penworks

Yes

Hi Greasespotters and visitors: In my ongoing attempt to find common ground among religions and in particular lately between TWI supporters, offshoot followers, ex-cultists, never-in-your-life cultists, Christians, Agnostics, Atheists, etc. etc. I'd like to offer this video clip on T.E.D. My questions are: Is it really possible to do this? Are we evolved enough as humans? How do we de-escalate the rhetoric in civil discourse to do this? Caution: This is a Buddhist perspective on what it means to be compassionate, although he points out how Christ encouraged this idea and way of life, too. My intention is that this topic can be disussed here - I don't think it falls under the Doctrinal forum. If I am wrong, it should be moved there. Robert Thurman on Expanding Your Circle of Compassion Thanks, Charlene

My article has lit up some otherwise dull fuses out there. (Note: I've received some personal emails that indicate this but I will not post them here.) If I have offended anyone in regards to their hero, that was not my intention. My intention was to share my opinons/experiences in the hope that they would be helpful to others or useful in their understanding of TWI and what was taught by that group. Naturally, what was taught by that group originated with VPW. My writing is not a personal attack on him. My writing is an exploration of the THINKING that he promulgated. He used that word a lot so I will use it in an attempt to communicate with TWI followers or spin-off group members. The THINKING behind the TWI research approach involves assumptions. I personally think that inerrancy is not a reasonable assumption with which to start research. Why? It denies the "facts on the ground" about the texts of the Bible that most people know, i.e. that they were written by various different writers in different countries during different periods of history and could not possibly be "without contradiction" by the sheer fact that these writers were unknown to each other. Not to mention the fact that we have no originals. At best we have translations of versions that are copies of copies, etc. etc. I fully realize these "facts on the ground" fly in the face of another assumption, which is God is the author of all these books. To those who choose to accept that proposition, it doesn't matter who wrote them or how many writers there were. The books constitute a pile of writing that constitutes The Word. Who cares about the history of the text? TWI cared about it for awhile. Until someone in 1986 named Ch(s Ge*r came along and read the Passing of the Patriarch and all of a sudden, the research group at TWI, which consisted of TWI research team members (myself included) and members "from the field" were stopped from continuing on the project by the head of research, (Wal*&r Cu*mins who was I suspect (watch out, this is my OPINION) under pressure from Ge*r) canned the small group of people interested in that topic. It became too problematic, I guess. YEAH. Why? It might undermine one of the cornerstone assumptions of TWI, the one they were fighting so hard to maintain: that the Bible "fits like a hand in a glove."

I have an over-active imagination fueled by an over-active curiosity driven by years of knowledge-of-things-in-the-world deprivation that leads me to over-analyzing events of the past, present, and possible future scenarios. Water boy, you are not alone...

Brilliant analysis.

On the "Research" team, I used to help write those "literal translations according to usage." Did we think about the fact that a process like that actually contradicted VP's idea that the Word "meant what it said and said what it meant, the order of the words must be perfect...etc.? We were making ANOTHER TRANSLATION to throw on the pile of a hundred ones already out there. Okay, I'll pipe down now. Sister Margaret Mary always said I talked too much.

Yes, I still have dreams. Lately, I attribute that to the fact I am writing about my TWI days for a book. The one the other night: VP wanted 3x5 cards. Anothr girl and I went searching for them desperately and didn't find them...maybe we were looking for those darn missing "originals"...they were printed on 3x5 cards, right? Oh yeah, nobody knows for sure cuz THEY WERE LOST OR DESTROYED!!! Okay, no more coffee for me... Peace, Charlene

Agree. I retract my comment that you are "asking an honest question" until you show otherwise. It now seems a loaded question, which IMO is not USUALLY honest... Commentator's notation: I seem to have fallen into the habit of qualifying everything I say recently. That's what a few knee-jerk responses to anything you say can push a person into doing. Oh well, for what my opinions are worth, good luck with your doing-good endeavor, Patriot.

Upside: A box in which all answers were found. Downside: A box in which all answers were found.

Why are you here?

That was my experience with TWI research! Well put. Here's one example: Now, turn to your PFAL books to verse - oops I mean page, 127, "Now I said that no translation, let along a version, may properly be called the Word of God." WHOA. Then what CAN be called the Word of God?

Take one look at this site about John Hagee's ministry and notice how much like TWI it is. They are "moving God's Word" etc. Scary to me how imperative he makes it sound and how twisted The Word of God sounds in this guy's teachings... BTW - I have a reliable source (I won't reveal who that is) who told me a person very involved with the Bible Lands Tours for this Hagee outfit is a former TWI follower who studied and taught Old Testament history, etc. in TWI. Can anyone here provide a second source for this info?

:eusa_clap:

Fascinating thread. Have to say I've come across a lot of these similarities regarding creation myths across cultures, too... Regarding resurrection stories, have any of you read The Passover Plot by Hugh J. Schoenfield, published in 1965? It was banned in the U.S. for some time. It's a fun and original (I think) way of interpreting the very same verses of the gospel that are used to prove the opposite explanation of the death and resurrection events of Jesus recorded in the gospels. The paper book jacket states, "...Jesus...sincerely believed himself to be the Messiah of Israel foretold by the prophets, and deliberately plotted his actions - which were to culminate in the events of the Passion Week with his crucifixtion and subsequent resurrection - to bear out the Messianic prophecies. I won't spoil the ending but...oh heck why not... Continued from the dust cover: "...Jesus contrived to be arrested the night before Passover, fully aware that he would be nailed to the cross the following day, but taken down before the onset of the Sabbath in accordance with Jewish law. Here's where it gets fun: He would survive the agony of but three hours on the cross. To ensure his safe removal, he arranged to be given, while on the cross, not the traditional vinegar but a drug that would render him unconscious and make him appear dead....he would be nursed back to health and then "resurrected." In the end, he escapes out of the country to continue his revolution... The Messianic Legacy book is another one along these lines. Fun reading on a rainy night. Peace, Penworks

Thank you for obviating this. Apathy about the seriousness of these matters is beyond belief. If any of us has knowledge that can help someone else who is in pain but we withhold it, then shame on us. If any of us has knowledge that sheds light on past events to reveal their nature or their lessons, than I think most would agree that it is our moral obligation to speak up.

Since you asked an honest question, I'll throw in my two cents along with the others here. Since you are asking how to avoid being "derided" as an offshoot of TWI just because you at one time were affiliated with it, the advice already given to not charge money and lose the "way-speak" vocabulary is great advice. I would also add the following: First, I would seriously ask myself some tough questions about the "biblical principles" you were taught (You didn't say from where, so I don't really know). Ask yourself what they really mean, what you understand about them, how you think they are to be interpreted, how do you apply them, how do you know you're applying them appropriately, and why you think they are good to begin with. Next, I absolutely caution you about being "zealous for God" and encourage you, again, to question what that means and the effects it produces. Keep in mind some people's concept of God and what He or She does is not the same as yours. Too much zealousness leads to problems I think we're all very familiar with. Next, If you're basing your ideas at all on TWI's style of research, (which you may not be) just remember TWI research led to teachings founded on the idea that there are originals of the Bible to "get back to," - they do not exist anywhere in the world except in people's minds. Therefore we can't make claims about them, since we've never seen them nor has anyone else. Lastly, my experience after TWI when approached to join up with other ex-TWI people and start a group was to reject the idea. I discovered the basis for TWI research was the same as most other Christian groups within the framework of Fundamentalism. If I were you, I'd try and find a way outside this framework to "help people." If you are interested, there are several topics being discussed here at the moment on this topic of offshoots. I suggest you give yourself the chance to read them. One is a discussion on my article currently on the front page, Nostalgia for TWI Research... . Since you are trying to avoid being in that camp, perhaps getting as much info about it as you can would help. Best wishes for doing good in the world. IMO, we all need to ask ourselves, "what is the good we can do?" Peace, Charlene

In my case, the irony of ironies, was that our limb leader recommended my husband and I apply for jobs at HQ to get a "spiritual boost." He thought we needed that. I knew I needed some sort of change, and in those days, HQ was thought to be the "spiritual center" of the org. That was 1984. 1984, mmm...isn't there a frightening novel by that title? For more on that "spiritual boost" I got working at HQ, you can read my memoir here on the front page, An Affinity for Windows. Enjoy! Charlene

I was just thinking of that Emperor story today! Especially in regards to the fact there are no "originals" of the Bible texts to "refer back to." I for one was too intimidated to point that out! Cheers, Charlene

Good

Sometimes I think there are a few of you here who must have worked as writers for Saturday Night Live or Monty Python. If we couldn't laugh at some of the past... Must be why I like M*A*S*H reruns. I've have war vets tell me that's what it takes to survive in that insane environment...a little silly harmless spoofing... So, thanks.

Uh, excuse me, but TWI will know about it NOW. You realize they have at least one designated reader of this site, right? Yeah, some people miss going to the Home page of this site and just log into the Forums all the time. They miss stuff like the list of all the Waydale stuff that's there... :unsure:

It is unfortunate all this happened. We're lucky we have translations of versions that are copies of copies of copies of copies, etc. The documents we DO still have are records of a time many people are interested in, to say the least. I'm wondering, though, about the tendency to downplay the significance of all those fly specs and extra comments in the margins. They can make the difference when it comes to translations. Any one else have this concern? Is anyone out there reading this who has worked with translating any of the scriptures?

For me, the interest I had over time became the research of TWI and to me there's nostalgia for that which is driving the creation of the TWI offshoots. At the risk of tooting my own horn (which I'll go ahead and do as all my writer friends tell me to do), there is a new topic that Pawtucket started for discussion of my article posted on the Home page here. The name of the post contains the name of the article, Nostalgia for TWI Biblical Research Raises Questions. Enjoy! Charlene

Hold everything. Some people can believe that they are not sure they believe in God. That is another topic that belongs in a different thread, IMO. I appreciate these lessons in mathmatics and logic lately, but I'd like to drag the conversation back to point of the article: To show that inerrancy is a premise that disallows genuine research to be done. Why? Because a person who thinks the scriptures must be perfect will only look at evidence to back up their claim. Part of the post I made last night, which is #38 in this thread)reminded us that: There are no originals of the text(s) of the Bible to make this claim about. Fundamentalist are making a claim about something that does not exist. No one has seen the original(s), they were destroyed long ago. Get it? I cannot overstate the importance of this point. I'll use VPW's quote here because we are dicussing TWI and its offshoots that adopt the same premises he did for researching the Bible: PFAL book, pg.128: "What students or scholars refer to as originals really date from 430 and later. These manuscripts are not originals [he's right about that]...at best we have copies of the originals. [most scholars say we have copies of copies of copies of copies etc. of the originals]. When I refer to the Word of God, I do not mean a copy or a translation or a version; I mean that Word of God which was originally given by revelation to holy men." Did VPW ever show us these originals? NO. He did not have them. Nobody does. When he refered to "the Word of God" he refered to what he THOUGHT the Word of God must be. The claim of inerrancy is an assumption made about something that does not exist. No one can point to the originals and say, "See these are perfect, without contradiction, they are inerrant." Why? Because no one has them. Cough, cough. They should be embarrassed if nothing else about making such a claim. It is easy to make a claim about something that does not exist. I can claim the "original" moon was made of cheese and no one can prove me wrong. There's no original moon for anyone to examine who might want to prove me wrong. The amazing thing is that I could get some people to BELIEVE my claim about the original moon made of cheese or something else that does not exist. There are always people, given certain circumstances, who will believe (and I was one in TWI and may very well be one again some other time) even the most outrageous claims made by the most sincere and kind people. I suspect we all can think of examples... Topic Disclaimer: What this post is NOT: This post is not intended to destroy anyone's belief in God or the sacredness of the scriptures, or any religious beliefs or lack of them. This post is not an attack on God or a way to dispute His (or Her) existence or non-existence. These ideas IMO would be What this post IS: An attempt to use critical thinking regarding the physical texts of the Bible and to remind everyone of the fact - which most of us already know - that there are no original texts of the scriptures about which we can even make a claim of inerrancy. Most people seem to forget this. Why remind us of this? Because inerrancy is the cornerstone of TWI research and is till being perpetuated in offshoot groups who claim their beliefs as THE TRUTH OF THE WORD OF GOD. This has been proven time and time again to lead people into making bad decisions for their lives and families. That's what I find a problem with. If you want examples, roam around the topics here at GSC and you'll find them aplenty. If some people still want to BELIEVE in inerrancy, fine, they have that choice. I simply ask those people one thing: Please have the courtesy to say inerrancy is your BELIEF, and not say it is THE TRUTH which everyone else must accept. Peace, Charlene Now, back to the "Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition" shared with us on the previous page...now THAT'S funny!