chockfull

I find it surprising that some continue to misrepresent others point of view despite numerous times it has been clarified. It has been well established that I have never made claim that anyone was a liar, nor have I said anyone was. My claim has been consistent the information is not documented by any hard evidence.

But for the record I'll clarify again. What I said remains true and that is the claims have not been nor can they be proven or disproved they are undocumentable. You may choose to believe one side of the story the other has not been told, nor is it likely to for obvious reasons. What you or I choose to believe or accept does not guarantee truth it may or may not be so . It is neither proved right or wrong it is simply a testimony that has yet to be supported with actual factual evidence, nor stood the test of law. You choose to accept it because of your bias toward the group that does not make something true. No more so than someone's support of the same does. What you or I choose to believe is simply that what we choose to believe, that is not necessarily the same as true. Because it has not had the benefit of factual documentation, with due process of law, I choose to not pass judgments on undocumented personal testimony. Another words innocent until proven guilty. As such I can render the information neither true nor false so it remains undocumentable. (proven neither true or false) despite what one may believe one way or another

One of the difficult things is that the people in TWI leadership that have and continue to perpetrate, foment, and support these atrocities cover up their actions. They will not discuss actions publicly, or allow any factual evidence to come to light that they can control. They spin personal accounts, and continue to mark and avoid people, which closes the ranks around their version of facts. Part of this is due to fear of legal repurcusssions.

So reasonable logical people in the absense of actual factual evidence need to reconstruct factual evidence through sources that they judge as reliable although they may not be to the level required by a court. However, on the other side, court proceedings have leverage in place such as the deposition process and consequences for false or incomplete testimony that also are not available to the individual. In other words, that leverage makes it more difficult for leaders to lie to cover up their atrocities. A clear example of this is that leverage is what flushed out LCM acts which he previously lied about.

So whether or not individual detailed personal accounts of atrocities are "documentable" or not is irrelevant. In a public forum, they can be laid out for examination. If the leaders being accused want to refute the accuracy of these claims, they are certainly welcome to do so in the same public forum.

Thanks for the verse, Mark!!!

Merry Christmas to you and yours.

So how do I initiate dialog without stepping into trap by triggering their TWI-mental-reflexes? I don't want them to suddenly revert if I say something that might make them think I am "off the word" in a drastic way. I want to be careful to not attack TWI in case they end up defensive of it and start to go back. Dealing with innies, or newly ex-innies, can be difficult. I'm curious what you all would do and how you would talk to someone close about it.

I would say that open communication helps develop better relationships between people. Since they have not brought it up to volunteer information if you want that you would have to initiate it. Many times people aren't very good at talking freely to others - there are barriers. You have a barrier of fear here - that somehow asking them about their life might trigger a negative mental reflex. They have a barrier - maybe they are ashamed, hurt, etc. You never know that until talking about it.

I would say basically prepare what you want to ask and ask it. You can always ask "What happened?" questions in various forms, and "How do you feel about that?" and "What are you going to do now?" types of questions without needing to interject a soapbox stand of any kind.

Jeff,

Great job with how you're handling all this. You guys are in my prayers. Because of freedom of will there's not a whole lot you can do to affect the negatives from coming at you.

But you can focus on building the positives. I remember studying 2 Tim. 1:7 about fear as a negative and power, love, and a sound mind as positives. Sometimes it takes a lot more work in building the positives to overcome one negative. But that's how we'd rather live anyway. As you are faithful to build a positive continuing relationship with your son it will bear fruit.

-cf

Excellent points, Potato... especially since we know that twi and their minions did EXACTLY that in the Colorado custody case... had people sit on the stand and blatantly lie about what was said and what was practiced! (remember, this is where they said there was no such practice/teaching as "Mark and Avoid"!!!)

It's amazing the lengths deluded people will go to because they believe the end justifies the means.

And anyone who was around at the time knows that when twi saw the writing on the wall in the Allen case because of the deposed testimony of Craig and Rosalie, they decided to settle, they then went around crowing about how they WON and that the whole case was only about evil people trying to get money out of twi.

What's really funny about that one is that the damages were originallly set around $25M. The settlement was sealed, but speculation has it that it had to be upwards of $1M. Rosie and crew talked about how their insurance "paid" for it so they didn't have to use ABS money. However their "insurance" was very expensive to pay for, and for the later lawsuits the insurance company tried to drop them for cause. One of the unpublished lawsuits in play recently is TWI going after the insurance company for not covering damage settlements for one of the subsequent lawsuits. Tell me they aren't using "the tithe that doeth still provide" to pay lawyer fees, initially cover settlements, and buy expensive liability insurance for their abusive head honchos. That should really make people feel comfortable sending in their weekly check. NOT!!! They pay for that instead of putting on events for their people like they used to.

I understand the argument to uphold the sanctity of our judicial system. Despite its flaws I still believe its the best system devised yet. However, you cannot overlook the good use of media in getting pertinent information out that the wealthy or powerful wish to have suppressed. So, in my book, there is a need for both and they are not mutually exclusive!

One thing that I hate on this site is people always appealing to the process of law in defense of abusers. Many cases of abuse are not able to be covered up exactly because it became public knowledge and the sheer outcry of public opinion forced a semblance of justice. The latest OJ case is an example. There is no jury in America that would not nail him to the wall after the fiasco involved in the first case.

GS is exactly such a resource. People can come here and read up on things that happen behind closed doors in TWI leadership circles from firsthand accounts. There's a reason why they happened behind closed doors. There's a reason why TWI leadership is secretive. Eph 5:12,13 talks about things done in secret and made manifest. When the secret abuse, greed, political posturing, covering up, and more are made public and manifest, then the light can reprove them. These leaders know what they are doing is wrong, and that is why they hide things and lie about them. They don't allow things to be brought to light, lest their deeds would be reproved, and public opinion could be brought into play regarding their real actions and motives of heart.

If anyone in this here cafe has any advice for me, I sure would appreciate it. Is there a book or a site I can send her to? I went on the Way site and it's just like it was a few years ago, with zero opportunity for anyone visiting to send a message, much less even buy a book. (Why show people those books and then not sell them?)

Advice? Yes, absolutely.

Just show them this video:

That ought to cover it.

Perfect example of how the system works. Each person has the right to pursue their claim in a real court, not the internet version. They can submit testimony for examination ,they can enter evidence, present real facts as opposed to one sided opinions, and then a jury can render a verdict. At which time one can declare guilt or innocence according to the law. Wow what a novel idea........

And on the Internet, people can tell their stories and be judged by the merit of the story as opposed to the court system which is expensive.

If the abuser in the story feels slandered, then they can go to the court system for remedy, and enter discovery evidence, and present facts, and a judge or jury can render a verdict. At which time they could declare not guilt or innocence as those are criminal law terms not civil, but the successful outcome of a civil verdict and state the damages.

Isn't it great how that works?

I'm not a trademark attorney, but I think there are certain phrases that are more easily copyrightable and defendable than others. "The Way International" is probably more defendable. "The Way" in and of itself is a phrase spoken by Jesus and recorded in scriptures.

One of the problems with trying to copyright that or sue for infringement is that a largely defendable position is that Jesus owns the copyright and TWI just tried to camp on it later by filing US trademark documents.

Which in reality is actually what happened.

You might wanna check some tape logs for the 70s before you stand by that statement.

VPW, through the 70's from what I can put together, had KC Pillai and Lamsa teach some all the while extolling their support of him, had a guy he said was seed of the serpent teach the Corps, and once in a while would have some other source like Bud Morgan speak.

I don't recollect him ever exchanging teaching spots on the Sunday Service with other Christian denominations such as is common in mainstream Christianity. I'm sure if you have a comprehensive tape log list from all time you might find one or two exceptions to this, like Rufus Mosely teaching, or the like.

So I will concede this point to you on the 70's, and state that there was some of that going on in the 70's, which as others took on running the ministry in the 80's decreased more and more. By the time VPW was gone, there was absolutely zero outside collaboration on teachings, which has continued to today.

Congratulations, by sniping at one mostly correct sentence in the midst of paragraphs, you've managed to turn the attention of the thread from tithing and ABS and TWI practices on to yourself. I'm sure your motives are accuracy, but give it a rest and join the discussion.

Back to the main point. TWI set themselves up as the only source of Biblical teaching. They then taught that the Bible is our only rule of faith and practice. And VPW taught the commutative law in mathematics in his Foundational Class - things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. So without directly stating so, followers were led to believe that TWI is the only source of truth for faith and practice. Statements of pretended humility such as "I don't have all the answers", or "It's not the only truth it's just the best package" placed in strategic places are false displays of humility to further increase followers trust.

What is further irrefutable is what VPW believed about himself. He believed God talked to him telling him he would teach him the Word like it hadn't been known since the first century. He had a "phenomenon" experience including snow at gas pumps which are not corroborated by any outside source. He may have had a miraculous experience. But then again so may have Joseph Smith. VPW heard from God. Maybe so - the question is of course, "which god?"

If the true God was teaching him the Word in his ear like it hadn't been known since the first century, why the need to plagiarize?

With all the verbal blood-baths people took as they exited TWI... with all the spilling of personal, confidential details of people's lives that "leadership" did - whether it was LCM or VPW or Who-Knows-Who-Harry.... Why the f**k didn't someone come back and sue their a$$es for slander?

There are several reasons why libel cases have not been filed.

The very top dogs avoid personal contact to insulate themselves, and have cronies do dirty work for them. Intimidation tactics are used to discourage lawsuits. They make up lies about very personal issues, such that taking legal action would expose a person to making public their personal business, which is a deterrant. They circle ranks among followers, blackballing individuals involved such that obtaining testimony would be difficult. When all that fails, they come up with a scapegoat and take punitive action against them to back off the victim. They use delaying and stalling tactics to push prosecution beyond legal limits which are typically 1 year to file.

Actually, there's a lot of parallels there as to why rape perpetrators are not often prosecuted successfully.

I believe another inaccurate statement is that twi taught they were the ONLY and SOLE place for truth. My recollection is they were claiming the BEST source, not the ONLY source. I believe CSBP supports that idea. Also, VPW said "lots of the stuff I teach is not original", so logically there is lots of truth elsewhere since he got lots of his stuff from outside TWI. Never heard or saw in writing the claim that TWI is the ONLY place there is truth, I think that is someone's fantasy and wishful thinking and my wish is that folks would be more accurate when describing twi and Wierwille's beliefs.

To be 100% accurate what was taught is "the Bible is our ONLY rule of faith and practice". This was taught in many classes and forums. And outside of the "spritual 40 club" early on in the ministry, the practice of bringing in outside speakers and teachers certainly did not continue throughout the 70's when the organization was at its peak membership. 80's through current practices there have been "recommended reading lists" but no outside speakers or teachers. So the Way leadership set themselves up as the only source of teaching scriptures, and combined with the above public statement, it is splitting hairs to say they don't teach they are the only source for where followers obtain truth. There are a few levels of indirection, but the follower is led to that exact thing.

Where this is completely seperatist compared to mainstream Christianity is that other Christian writers are not even considered. A home fellowship would never have the freedom to work through a Joel Olsteen or Joyce Meyer book, or even a specific topic workbook from mainstream Christian sources. There are weekly teaching topics focused on Way publications set by HQ leadership.

Also taught was Uncle Harry's sharing on tithing and abundant sharing that the more he matured in the Christian walk the more he just gave all his money to The Way International, and considered other organizations as "second-rate causes". So by implication, "maturity" is held in equality to eliminating giving to other charitable organizations and giving solely to TWI. This viewpoint ha's been taught in TWI throughout the 70's to present.

Teaching a "law" of tithing is easy (besides being self-serving in TWI's case). A law is duty, command, with clear tests and penalty or reward.

What Jesus, John the baptizer and the NT teach is an attitude of generosity... if you have 2 coats, give one away (that makes 15% sound cheap), give to him who asks you, invite to dinner those who can't pay you back or invite you back, give beyond your ability, etc. Impossible to even imagine much less do unless you have an inner attitude of love and generosity.

Cultivating that kind of true love and giving spirit is much more illusive than law of 10 or 15%.

I think it starts with absorbing how generous God is with us. And letting the Holy Spirit form in you the fruit of love and goodness. It's a work of God. "God is at work within you both to will and to do His good pleasure."

johnj,

Your approach here has some real merit. Basically much of the color of TWI teaching is law based, while professing to be among the only that truly understand "the grace administration". Going back to the law while made free from it turns an individual into a Pharisee. Galatians does speak much to the "bewitching" that goes on in bringing people under a false legalistic based doctrine.

Jesus confronted the Pharisees for looking down at the widow giving a mite, while they used the "corbin" concept to keep from even caring for their own parents.

TWI leadership mandates to their leadership teaching these principles on tithing and abundant sharing quarterly, including their debt policies and scriptures (the no mortgage policy). The majority of TWI followers are unable to own property unless they completely refuse this principle and buy a home anyway rebelling against the teachings, which has been becoming more common. Then they cannot be fellowship coordinators or attend the Advanced Class or the Advanced Class Specials which they have moved to bi-annually in Ohio at their HQ. TWI has a net worth of $55M, with roughly half of that in short term investment capital, which earns roughly $200K per year. They spend very little of that on the people, doing no country-wide events that are not debt restricted, and they keep expenses low - 75% of income goes to HQ, 25% stays in the states, and the majority of the 25% goes to pay salaries of the 1 or 2 couples working for TWI in the multi-state region. The corporate culture is to spend as little as possible to put on events, with many using free rooms.

If you look at the fruit of the result of these teachings, you certainly don't see the prosperity promised, except for some of the higher executive positions in Ohio that are paying cash for homes there, own sailboats and the like. The average follower is kept poor and enslaved by these teachings, while the Pharisee class is enriched.

Excellent post Spectrum49!

I wonder if the OT priests used any of the tithe for fancy motorcycles, classic cars, private jets or motor coaches.

The motor coaches certainly turned in to traveling sexual abuse centers, made so by both the first and second "men of God" of TWI. No wonder he died of cancer. He turned into a cancer.

And no one wants their A$$ in a pit on the sabbath ... do they ? Hmmmm ?

Innies ........Best get mowing and cleaning.

It's better to have your A$$ in a pit than pits on your....

Oh, nevermind.

Anyone else recognize that magazine layout for the front cover??

Thought so. :blink:

It looks like a Jehovah's Witness Watchtower magazine cover?

You know, I like DWBH's post. It kind of reminds me of Jesus expression that you can't put new wine in old wineskins. I can't really say that I know what the new wineskin is in our day and time. But it is easy to see the old wineskins.

Focusing on the negatives, both actual and imagined, prevents remembering and seeing the many positives.

This is the essence of free will: it's what we choose to DWELL ON, and to DWELL IN.

By continuing to focus on, repeat, magnify, and even exaggerate the negatives, then the opportunity to see the many positives is lost forever.

Those who choose to live in the negatives long enough cannot even imagine the existence of the positives. This is a more horrible self-imposed limitation than anything that ever happened in twi.

Sorry - just had a chance to read through this and comment. Mike you are presenting a logical inaccuracy here - by saying that bringing up stories of negative things that happened in TWI is "focusing on the negatives", "DWELLING IN , or ON" negatives, repeat, magnify, and exaggerate negatives. You are saying that people who repeat stories of abuse are choosing to live in the negatives to the exclusion of positives.

This is somewhat delusional, and it is very similar to the type of logic you hear from TWI leadership - rather than acknowledge, confront, and change patterns of spiritual abuse, they teach at length a type of "Pollyanna" viewpoint similar to the logic you extoll. This is a classic ploy to shift the attention off of the abuser and on to the abused.

It is similar to attacking a rape victim for going to the police, telling their story, testifying in court, continuing to openly talk about the experience to help others through trauma and take a stand against injustice.

What it does is excuse the leadership who abuse and puts pressure on the abused to "forget about" their treatment and "just focus on the positives".

Here at GS many will refuse to excuse the abusers and focus on the abused. Most of the time this is because the abusers have kept their position, power, and influence, and have continued to abuse going on to other victims. Many want to speak up until these types of people have been removed from the power, position, and influence of being able to abuse more and more people.

And you will not hear people standing for the truth like that in your typical TWI fellowship. You will hear more of your Pollyanna type of thing, where even when very clear examples of abuse locally are in their face, they refuse to address it, talk about it, and move on forgetting about those involved or hurt. You see - it's much easier just not to deal with it under the guise of "not dwelling on negatives".

God doesn't want your sacrifice of "positive attitude". He wants mercy and justice. He stands against those who abuse, and with those who have been abused. He is on the right side of righteousness and justice. Unlike many people in cults.

Jesus said that the divorce laws in OT were written because of the hardness of their hearts. He said what God joined together let no man tear apart.

But you can't determine another's freedom of will, you can't control it, and at times it's very small how you can even influence it. We are all broken. We all fall short.

That's where His love makes us whole in spite of that.

Back to the topic of whether it's actions or theology that makes a cult, I'm going to chime in with an opinion that it is by far more of the actions that concern me in that category of TWI than it is theology. (Although the topic diversion into the Trinity is interesting reading and I started another thread on it).

To me the controlling and abusive behavior is the crux of the issue as opposed to theology or viewpoints. They break down an individual's boundaries, personal and family freedoms, and substitute the "greater good" of the group for them. They have a viewpoint of "unity" and "one accord" meaning an unquestioning belief in and support of leaders who are governed by baser motives of political power and the furthering of the group for their own baser gains. There are so many stories of individual boundaries being crossed here on this site - of course the sexual predator stories are the most despicable, but the others are just as bad - dictating who someone can date, controlling making people move from where they are, whether they can own property, pets, controlling the number of children they can have, whether or not they can have a profession or not (even though some of those is just for their way corps). One big one is the shutting down of dissenting opinion. Rather than an open discussion, debate, and investing resources into a defining result, a very few in high places determine what they think and shut down all opposing views. The debt topic is one very clear example of that. A few in high places have determined their viewpoint. Opposing research is rejected and ignored, the leadership is required to teach on the party line quarterly, and participation in classes and leadership is hinged upon not having any debt including a baseline family mortgage. Top leaders were forced to sign a paper indicating their support of the issue for fear of losing their jobs. I'll tell you the times I've most felt like I was in a cult was when I was trying to explain to other Christians why it was I didn't own a house - all relegated to one marginal interpretation of a New Testament verse. And trying to explain to someone why leasing a car wasn't debt but purchasing one on a loan was. People would just look at me and say "why do you let some group tell you what to do like that?" I don't know.

To me TWI is a cult because you can look at the wasted trail of the destruction of lives behind their leaders operations. That hasn't changed over time. That is fruit. And fruit defines the tree.

You forgot "also".

Reminds me of a couple of 36 hour marathons getting that marked in my Bible.

My wife knows how I feel to a certain degree and is waiting for me to

have trust and confidence in the leadership and the way again.

She thinks I will wake up one day.

Other family is clueless.

Do not want to give to many details WGB and all

copenhagen

My friend I have a reading list recommendation for you:

http://www.amazon.com/Boundaries-When-Take...3715&sr=8-1

It certainly won't cause the arguments that a more directed book purchase might. They even have a workbook model available for small groups, like a fellowship.

I really would love to see as an experiment what it would stir up if a TWI fellowship really started living and applying that stuff.

Chockful,

I would answer them, but honestly I am not 100% sure

I do believe God is a trinity.--A family--I do think it CAN and for me WAS another Jesus. No resemblance to what I know now.

On the rest--I don't know.

If I were to describe my quandry--or struggle---I would be at a loss for words.

Glad I made you laugh though.

I understand. I think I pretty much said I was going through changes on viewpoints on a lot of that too. I do think it's a good thing that our understanding, appreciation, and viewpoints of the Lord Jesus Christ is growing and changing. The more I see the more I'm forming an opinion that a lot of it is just labels like "Republican" or "Democrat". And that leads to a degradation of the view of an individuals relationship with the Creator. I wouldn't have a problem calling Jesus Christ "my Lord and God" like Thomas did. It's a growing relationship, like a spouse. I mean, how can you describe the word "love" relating to a spouse over many years? So many things are hard to put in words.

And for you to assert that comparing TWI's theology to Arianism and Ebionitism is in some sense derogatory comprises a misunderstanding of the heresies themselves.

No such assertion - just relaying the means that a couple of people have presented that argument to me in the past.

Arianism, in its various forms, states that Jesus is not God, and is a created being. Most Arians held an Adoptionist view of Jesus, in that He was endowed with the Father's grace and through His cooperation with His Father's will, He attained divinity, though not equality with God, over a period of time. The Ebionites, according to the Church Fathers, believed Jesus to be the Messiah, but a prophet, indeed the greatest of the prophets and a perfect man who fulfilled and obeyed the Law better than anyone ever could, but nothing more than a man, and certainly not divine.

How can you assert what "most Arians" held as far as viewpoints when they lived 200-400AD? That's a reconstruction of an opinion of a belief system done from which writings? Their opponents?

St. Irenaeus, in Against Heresies, says of the Ebionites:

And also St. Hippolytus of Rome, who expounds the doctrine of the Ebionites concerning Christ, in his book The Refutation of All Heresies:

None of those quotes sounds much at all like any teachings on Jesus Christ not being God that I've encountered in TWI.

And about Arius, this is an epistle of Pope St. Alexander of the Church of Alexandria, who was elected Pope of Alexandria instead of Arius because of Arius' heretical views. This is from his Catholic Epistle, to the entire Church, where he quotes the Arians in their statements of belief:

Yes - Catholic history. You're not a Catholic, but are you trying to assert in a logical discussion that Catholic history is not one-sided?

Chockfull, can you give me a reputable source that would show that Church history prior to 1000AD is unreliable?

How do you prove a negative? It is at best very incomplete. Are you going to try and assert that we have similar levels of reliability in historical accounts 50AD - 1000AD that we do 1500 - 1800? Ludicrous. Most of my history professors in college who are semi-reputable sources have told me that all history is unreliable to different degrees, because it is written by fallable humans with opinions.

And what exactly do you mean by "It's not a compelling argument. 2000 year old views are not current views as modern viewpoints more reflect the advancement of academic achievement of mankind. Arian didn't have GPS satellites to influence his perception of the world."?

~Phil

What exactly I mean is that to draw parallels between TWI's One God teachings and Arianism and Ebionitism is a stretch for a few reasons:

1. Lack of clear ability to completely represent Arian / Ebionite doctrine & viewpoints.

2. No clear understanding of TWI's representation of Jesus Christ not being God and viewpoints related.

3. Over-generalization

The word heresy itself is pretty extremist. The Greek word hairesis means diverse or other. Heresy in practical application in the early church just meant someone didn't agree with the guy who won the political election. The word heresy eventually turned into a hate crime type of word - first being associated with excommunication, then the Inquisition. It gets tossed around like nothing, but there is quite a lot of evil in back of how that word has been used throughout church history. Brand a man a heretic, and it's not much of a stretch to burn him at the stake - like happened all the way up through the Reformation.

I have a question for you. What's all the mental acrobatics around the concept of Jesus being a "created being"? How exactly in your viewpoint did the virgin conception take place? Did Jesus actually go through the full fetal development or was he a fully cogniscent conscious "little God" in there in Mary's womb? Was or was not life created in Mary's womb?

B-O-R-I-N-G. And yet, the worst of the canned read fellowship teachings cannot come close to the Kindergarten-level-education-targeted STS teachings. "Hi, I'm going to talk to you like you're 5. And smile while reading from cards. Hopefully I will sound profound." NOT!!!!

I never knew about the sexploitation until the lawsuits - just simply never ran into it, except for a couple girls I knew said they had affairs with some previous leaders. The politics and control I guess I went along with it and probably came off like those above me came off to me. So in that I suppose I was a tool. I started to see things then spoke up, then got in increasing amounts of trouble, then left. Not a unique story at all.

I don't know really how I deal with having been a tool. I'm not in a 12 step program or anything. "Hi, I'm a tool, but I haven't tooled anyone for 1354 days". I guess the more disgusted I became with the examples above me the less I wanted to imitate them. Hopefully that's steered me towards non-tool land.

Dynamic Monarchianism...that's a perfect description for what TWI's theology is. Well, actually I think TWI's would better be described as a form of Arianism or perhaps a variation of the Ebionite heresy.

You know I've heard the Arianism and Ebionite heresy comparisons - usually spoken derogatorily and from a condescending type of intellectual position that only a Catholic priest can really pull off with the right facial expressions and voice inflection. It's not a compelling argument. 2000 year old views are not current views as modern viewpoints more reflect the advancement of academic achievement of mankind. Arian didn't have GPS satellites to influence his perception of the world.

Also, with as many other things the Catholic church has edited in a one-sided fashion with no opposing viewpoint published, and swept under the carpet, out of courts, to the bottom of lakes, into abortion clinics, etc. I'm not so sure that Catholic history prior to 1000AD is even that reliable of a source.

This leads me to question...how does TWI view Jesus, exactly? I know they don't view Him as God, but is He a divine being but not God, or is He just a human who attained a certain state of holiness or enlightenment from God, like Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha? Or rather, is He one of the Prophets, as Muslims view Him? Is He just a good moral teacher as the Jews view Him? What, in TWI's view, does the title "Son of God" mean? What does "Son of Man" mean?

Brush,

I don't know if I can quantify TWI views quite as philosophically as your "divine perichosis of love" analysis, but I think I can give it a shot.

The sum and substance of the belief is I Tim. 2:5

"For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus".

So TWI views Jesus as a man, the one Mediator between God and men, the only-begotten son of God, the only one now raised from the dead, ascended above all principality and power, and seated at the right hand of God. He is our Advocate, and the Red Thread or title subject throughout every book of the Bible which speaks of him indirectly.

So no, not God. No, not a divine being but not God. No, not a human who attained holiness or enlightenment from God like Buddha. (But a human who fulfilled his Father's will and was raised, ascended, and seated at the Fathers RH above all spiritual power). He was one of the Prophets, but no not just one, and no, not like the Muslims view him. He was a good moral teacher, but no, not only that as the Jews view him.

In TWI's view the title "son of God" isn't substantially different in meaning than normal language in that "son of Chockfull" would convey the same relationship to me as Jesus to God (except has infinitely fewer benefits). I don't recall in TWI teachings son of Man being emphasized a lot, so I don't know I can answer what TWI thinks that means. All in all it's a pretty simple straightforward description and application of terms. Where it doesn't fit VP handles in his JCNG book to explain the "difficult verses". And his research principles are that the "difficult verses" must be understood in light of the "clear verses". So whatever interpretation he comes up with for John 1:1 it can't contradict I Tim. 2:5.

-cf

No question - P.T. Barnum...

Now that has potential. If VP was PT Barnum, would that mean LCM was a man in tights on the flying trapeze? And RFR was the bearded lady?