penworks

In the PFAL book, it's clear VPW had one view and one view only of what the Bible was: The inerrant Word of God. Period. Grads of the class all heard it drilled into them, and they still do no matter how many name changes the PFAL class has undergone. IMO, VPW was just one more voice pushing Bibliolatry. Offshoots of TWI continue to propagate this cherished belief, feeling they must carry the torch of "their father in Bibliolatry." I remember while I was in TWI, I refused to accept that I was in effect worshipping a book, but indeed I was. And in the process indirectly worshipping a man who said he knew what that book "really said." What I like about this article (link below) is that it tries to offer a realistic way of appreciating the Bible for what it is, not what men have tried to make it be. BTW - This is something I've spent only the last few 25 years of my life doing - in my spare time :-) Let's get real: The Bible is Dead; Long Live the Bible Cheers! Pen

Someone recently asked me whether VPW told me for whom to vote. All I could say was I don't remember his outright TELLING me which persons to vote for, but he usually made it plain who he was voting for. i.e. Reagan. He was clearly Republican and in those days (1970 - 1987) I was strongly influenced by VPW even after he died in 1985. How 'bout you? OOPS, the title should read "Do" not "Does". How do I change that?

HA. While looking through mine, prompted by this post, I discovered some things on the inside cover pages, though, that brought back some weird memories: I pasted a small scrap of paper listing the 5 Corps principles. Also is a yearly calendar (stick-on kind), and nother scrap of paper with James 1:17 on it. "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above and cometh down from the Father of lights with whom is no variableness neither shadow of turning." I have no idea why I chose that verse. On the next inside page, I taped a sheet titled, "Keys to Walking in the Spirit." Looks like its from the Advanced Class. It's printed with decorations in the corners so I guess we were given it during the class. Each "tip" has at least one verse to substantiate it, from all over the N.T. and some from the O.T, which raises some issues ...but that's another topic. On the next page I stuck another stick-on sheet which is about 1/2 page, titled, "God's Word Speaks of Five Crowns of Highest Award for Believers. They are...(then it lists and defines them.) No verses were given for each one but I wrote them in ink in the margin. Then I have the phone number of the Rome City campus for some odd reason. And a list of 4 attributes of what "twigs are: Positive, Teaching, Fellowship, Ministering. Then a statement: The Way Tree is a white oak tree. The next inside page (there were many, how come?) has another stick on page with "Biblical Truths we Must Adhere to as Workmen" and some other tips on "letting the Bible interpret itself." All lifted from Bullinger, I'm sure. Then there is the note to self: Inherent means "from within," Inerrant means "without error." Interesting that, more than 25 years later, "inerrant" has now become part of my research on fundamentalism.... I've got to "move on!" ---Given all these cheat-sheet helpful hints, who needs to turn the pages and actually read the Bible? With all that "accurate" help, I can't for the life of me figure out why I left!!

You made me laugh out loud. You get an A+ for humor today, dude.

Good post, Um...I'm one of those posters - from the 2nd Corps. Don't kid yourself. Those were dark days, too, albeit w/out LCM screaming. VPW's methods of indoctrination clothed in the "father in the Word" persona were perhaps subtle at times compared with LCM but just as or more insidious...and predatory. Although VP "sort of" defined his program with the 5 Corps principles (although they were very general and open to all sorts of interpretation), he sprang those on us AFTER we were in residence. One girl told me she thought we were just there for 2 years to learn stuff, then go home. Nope. We got roped into a "lifetime" deal, which some of us have rejected to varying degrees. Sadly, the girl I mentioned above is currently roped into a TWI offshoot. That's how powerful the indoctrination was on her, at least... Anyhow, that's my 2 cents. Charlene

Hello, This is Charlene Lamy Edge letting you know that this article is linked to my story here called, An Affinity for Windows. This month, April 2011, my story was solicited by John Knapp, LMHC, to appear on his site: Center for Healing Spiritual and Cultic Abuse. It is nice to see how many people have read it there already. I'm grateful to contribute to the conversation, taking place on so many web sites sharing people's stories of understanding, growth, and healing after being in a group that did not serve their best interest. My relationship with CHSCA is not a formal one. I do not consider myself a member of CHSCA, nor have I received counseling from the CHSCA organization or from any other cult counseling group; however, I am glad for any help anyone can receive from CHSCA or anywhere else. Further, I am not affilitated with any cult awareness group or anti-cult movement. My intent is to let my story be available for anyone who might find it useful to their journey. An Affinity for Windows was first published by Red Pepper Press, Winter Park, FL, 2004 in an antholgy, Shifting Gears: Startling Moments In and Out of the Classroom, 22 stories by women of Rollins College, edited by five people, including a Rollins writing professor. Visit: Mad About Words for a few sample pages of the book, which is now out-of-print. Thanks, Charlene

16 years after I graduated. But the good news is, if I hadn't gone through it, I would not have eventually had the amazingly talented and loving daughter I have. Her father was in the Corps with me. So questions about regrets are a mixed bag...

I think this is part of why TWI is in the category of a cult. Unchecked power. No "union" at HQ for workers to unite. :-)

Hope for what? I found this regarding Bullinger and inerrancy: Most widely known for The Companion Bible--the Authorized Version of 1611 with the Structures and Critical, Explanatory, and Suggestive Notes and with 198 Appendixes (Kregel), Bullinger's copious notes contain vast amounts of technical information, typically overwhelming the average reader today. He clearly and faithfully believed that the original canon of Scripture was the inerrant Word of God. However, his views on biblical inspiration contained subtle error, which in turn caused anomalies in his views regarding interpretation. While he acknowledged the Holy Spirit as "guide and teacher of His own Word", he did not believe in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit for the new-creation believer and thus the biblical doctrine of the Spirit's illumination was conspicuously absent from his theology. http://withchrist.org/bullinger.htm

P.S. I should point out that The Fundamentals were published in the USA. There are probably other theologians in other countries who latched onto inerrancy, too. If I'm remembering correctly, E.W. Bullinger, from England (December 15, 1837 – June 6, 1913) may have been enamoured with the idea of inerrancy of the scriptures, too. He was from across the pond in England. As most TWI people know, his influence on VPW was huge. http://en.wikipedia....E._W._Bullinger This is a little more info on inerrancy that might help. http://en.wikipedia....lical_inerrancy

One of the hallmarks of Protestant Fundamentalism is its claim of inerrant scripture. This is a relatively new idea about scripture, coming into play around 1920 when some theologians got upset about the critical and historical study of the documents contained in the Bible and put together about 12 long papers called The Fundamentals. (there are plenty of good books documenting the history of fundamentalism and you can Google The Fundamentals and find them online). Historical study asks questions like: where did these documents come from, who wrote them, what kind of cultural influences did the writers inherit, etc. The theologians who wrote, The Fundamentals were afraid that such study undermined people's faith in God, Jesus, and salvation. I disagree with that, faith is faith, which by its nature does not depend on a book. So inerrancy is a "new" claim about scriptures made from what I see as a defensive position. In my view, it stems from a fear that a study of the Bible's sources and different writers, claims, errors, etc. would bother people. I disagree. Plenty of Christians accept the imperfections in the texts while still believing in God, Jesus, salvation, etc. So back to inerrancy. The history of fundamentalism shows that inerrancy is a man-made idea about scriptures and also of a God that has to be "perfect" which is a theological position and therefore unprovable; that, too, is a matter of faith. The burden of showing inerrancy of the scriptures, therefore, lies with the authors of The Fundamentals but since they're not around, it falls to anyone making the assertion. So I ask you, did VP ever prove that the entire KJV was without error or contradiction? Did he or anyone else ever show how the entire Bible "fit" together perfectly? A few more observations before I get off my soapbox: 1) VP and most other fundamentalists do not state which Bible they are referring to when they say it "must be perfect because God is perfect." So the question to ask them is, "Which canon of the scripture is inerrant?" 2) Why is it so important that the scriptures be "perfect"? Many people find value, inspiration, etc. from scriptures in spite of the various viewpoints or contradictions found in it, like the different perspectives of the gospel writers. 3) If God is without contradiction, how do you account for even this simple example of contradiction about the God of Israel (apparently the same one VP taught us about) . One minute he says don't kill - no exceptions are stated. Two chapters later it says he tells Israel to go for it. Dueteronomy 5:17: "Thou shalt not kill" Dueteronomy 7: 2: "And when the Lord thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them...: For those interested, more information about inerrancy is covered in most any book about fundamentalism from writers like James Barr, Ernest Sandeen, George Marsden, and in a book on Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know - and Doesn't, by Stephen Prothero. In closing, I'll just include this food for thought : "...in addition to reading the Bible devotionally there is a value in reading it historically. To be sure, a historical reading can show many of the shortcomings of the Bible - discrepancies, contradictions, faulty claims, impossible statements, and harmful ideologies. But a historical reading can open up entirely new vistas in our understanding of the Bible and its multifarious messages." ~ Jesus, Interrupted by Bart Ehrman. Pg.282. Cheers! Pen

It was indoctrination. Dogmatic groups resort to that to keep believers from asking uncomfortable questions. Any closed belief system of necessity has to do that - otherwise they wouldn't be a "system" they would be an open forum, willing to entertain challenging questions and not be dogmatic about their beliefs. I went to Catholic school for 8 years and experienced indoctrination there, too. TWI took the process up a few notches with the Way Corps program. I lived in Trailer Six with 20 women, ten bunks, and 2 bathrooms for two years and believe me, I know. Doubt of VP or what he taught or how he ran The Corps was the enemy. Certainty was the rule. In the end, as I read somewhere, it is not doubt, however, that produces madness, it is certainty. For more of my opinions on this topic, see post #245 here: The way VP was Cheers! Penworks

Dear Johniam, From what I've seen, you've made up your mind about VPW but for others reading this thread I'll just say this: There is plenty of clear evidence of VPW's taking other people's books and stealing passages from them (two main ones are J.E. Stiles, and E.W. Bullinger), his inappropriate use of scripture verses taken out of context; his authoritarian rule over his group as witnessed by many of us who knew him; his condemnation of any other denomination; his denial of the holocaust (he sold The Myth of the Six Million in the bookstore); his alcoholism; his interest in pornography (i.e. showing bestiality films in the Advanced Class) and his sexual abuse of women as accounted by Kristen Skedgell in her book, Losing The Way. If people want to follow someone like that, then that is their choice. I'll shamelessly plug my own story and article which are posted on the front page as further bits of "what we got" for your review. I knew the man for 17 years. I know that not every single thing that came out of his mouth was a lie...if that had been the case, lots of us would not have become associated with TWI. I'll go on record as pointing out he told the truth plenty of times, but he used people and used the Bible to further his own aims. He made his claims sound like they made sense. He manipulated people and intimidated them. Each person's experience in TWI is different depending on many factors, but I suggest for those who want to know, that they seek out information about the man from those of us who knew him and read his books, like the PFAL book to see for themselves how he misused scripture and ranted about "unbelievers" among other things. He was a fundamentalist gone wild. Remember this while you're making up your own mind: "The fanatic inspires and breathes fear. It is the only tie that binds him to his fellow-man and God. So afraid is he of doubt that he pushes it outside the law. Whether his dictatorship is intellectual or theocratic, he pretends to possess a unique and eternal truth. Insist on a discussion, and he takes offense. He accepts questions only if he alone has the right to answer them. It comes to this: The fanatic accepts only answers – his own – while his tolerant adversary prefers questions." ~ Elie Wiesel

T-Bone' date='10 March 2011 - 01:32 PM' timestamp='1299778344' post='524405'] .....there's just no hope of making a fresh start when you still have a stale mindset. IMO this is one of the best lines on GSC yet. May I use this phrase when I mention TWI off-shoot groups in conversations I have? I'll give you credit :-)

From long ago and far away... TWI in 1971

On an historical note (or hysterical) I recently came across a brochure of documented Way history distributed on The Way Historical Tours in the 1980s to see VPWs former churches, houses, etc. in Van Wert, Payne, and Spencerville near HQ. In the brochure's list of events I found this: "1952: Rev. Lee Vayle visits and teaches on the worship manifestations." When I listened to a couple of Vayle's teachings, I felt as if I were hearing VPW. I don't have any documentation showing if or what material VPW might have used from Vayle, but their voices sure sound similar on tape. Rev. Lee Vayle teaching in the 1960s BTW - I've heard that those Historical Tours are being conducted again by someone who is NOT with associated with headquarters any longer, but who lives in the area. Another sign that many continue to consider VPW "the man of God" despite evidence to the contrary.

Thanks, Thomas. Am working hard on the book-length version of Affinity for Windows (posted on GSC's front page), Affinity barely scratched the surface. Stay well, Charlene Lamy Edge PS - I'll be on exwayvision.com , screen name Penworks.

Karl's book is invaluable to learning about TWI if you've never heard of it and for sorting out your experience if you were in it. I've recommended it for years. I was in TWI during the years he writes about (plus the previous ten). If his story wasn't so full of truth and facts (and a few astute speculations :-) it might be as funny as some think. Kudos for writing it, Karl. Cheers! Charlene Edge a.k.a. Penworks

Hi Peter. We never met but I heard about you in the 1970s when I was in the Second Way Corps. Thanks for coming here to share your thoughts. I, too, will miss GSC! Cheers to you Down Under. It's a lovely country. I've been there twice. Charlene

Thanks. I just found Paw's announcement. Too bad. It's an invaluable source for "the other side of the story."

Ohmygosh. I just read this. I'm so sorry you must close down the shop, Paw, but I surely understand. You've done more than your share to help so many pepoe. Thanks a million for all you've done to let us all share our stories here. Hugs, Charlene

I feel as if I've missed some kind of announcement about "as we move house." Please enlighten me. Thanks, Pen

Wow. Thanks for all this. I wholeheartedly agree with you. Obviously, I didn't make myself very well understood. First, as I said, I doubt VP heard such a revelation from God. If I thought he had, I would never have left TWI. I think I've been misunderstood, though, in making this statement: "Okay, first of all, we need to remember VP thought (or flat out claimed and lied) that God told him he'd teach him the Word like it had not been known from the first century if he'd teach it to others. (see The Way Living in Love for his statements on this). Arguing with such a person is futile. He's already taken a position that's not possible to falsify. " I was thinking of what William James talks about in Varieties of Religious Experience, when he explains that people's subjective experience cannot be proven or disproven. But the value of what they claim can be determined by examining the "fruit" in their life. (James explains this far better than I). To me, the experience in VP's case is that he heard what he thought was God. (or he lied and never heard anything). I personally don't think it was God and as you so very well used scripture stating God cannot lie, it is very obvious we can say the CONTENT of what VP said he heard was false. And I've mentioned on other posts how there wasn't a stable 'first century church" to refer back to much less recapture exactly what was taught then, etc. etc. But by examining what VP taught, we see it could not have been a God of any sort. VP stole what he taught, for the most part. This topic has been discussed so much here at GSC that what I have said here is redundant, I know. So, I realize that my writing just didn't turn out very well today. I apologize and I do admire the research you put into your reply, Wordwolf. Cheers.

I've thought about this subject a whole lot, like many others here at GSC and I appreciate the documentation from Mrs. W's book on these topics. While I don't have the book, I know first-hand the rationale that went on in the Research Dept., even from Walt*r C*ummins, when he answered charges about VP's plagarism. His defense was that VP said he learned from many people, he did cite their names (yes, but only here and there but not as he should have). In Research we would be reminded that VP said he didn't do anything original, he just was able to "put together" knoweldge from many sources, making them "accurate." This is rationalizing at its best. Okay, first of all, we need to remember VP thought (or flat out claimed and lied) that God told him he'd teach him the Word like it had not been known from the first century if he'd teach it to others. (see The Way Living in Love for his statements on this). Arguing with such a person is futile. He's already taken a position that's not possible to falsify. Who knows what VP heard? I doubt he heard that, but it's a claim and not possible to disprove with contrary evidence. But it is possible to show evidence of VP's poor, wrong, or stolen research that makes God look pretty stupid if indeed he was the one responsible for teaching VP. Besides the fact that plagarism, in "normal" venues like universities, etc. will get you expelled, fired, etc. there is another aspect to this that occurred to me lately. It's this: Based on VP's own statement that God was supposedly teaching VP himself, why would VP need to borrow, steal, use or take from other men's works? Did God tell him it was okay to do that? I DON"T THINK SO. My impression of how Walt*r C*ummins and others rationalized VP's wrongdoing is they didn't get specific about it. Once I tried to pin down Walt*r C*ummins about Lamsa. Regarding Eli Eli being wrongly taught by VP, I asked, "What if Doctor was just misled by Lamsa?" I thought if I asked my question this way instead of attacking VP's error straight on, we could talk about it. Wrong. He said, "I believe Dr. Wierwille was more spiritual than any of us." End of conversation.

I met the Senator back in the days at TWI when he was meeting with VPW. He's a nice man. He's sincere. I do not agree with him however, especially with his statement that: " Collectivism and atheism go hand-in-hand." This is false. Whille it was officially true in Communist China under Mao, it is not true for every collectivist society. Take even a cursory look at religions across the world and their cultures and you can see this statement is not true. For instance, in more communal or "collectivist" societies like in Bali, Indonesia (which practices Balinese Hinduism) and other non-Western countries, (the Aboriginal people of Australia) many people have a belief in a supernatural deity or deities they call God(s). They are not atheist. Perhaps they might be atheist to the writer of this article because their religion is not monotheistic - they don't worship the idea of God that Christians, Jews, or Muslims have) but they do believe in the supernatural, the divine power greater than themselves. And one more thing, it seems to me that paranoia about individuals being sucked into a collective is odd coming from Christians. Some early Christians were VERY communal, even though there were many different factions. Just read Acts, most of Paul's epistles and also gospel records of Jesus' words about loving one another. I'm NOT saying we shoud immitate collectivist patterns found in the Bible and try to put them in our government's structure in the USA , I'm just saying that Christians who slam this "collectivist" notion as bad, should take a look at their own religious roots. Cheers!