Charity

Previously I replied to your post by saying, "This is both a bit funny and sad at the same time." I've since been reading the "Questioning SIT" thread and I think I have a better understanding of what you are saying. Please correct me if I'm wrong. While in twi, we might have had some initial doubts about things we learned or did (like SIT at the end of the class), but because there was so much hype to believe "all things vp", the doubts were quickly buried or they just fell by the wayside. From that point on, we believed (or pretended to believe) what was happening was real. It's like so many things talked about on GSC, it's after one leaves twi with all its hype and the rose-colored glasses are finally removed that we are free to question once again whether things were true/real for us or not - like "did I fake speaking in tongues." This is not a bit funny at all and though we might be sad, mad or hurt to realize we'd been tricked, cheated or deceived, I'm learning that truth does bring freedom.

(I might just have one, possibly two of the above .) Seriously though - no GP is taught or needed in the other programs (or classes)?

twi's GP = God, Who is Spirit, teaches His creation in you, which is now your spirit. Your spirit teaches your mind. Then your spiritual power becomes manifested in the senses realm as you act or as you speak out. That people in twi operated the spirit was demonstrated when they were "called upon" by leaders to SIT and interpret or to prophesy which we immediately did. I remember very little from the Intermediate or Advanced classes. How was it taught that we should operate the other 6 manifestations? Didn't we have to ask God or wait to receive a word of knowledge and a word of wisdom before we could use faith to do gifts of healings ,working of miracles and discerning of spirits. So why could we always do the first 3 whenever somebody asked us in a believer's meeting but not the other 6 should somebody ask (like someone on their death bed)? This doesn't make sense if it's the same GP for all 9 all the time, or maybe I'm just missing something. (This is assuming people are still called upon to manifest in a believer's meeting. Maybe they've done away with this.)

Thanks for your reply Bolshevik. I can assume, going by your posts on GSC, that going (or being sent) to New Knoxville under those conditions was anything but healing for you. It probably did isolate you more under the guise of twi keeping you under their wing.

I take everything you say about your years as a child to heart. My own son grew up in twi until we left when he was 8 years old. Your post sparked a small memory that my son did speak in tongues and might even have interpreted. I don't recall teaching him about this though. He did attend children's fellowship at the Rock of Ages for quite a few years. Maybe he saw other kids doing it there. I'll have to ask him what he remembers. Your experiences growing up in twi are so different from mine and my children's. You were quite close to everything going on while we lived in a different country where twi was very small compared to the states and we never went into the Corps. My heart goes out to you for what you went through . Thanks for sharing the above.

Thank you to everyone who shared their experiences and knowledge about SIT. You are all wonderful!

Thanks WordWolf - I had forgotten about this website. It did have what I was looking for under the Letter and Questions page. I've posted the part below. (the underlining is mine) Q. I have discovered several errors in The Way and have begun to discard some of its practices. The Way emphasizes speaking in tongues so heavily that I wonder if I should stop this, but I believe the Bible does not condemn it. What should I do? A. There is room for difference of opinion on this question, but consider this: Most Way members were committed believers before they were led astray. The Apostle Paul presents an excellent description of this in his second letter to the Corinthian church: "I hope you will put up with a little of my foolishness; but you are already doing that. I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy. I promised you to one husband, to Christ, so that I might present you as a pure virgin to him. But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent's cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough... Why? Because I do not love you? God knows I do! And I will keep on doing what I am doing in order to cut the ground from under those who want an opportunity to be considered equal with us in the things they boast about. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ" (II Corinthians 11:1-4, 11-13). Return to the practice you had before joining the Way. If speaking in tongues was beneficial, then continue it if you wish. If, however, you began speaking in tongues during Power for Abundant Living or under Way tutelage, then do not continue this practice, because The Way is promoting a "different spirit" and counterfeit manifestations, as 2 Corinthians 11 describes. One finds evangelical believers who speak in tongues and others who do not. I don't know if I agree with him or not. I do continue to SIT the same way as when I first started at the end of the pfal class. Thankfully a lot of info has been shared with me recently on this thread so I want to go through it and consider everything.

Thanks so much for showing all the threads - I really appreciate it. I have found the many different discussions on GSC to be interesting and helpful. Thanks again.

Actually this isn't the one I found earlier. That one had a recommendation for people for began to speak in tongues because of the pfal class. Does anyone know of this website?

I found it http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/vp_stiles.htm

This is both a bit funny and sad at the same time. Thanks for sharing it. I'm looking for an article by John Juedes that I found quite a while ago about SIT at the end of the pfal class.

Thanks T-Bone for your email. I know Mike had a problem with me using footnotes, unlike the caveman above - too I guess. Your wrote above, "Reflecting on my former TWI-mindset, a lot of my concepts I adopted from wierwille’s idiosyncratic and self-centered perspective. I’ve got my own holy spirit – woo-hoo I’m a big deal ! Oh, the thrill of ownership!!!! " I find the 2 uses of the words "your spirit" in twi's GP bothersome. It seems supported by vp's teaching on body, soul and spirit. Before being born again, man is body and soul only. After being born again, man is now body, soul and spirit. So, since the spirit is now in my body, it has become my spirit. It makes the spirit so miniscule this way when compared to it being God's spirit in me.

Hi T-Bone, do you or anyone else know of someone who has had a different experience than the above when they first began to speak in tongues? Do you know of people who spoke in tongues following vp's instructions, but who later realized it wasn't genuine?

The unsettling part of this is that like most people in twi now, I used to believe the GP when I was in twi. Never questioned it once - just complete ignorance on my part that it were teachings like this that were behind the absent Christ in my life, and I wasn't even aware that Christ was absent because of how focused I was on the "man of god for our day and time" aka vp and his teachings while being surrounded by "like-minded believers". How to move on? I think of what Jesus said in John 14:27, "Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid." Jesus will set things right, maybe only in part now but one day, in all things.

Exactly and why would God even need to teach, or the spirit of truth need to learn, as stated in the twi's GP while the verses say that the spirit will hear, will take [2x])? Google's definition of "teach" is to show or explain to (someone) how to do something so what's their sick reason for using the word teach? Maybe they just wanted it to flow with the next part of their sick GP that says "Your spirit teaches your mind." (I wish there was a "vomit" emoji.)

Google definition of imply: strongly suggest the truth or existence of (something not expressly stated). Why do they have to imply anything when verses 14 and 15 expressly state the truth. And they do more than just imply when the article later declares what the GP is: The great principle we see from these verses is that God, Who is Spirit, teaches His creation in you, which is now your spirit. Your spirit teaches your mind. Then your spiritual power becomes manifested in the senses realm as you act or as you speak out.

Even after being on GSC for months, I am still shocked, deeply saddened and angry by the continued deception twi uses when teaching on scriptures concerning Jesus. The words in purple below are taken from twi's article on the Great Principle (GP), the website for which is shown on page 1 of this thread. (the strikethroughs are mine) Referring to the gift of holy spirit, John 16:13 says, “…for he [it] shall not speak of himself [itself]; but whatsoever he [it] shall hear, that shall he [it] speak….” This implies that your spirit, the gift, hears and learns from God and obeys what He tells it to say. Nowhere in this verse does it say the spirit of truth learns from God! We can see this again in verse 15 - no you do not! Verse 15 tells you exactly who is giving the words to the spirit of truth. Jesus Christ says, “All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he [it, the gift of holy spirit] shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.” This is the first part of our basic principle—God, Who is Spirit, teaches your spirit. This verse does not say “God…teaches…!” Jesus says that all the Father has is his (Jesus’), then he says the spirit of truth shall take of mine (Jesus’) and shall shew it unto you – the Spirit of truth takes from Jesus! Jesus just got the ax (discharged, fired, expelled, rejected) deliberately by twi! The next verse – which they left out in their article – confirms verse 13. 14 He will glorify me (Jesus) because it is from me (Jesus) that he will receive what he will make known to you. So much for twi's rightly dividing of God's word.

Thanks OldSkool, Romans 8 is pretty clear about there being a spirit of Christ that is different from the spirit/soul of man. I agree with what you say about vp's teaching on spirit.

Very interesting post T-Bone. Quick question for now. You wrote:, "The spirit…the mind…the soul…are we talking about the same thing?" For soul - are you referring to “soul life” (not sure anymore what this is) or “spirit life?” Your quotes above on the role of the Holy Spirit relates to the Spirit giving life.

As a follow up to what I wrote above, I believe the gift of holy spirit is not an "it" as twi would want us to believe. The spirit in us is alive and life giving. twi might argue that a tree is a living thing and we call it an "it," but the big difference is that you cannot converse with a tree nor have a personal relationship with one. They want to call the gift of holy spirit an "it" (like a car) so that they can insist that the spirit needs to be operated by us. That leaves the Greek pronoun for "the spirit" being interpreted as "he" which it is in most Bible versions. I'm okay with that whether the spirit is a separate entity in addition to God and Jesus or not. What I do know is that because of the gift of holy spirit in us, we can have a 2-way relationship and fellowship with both God and Christ who are the source of all spiritual blessings.

Mike, blame me all you want for not reading my "long posts" (like yours are always short.) I did use footnotes to keep my latest one short and to the point and even said you could ignore them if you wanted. As to "who said what to whom," I told you in one post that I put my words in italics and the next time I used "You wrote" and "I wrote." I'm sorry if all these three aids were too complicated for you to follow. Based on your last two posts to me, I believe you just didn't want to read or think about my post about Christ. As you said, you prefer discussing "more important things" like the Great Principle. No problem, I'm willing to move on too.

I think Mike might have given up on me since I've become a "wrangler" in his mind. This could be a , a , a or just plain sad for which I could use a (and a hot chocolate)!

Good point!

How was Paul portrayed? Wasn't this when vp said Paul was out of fellowship with God because he had not listened to some prophecies telling him not to go but he went anyway so vp said the most Paul could do was almost convince Agrippa to become a Christian? I can't remember for sure but vp might even have said that Paul never won anyone to the Lord after this. I have to question if he was accurate about this.

Sorry, this post is long but mostly because of the footnotes below (which can be ignored), but I am trying to be thorough and accurate. You wrote: I spotted the pattern after Twinky and Nathan's wrangle, so when Charity set me up for a third time I asked her if she was going to do the same wrangle, before I answered to her setup. My question sailed right over her head… My corrections Mike: · You did not ask me that question at all. You asked me, “Why do you ask, Charity?” in response to 1my reply to you on a different thread. · Your question did not sail right over my head. 2I answered it. · I did not set you up and my questions were not a setup – this idea was in your head - it was not in my heart. You would have realized this if you had read the 3beginning of my post. Instead you sent me a 4snarky response to it. You wrote: …and she immediately found my answer falling short. Then WHY do you go back and forth for pages about "intellectual" topics (e.g., the "go-cart" analogy) when the posters obviously find your answers “falling short.” I did get personal in my reply to your answers because the topic was about having a personal relationship with Christ, our Lord and Savior. I suggest you use the disclaimer "Do not reply!" in the future if you want to end a topic prematurely. 1I wrote, “It would be nice to hear you talk more about the "ever present Christ, spiritually within us." What does this mean to you? Other than being inside us, how do you fellowship with Christ throughout the day? 2I am interested in hearing about Christ in your life without any mention of the collaterals. 3Hi, my replies are in italics. I am asking Christ for guidance as I respond. Looking back on what you wrote Mike, I see a pattern of you saying and doing things that sound and look godly but without a sense of warmth, affection, comfort or friendliness in how you speak about Christ in your life. You will see what I mean when/if you read my replies. It makes me think about my relationships with others throughout my life. Except for my very best friend in childhood, I kept an emotional distance from others. Even though my mother took good care of me, I never experienced a close relationship with her (except at her death bed) because most of her true self was oppressed because of my father's treatment of her. My relationship with my father was a desperate need for his love and trying to please him enough so that he would stop drinking (i.e., codependent). Only my children could opened up my heart to feel, give and receive such warmth. I have no idea if this describes any part of your life, but if it does, I can honestly say that within the past few months from being on GSC, my relationship with God and Christ has begun to change from an intellectual knowledge of them to a personal one. 4How'd I do on that, not mentioning the collaterals, ma'am? I haven't gone back to read my post yet [the one I sent you], so I'm hearing TV game show music in my head as I prepare to go read it. If you were my English Comp. 101 professor, and considering the brevity of my requested essay, what grade would you give me? Try to keep that grade separate from the grade you'd give me as a Theology professor would, reading the same mini essay.