Rocky

What I'm hearing you say is that you're more concerned with describing what you think I'm thinking instead of explaining what you want me/us to understand about your perspective/understanding of the Bible regarding keeping of the Sabbath. Perhaps it would be constructive for you to try to answer the questions posed to you rather than erect walls in your mind to give yourself justification for not actually discussing the core issues you want me and other people to understand.

I could guess... but otherwise don't know anything about it.

Btw, in case you read or even just saw the thread I started in the "questioning faith" forum, I'm reading a book written by former fundamentalist Frank Schaeffer by that title, Why I am an Atheist who Believes in God. To me, it's a fascinating book that explores paradoxes of Christianity.

Waxit, what you label "agnostic" above... I'm not agnostic. But I'm also not fundamentalist. I view the Bible as a book of stories inspired by God, rather than a rule book that should be parsed and then used on which to base a legalistic subculture. Will you still refrain from dismissing me? "love people/understand where they are coming from" sounds like you're describing a willingness to genuinely listen and consider what those responding to you are saying. I hope that's true.

And I'm glad you did expose them.

You can ask. But I'd suggest that no matter how I answer, you might be inclined to put me in a box, in your mind, and dismiss me. I would ask YOU, what are you willing to bring to the table that would engender trust in your ability to engage in good faith. I didn't intend disrespect when addressing you as a dude... but I will cease using the term and try to be more respectful.

I loved that too!

And when he wanted a bit of novelty and variety in sowing his seed, he got that too. Btw, did anyone mention, in this thread, how ALL of the subjugation tactics/strategy (i.e. threatening to kick the entire corps out of the ministry... or actually ending the program for the ZERO corpse) was tied directly into the primal human social need for belonging? Our need to belong is what drives us to seek out stable, long-lasting relationships with other people. It also motivates us to participate in social activities such as clubs, sports teams, religious groups, and community organizations. In Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs, belongingness is part of one of his major needs that motivate human behavior. The hierarchy is usually portrayed as a pyramid, with more basic needs at the base and more complex needs near the peak. The need for love and belonging lie at the center of the pyramid as part of the social needs. While Maslow suggested that these needs were less important than the physiological and safety needs, he believed that the need for belonging helped people to experience companionship and acceptance through family, friends, and other relationships. ***** So, with Wierwille understanding (it was NO accident that he did any of that crap) the social issues, and the importance of these human needs, it's no wonder he used them to subjugate people to his whims. Was there anything noble about TWI?

Glenn O was, IIRC, 9th corps. I remember him. Hope he's still alive and doing well.

Indeed, it seems clear to me that the Jesus depicted in the Gospels was an "outside the box" thinker and doer. His disciples weren't sinister. Rather, they simply had not yet escaped "the box" that their culture had raised them in. It takes time to change cultures. To me, reflecting back on my 12 years in twi, the mindset was much more geared to limiting biblical understanding to the box Wierwille both grew up in and built around himself and his culture than, "oh... how interesting, let's ponder how that might be the case..." type thinking. Of course, that mindset had a solid anchor in his desire for glory and power. Btw, last night, I listened to a ted talk that was quite interesting along these lines.

Q: What have they revived? A: What was there to revive? Perhaps at some point some of them have come to the realization that there was nothing there to begin with. A cult of personality ceases to be viable when that particular personality exits stage left (or right, or whereever). Q: What have they restored? A: Great question. Maybe their own spiritual lives? But wouldn't that entail coming to the realization referenced in the previous question? Regardless, said restoration certainly wouldn't look like anything they hoped and expected when they set out on that journey three years ago. Q: Does their little weekly echo chamber have any relevance to anyone besides themselves? Anyone listening outside their little circle jerk? A: These rhetorical questions obviously answer themselves. Q: Surely, one can think deeper that spewing back the wierwille sound bytes of yesteryear, no? A: YES, one CAN think more deeply than simply spewing back wierwille sound bytes. But NOT if they keep doing the same things and expecting different outcomes. Oh, and DON'T call me Shirley! Q: When will they stop the merry-go-round and look around? Why have corps and clergy been exiting (escaping) from twi since 1976? Why did all of wierwille's corps letters lament, over and over, that corps were exiting twi and moving on in life? Were all of these corps and clergy "cop-outs?" Were they possessed with devil spirits like wierwille said? A: When (or IF)? YMMV. The why might be obvious to (some of) them by now. Were all of those escaping since 1976 "cop outs" and/or possessed by devil spirits? Most likely NOT. Three years is enough time for (some, but I wouldn't hazard a guess as to which ones) people in that group to start realizing they're definitely not going to be able to re-energize any bit of a splinter group to the "good ol' days" of their imagination/recollection. Because there's no group to re-energize, I'm confident that some (again, wouldn't guess which ones) WILL start re-evaluating their lives and spiritual journeys and expand their understanding and imagination to embrace ideas that were previously forbidden by the chains of cultism that previously kept them so severely limited.

Yes, of course... I knew that.

YES!

Hi Twinky, Your comment posted while I was writing mine. IMO, paradox is one of those things that many people could describe as difficult. In the context of this Sabbath discussion, it appears that both the concept of keeping the sabbath AND NT grace may be true. Embracing paradox might be an intellectual skill that could reduce the associated cognitive dissonance. Rather than denying the need for the underlying concept of a day of rest and honoring God, a person might be able to recognize and accept it, but realize it's not necessarily a dogma that necessitates a troubling bondage for the person who is unable to practice the "letter of the law."

Great points, STL and T-Bone. An example that occurs to me is that it may be difficult to embrace paradox. Though Wierwille knew of the concept, as I recall now, his teaching discounted paradox.

IIRC, Penworks mentions this in Undertow.

Wow...

Yes, that's what I was aiming for... should have tested it when I posted. Thanks for covering for me.

Some of you may already know who Frank Schaeffer is. Some of you may already know that I don't look at the Bible in nearly the same way I (we) did when affiliated with twi.

Bravo!

Pardonez-moi, kind sir! "verses." "Versus" is something different altogether.

The article the following quote is from appears in The Atlantic. The overall message of the article is political (therefore, I'm not going to provide the link, but will to anyone who wants it and asks by private message. But this concluding passage is not political as such, but is taken from a Nobel Prize acceptance speech decades half a century ago. “The simple step of a simple courageous man is not to partake in falsehood, not to support false actions,” Alexandr Solzhenitsyn said in his mesmerizing 1970 Nobel lecture. “Let that enter the world, let it even reign in the world—but not with my help.” "Solzhenitsyn went on to say that writers and artists can achieve more; they can conquer falsehoods. “Falsehood can hold out against much in this world, but not against art,” he said. "But art, as powerful as it is, is not the only instrument with which to fight falsehoods. There are also the daily acts of integrity of common men and women who will not believe the lies or spread the lies, who will not allow the foundation of truth—factual truth, moral truth—to be destroyed, and who, in standing for truth, will help heal this broken land." Indeed, T-Bone, the paint brush, the pen, the photographers' lenses, the keyboard, are all mightier than the sword.

Twi IS a corporation. Most likely a 501 (c) 3 non-profit corporation. AFAIK, RR is approaching her 80s, if she has not reached that mark yet. However, she no doubt has more than adequate health care, since she controls the purse strings of that $60+ million corporation.