Larry N Moore

Bolshevik I'll try not to derail this thread with too much info about my pov concerning TWI or VP. Perhaps, if you really want to know where I stand on certain issues you can ask me in this thread but, briefly here I'll simply say I don't consider it a waste of my time to find "good things" in anyone. I'll even try my best to find something "good" to say about you. Unless I intend to respond to a post I generally don't bother reading who wrote it. Your comments happened to be one where I felt like responding and so I thought it important to know who wrote what I was responding to. Thus, I agree with you that it's not necessary to know who wrote JCING. I once shared with someone, who had no knowledge of TWI and VP, snippets from the book to get their unbiased opinion. It was an interesting experiment. My personal pov is that you can learn something (if you're interested in learning something about God and the Bible) from just about anyone -- I might even learn something from you -- but you should also learn how to chew on the meat and spit out the bones.

Hi back at ya dmiller! I also admit (shyly) that I am. ;)

Well, Bolshevik, I guess that just goes to show you shouldn't believe everything you're taught, unless it's supported with evidence. If you look at Bullinger's notes on the structure of the Gospel of John you'll see where he states the purpose of that Gospel "is to present the Lord Jesus as God." Here, again, I wouldn't find it very logical to draw any conclusion absent evidence. Even though VP most assuredly borrowed (that verb probably won't sit well with many) from the writings of Bullinger and others as seen in some of his books it does not follow that he did likewise with every book or article he ever wrote including JCING. If you have evidence showing that he plagiarized someone else's writing (when he wrote JCING) then I'd like to see it. Isn't the "argument" (message) more important than the source? Whenever, someone tries to discredit the source they are generally committing the fallacy called Ad Hominem. Well, I can't comment on how you were raised but, I can attest to the fact that I met many believers who were what was commonly known as "spoon-fed Christians". Even though the phrase was usually applied towards those outside TWI I seen it very prevalent even in TWI. That's unfortunate. I can't say the same was pulled on me but, my parents weren't members of TWI so I doubt anyone would tell me the same thing. I don't recall receiving the same teaching. I might have but, it's been a long, long time since I was involved with TWI. I do remember reading books written by people outside TWI who had a pretty good grasp on who Jesus Christ was. Anyways, thanks for your response.

It's highly unlikely that anyone would be "unknowingly" quoting either Kenyon or Bullinger since both were trinitarians.

No problemo. I didn't want to respond without knowing more clearly what you were asking. I can definitely relate to it being "Too many years . . ." since I studied this stuff. There use to be a time when I could easily remember almost everything that VP ever taught on any subject. Thus, I don't remember that he ever taught that "sin was in the blood". Sounds sorta silly when you think of it. Although I do recall hearing something about the bloodline of mankind becoming contaminated due to sin. So, if anything I think the contamination of mankind's blood might have something to do with Jesus not taking that part according to Heb. 2:14. I think this subject is probably covered in VP's book "Jesus Christ Our Promised Seed". I'll take a look at it later and let you know if I find anything relative to your question.

Took PFAL in 1973. Left TWI in 1995. I suppose it's not necessary to say that given the amount of time I spent in TWI I pretty much was deeply involved. What I find (somewhat) disturbing is the bitterness I see in SOME former members. I've tried to understand it but, without much success.

I have all his books (copied on my computer) but I'm not sure I understand the question. Could you be a bit more specific? If I could discern your meaning from carefully reading through the thread then pardon me for butting in without doing so.