurate and true. I can't prove every detail, just as a jury in a sexual abuse case generally cannot prove all details of a crime that happened with only the perp and the victim present. In some cases stories have been corraborated by other people in some way before publication. I know the real names of those who posted anonymous letters. I don't publish letters or accept them as truth without question just because they fit with my view, but because they atre important and appear to me to be credible. This isn't a perfect system, but I think it works fairly well. The post above mentioned disputing letters. This actually is possible to some degree. I do not give out the names or email addresses of people who post letters (anonymous or signed), but sometimes I forward a response to the anonymous letter writer so that they can correspond directly. The anonymous writer has the option to respond driectly or not. This allows some communication or potential correction while protecting the identity of the writer (and gives her/him the option of identifying herself in private email). For more on this, see my Editors Staement on Sex Stories in which I explain why we published them. It's well thought out, not just being anxious to attack TWI blindly. Note also that TWI and its leaders have NEVER once challenged any of the anonymous letters, even though they would have more desire to squelch them than anyone. However, anonymity is a very small part of our web site. I sign everything I write. I answer email and criticisms (Ive missed a few over the years, but very few). My email and office addresses are published and easily found. I'm the only person I know of on greasespotcafe who uses his real name and who "everybody" knows who he is. Overall, www.abouttheway.com very much supports accountability and responsibility, as much or more than you'll find elsewhere.

here's one of my favorite VP Wierwille quotes: "WOMEN NEVER TELL THE TRUTH" V. P. Wierwille, quoted in The Way- Living in Love, written by devout Wierwille follower Elena Whiteside, and published by The Way International's American Christian Press, 1972, p. 199. No, he wasn't kidding. He recounted this story in the same conversation in which he lied to Elena Whiteside about his experiences in Tulsa. He claimed that a blizzard in Tulsa December 11-13, 1951, stopped all trains, buses and planes from moving out of the city. Weather records show that no snow fell the whole week (the biggest snowfall all month was 6 tenths of an inch), and newspaper weather reports indicate that the temperature was in the 50s. Here's more from the same page: (A man asked Wierwille,) "Aren't you that... preacher who spoke in tongues last night?" I said, "yes, but it was a damn lie...." Then a woman came over to me and said, "I think God sent a man here to meet your need. Meet me at 9 a.m." I thought, "Women never tell the truth." But then I reconsidered.... I just remember thinking to myself, "There aren't going to be any women around when I get the holy spirit...." (Later he met J.E. Stiles, whose wife asked Stiles:) "How long will you be?" And he said, "That's none of your business." That was it, and my opinion of him as a man went up 99 percent. His stature increased in my eyes, just from the way he handled her." (TWLIL, pp. 199-200) If I were a woman, I wouldn't feel very secure around this kind of man.