Rocky

4 hours ago, Rocky said:

1) Men wrote the scriptures, not God.

2) How would the scenario you suggest God should/could have used have proven his existence?

1 hour ago, Charity said:

My rhetorical question is why didn't God make himself and his true word known directly without any middlemen and then prevent it from being changed, suggesting in a fantastical way the threat of a lightning strike upon anyone who tried to do.  

Oh.

46 minutes ago, Charity said:

Rhetorical question:  Why didn't the almighty God (who is not the author of confusion) not make the one topic of end time punishment clear and concise in one piece of writing (necessarily in different languages) and preserve it forever (without any changes on the threat of a lightning bolt immediately striking anyone who tried)?  That would definitely prove his existence!

1) Men wrote the scriptures, not God.

2) How would the scenario you suggest God should/could have used have proven his existence?

6 hours ago, waysider said:

And thus you are right back at the heart of the issue. Should religious texts be accepted as the authoritative source? Three Abrahamic faiths. Which one?

Nobody's right if everybody's wrong....Hey! That would make a good song lyric. 

A couple of book titles that might relate to this thread:

https://www.amazon.com/Being-Wrong-Adventures-Margin-Error/dp/0061176052/

and

https://www.amazon.com/Coherent-Mind-Quantum-Lali-Love-ebook/dp/B0F6YCDP2Z/

15 hours ago, Charity said:

Are you questioning my right to ask the questions?  If it doesn't matter to you Rocky, then just say so.

Are you questioning my right to add (or try to) perspective? This question is rhetorical. Does not need to be answered.

15 hours ago, Charity said:

Are you questioning my right to ask the questions?  If it doesn't matter to you Rocky, then just say so.

No. I corrected your mistake. You referred to Wierwille's Birth Certificate. That's incorrect. The post in question actually referred to his DEATH certificate. It matters to me when materially incorrect posts need to be corrected in order to avoid significant misunderstandings.

16 hours ago, Junior Corps Surviver said:

These days they don't justify anything. "that was a long time ago. It's OK now". I usually say "The foundation of TWI is rotten. You can pain the walls all you want. "

Just another way to gaslight people (those still donating to their not-for-profit church).

8 hours ago, Charity said:

Do you or anyone else know more about why vp wanted such a study done?  Was he having doubts about his ideas about adultery being accurate?  Or was he counting on the study exonerating him?  Did the fact that he was having serious health issues at the time have anything to do with this request?

Does it matter anymore?

8 hours ago, Charity said:

I ask because according to VPW's Birth DEATH Certificate, John Juedes wrote about wierwille wearing an eye patch and...

On 6/16/2025 at 11:59 PM, Nathan_Jr said:

"spiritually mature"

... nevertheless still emotionally immature.

On 6/17/2025 at 3:00 AM, Junior Corps Surviver said:

We left not only because he had to write this but because he was fired for it. It made no sense. It made me turn my back on TTW after 15 years. That's how stupidly they handled it.

self-justifying rationalizations through and through (by TWI and Victor Wierwille).

32 minutes ago, frank123lol said:

Those active in the way at the time were told not to read said article as we would be possessed!

Reminds me of that song "I saw the darkness..."  

2 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

This conversation has nothing to do with TWI.  

Except when one goes to the first post on the thread and clicks the link in that post. It directly references two LONG time twi followers.

For reference, here is that link. https://restitutio.org/2020/02/06/313-questioning-way-international-doctrines-william-barlow/

Stoic philosophy can and does enable a person to walk in the confidence and calmness, etc. that Paul's epistles as we know them say are "fruit of the spirit."

6 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

Statistically valid?  95%

Where'd you get your data to back up that (specious) claim?

1 hour ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Plagiarizing is lying, stealing. A plagiarist is a liar and a thief.

Claiming God taught you, but you really just plagiarized, is a wicked lie.

 

 

It seems there were a couple of the ten commandments covering lying and stealing. I wonder if they might be the part of the Old Testament Law that we don't need to bother complying with these day. 

7 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

Atheists are extremely without joy, IMO.

You're entitled to have an opinion. That does NOT mean it's at all credible. 

9 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

I'm pretty sure in his best days Dr Wierwille would not have wanted that.

Btw, I don't project anything on to him. I was in the corps(e) 40 some years ago. I'm not interested in what he would or would not have wanted. I'm interested in what he said and did. From a strictly critical analysis perspective, it was his ministry. His organization. He wasn't about to let anyone disagree with him and get away with it.

2 hours ago, JoyfulSoul said:

The Word, The Word, The Word!  He didn't teach VPW, VPW, VPW!

How sure are you that he did NOT teach that HIS teachings were the Word of God?

Whether he ever used those words or not is irrelevant. His actions, his exercise of excommunication ALL consistently DID mean that Victor's words were the Word of God.

57 minutes ago, Raf said:

Yeah, there's nothing Biblically required about making the tithe the minimum;

IF anything, teaching the concept without the deceptive bias, TWI actually OWES service to the believers/followers.

1 hour ago, Joe Maslow said:

L’identification des dîmes: Quelle dîme est donc payée par les chrétiens

Which translates to: Tithe Identification: What Tithe is Paid by Christians?

I appreciate the practice with French language translation (I still have to use google translate).

1 hour ago, Charity said:

"One of these immutable laws is the law of giving."

Immutable my BEE-hind. 

6 hours ago, Joe Maslow said:

Well, I adhere to the main post here. 

However, publicly TWI is teaching about GIVING not Tithing (If you watch their current STS they do not mention tithe) - unless you are in a private circle where they still expect 10% or more from "leaders" and "faithful believers".

TWI is full of contradictions...they still sell "Christians Should be Prosperous", in that book VPW says..."Do not pray for prosperity if you do not tithe".

But....check TWI's description on their website: "This booklet opens the doors to prosperous living. Biblically established keys, such as the law of giving and receiving, unlock true prosperity for the believer"

THE LAW OF GIVING OR TITHING? 

 

 

Pardon me if I misunderstand, but if God had set it up as a law, wouldn't there be a one to one ratio of action and reaction?

Why don't they (or anyone else) just call it the concept of giving (and receiving)?

One would think they could expand on it to include the organization's understanding of what the believer's giving is conceptually supposed to be used for... and perhaps expand the teaching to include TWI responsibility to contribute to community support organizations, at least 10 percent of gross receipts.

IOW, if the organization badgers you about how much you need to give them, it's a cult. 

BTW, Mormon churches do that too.

A very insightful post that demarcates the difference between what "the Word" says and the organizational practices, which is the STORY of how the Word is actually communicated by way of do as I say, not as I do.

4 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Another example of why literal, word-for-word translations are not helpful and lead to confusion. 

Very recently (in March 2025, I believe) Leor Zmigrod published a book on The Ideological Brain: the Radical Science of Flexible Thinking. 

In general (so far) she addresses religious AND political thinking but doesn't suggest she favors one side or another. This book, IMO, is germane to this thread's discussion because IN PFLAP we were indoctrinated to think according to how Victor Wierwille taught the bible.

In the nearly 40 years since I left TWI, I've changed how I think about both religious and political subjects and values.

I will not reference any such subject as if I believe what I used to hold as true is particularly wrong, or even right or correct. But I do now hold that the entire notion of private interpretation of "God's Word" is inherently NOT valid because I believe humankind is unable to authoritatively make such pronouncements due to our inherent neurological, emotional, social or otherwise psychological limitation.

Nevertheless, carry on with the discussion of TWIs view of private interpretation of the bible.   

Rather, my view is encapsuled in the wisdom (of Solomon?) in Proverbs 2:1-5.

But I digress.