Charity

5 hours ago, chockfull said:

I think you are hyper personalizing a conversation.  I was just answering the question you asked.

Are you saying you are not and have never been like that ?

Just asking.

Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?

If so does not this obsessive type of mindset lead you to a conclusion in and of itself?

Yes this like many others are posed as rhetorical questions.  So I think I am going to stop answering the answers to rhetorical questions sorry.

I think I found my mistake.  When I had asked what “scribe mode” meant, your answer was “grammatical experts” and added that these were the ones who wandered around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the Sabbath.  So then going back to your statement to me, “How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this,” I thought you were saying that I had been in a scribe mode which meant I was being like those correcting-grammatical experts. When I asked if this was what you were saying, I included John 5:15,16 because it had to do with your example of Jesus healing a man on the Sabbath.  This is where I let my emotions take me over the top. 

Looking back, it would have been better to have simply asked if you were implying that I was in the grammatical-expert mode and if so, why.  After going through everyone’s postings for the past 3 pages in search of the ones that were between the two of us, I saw how I probably did go into the scribe mode when I quoted Rom 10:8-13 in response to your questions. 

I also realize that I had detoured from what you wanted to discuss: whether confessing Rom 10:9,10 entailed a rote formulaic approach to the new birth as well as how you thought that PFAL’s version of the new birth was to go through a Rom 10:9,10 checklist thereby forgetting about or replacing Jesus.  My apologies on both matters.  I do feel that this is an important topic, so I will begin to respond to it in my next posting to you.

2 hours ago, chockfull said:

I think you are hyper personalizing a conversation.  I was just answering the question you asked.

Are you saying you are not and have never been like that ?

Just asking.

Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?

If so does not this obsessive type of mindset lead you to a conclusion in and of itself?

Yes this like many others are posed as rhetorical questions.  So I think I am going to stop answering the answers to rhetorical questions sorry.

Chockfull, I don't know how we've come to this point?  I feel bad about it.  I'm going through all of our posts to each other from the last two pages to understand why you would ask me, "Is the only thing you are gaining from this conversation a series of hyper personalized perceived “accusations” or slights?" to which my immediate reply is no.

45 minutes ago, chockfull said:

Does God interact with you at all?  Does He answer prayer?  Or is He just up there as a rule enforcer and lo shanta interpreter?  Who gives an approving smile when you SIT enough during a day?

I think if you've read what I've written since I started posting on page 37 in this thread, you would know my answer to these questions.

18 minutes ago, chockfull said:

I personally used to carry around 3x5 cards of word studies.  A lot of them surrounding the various adjectives and adverbs around the Holy Spirit field.  I used to agonize over making every last detail of every scripture fit. 

A harmony of the gospels where each book was written many decades after the events occurred is going to have discrepancies.  They were written by men.  To try and enforce a foolish consistency among them is hogwash.  To use that to exploit people to pull them away from their Christian support groups and home churches to follow a pied piper is more wrong.  It is lust and power personified.

There is great learning in scripture study, prayer, discussion of scripture topics.

My views on extreme fundamentalism are kind of echoed by Ralph Waldo Emerson a famous writer.

”A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds”

 

I was very much like you Chockfull in my "need" to have the scriptures fit together (like a hand in a glove) as we were taught was of utmost importance in the cult TWI.  As was often STRESSED, I very much wanted to study to show myself approved unto God, a workman that wouldn't have to be ashamed.  I'm learning to loosen up on all this since being on GSC. 

I agree there is great value in scripture study and that this needs to be done along with prayer and discussion of scripture topics. The religious groups I've found on the internet almost always have a section detailing their "beliefs" which I think are the topics from which they won't on.  However, from my experience with The Vineyard church (which is the only church I've spent time with after TWI), I found that most would openly discuss scripture topics without coming down on you and saying things like "you are very prideful because you don't believe in what our church teaches" as do those in extreme fundamentalism.  I would agree they have "little minds" since I used to be one.

3 minutes ago, chockfull said:

The Greek word for scribe is “grammeteis”

Meaning grammatical expert.  They were the ones in the day wandering around correcting Jesus on various things like healing a man on the sabbath.

I think some of my later posts after this get what I mean by personal experience.

So when you said earlier, "How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?" are you saying I was acting like a "grammatical expert?" who you then said were the Jews wandering around correcting Jesus on various things?  John 5:15,16 talks about these specific Jews (who were also probably among the Jews who later on were screaming for Jesus be crucified).

John 5:15 The man went away, and told the Jews that it was Jesus who made him whole.

16 And for this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things on the Sabbath.

Just asking.

24 minutes ago, chockfull said:

I like that you included the much forgotten context, even if just v8.

How about focusing on the other question rather than back into scribe mode on this?

If God would not discard the young child for possibly doing 2 out of the 3 steps of the above, or not being mature enough to comprehend the above detail, how did we get here for everyone else?

The new birth is a personal matter.  As is a personal relationship with Christ.  God looks on the heart, not the rote activity of an individual.

Chockfull, what does "back into scribe mode on this" mean?

Also, to help me with answering your question from your previous post, I need to ask you about "The new birth is a personal matter." sentence above.   How do you personally know if you have the new birth?  What did you personally do to get it?

13 minutes ago, chockfull said:

A very interesting detail about this that is not really widely know I discovered by researching Baker & Hostetler legal actions over time.

I discovered a lawsuit filed by them against the insurance company for the liability insurance they carried on the BOD.  They were trying to collect back insurance money from the insurers over the lawsuit settlement.

So whatever the payout was, which is surmised to be a multi million dollar lawsuit, was paid out straight out of your ABS.  I’m not sure if they successfully collected it back from the insurance company or not the settlement of that suit was not public.

Interesting.

19 minutes ago, chockfull said:

They were not criminal but part of the Allen lawsuit.  So this is a civil litigation matter.  Thus they went away with the lawsuit settlement as opposed to criminal charges pressed by a district attorney which are pursued by tax dollars.

Okay, thanks

4 minutes ago, chockfull said:

Here’s another question for you.  Confessing Romans 10:9,10.  What does this entail for you?  A rote formulaic approach to the new birth?  Like PFAL taught SIT?  You do 1,2,3 and by fulfilling the formula God come through His end?

Where is the detail regarding accepting Jesus as Lord?

Outside of all the scribe like mental waste of time,  do you think our Heavenly Father who is love and light would leave an innocent in some state of outer darkness because of a poor choice of a parent?

 

Good questions.  The answer to the second one is no.  The first one I have to think on a bit.  I'll start with Romans 10:8-13 and get back to you.

8 On the contrary, what does it say?  The message is near to you, in your mouth and in your heart (that is, the message of trust that we are proclaiming),

9 because if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from among the dead, you will be saved.

10 For with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made, resulting in salvation.

11 For the Scripture says, Whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.

12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord  is Lord of all, enriching all who call on him;

13 for everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.

Checking Bible Hub just now, I'm seeing that each of the "will be saved" above is in the "future indicative passive." 

This really seems like something for the "Doctrine" thread.  Should we go there?

4 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

GSC was a huge factor in finding my way out of twi. I was literally at HQ when the Allen lawsuit was underway. I saw firsthand the dishonest coverup but likely would have swallowed the hook that Martindale's affair was one time and mutually consensual. GSC opened my eyes to the obvious. TWI is a corrupt organization that was facing RICO charges and those charges were going to trial because the judge upheld them after TWI sought to dismiss. What I learned here is the problem was decades old, led straight back to wierwille, and was an established pattern of abuse. I witnessed the whitewash as twi still strives to be legitimate. I've spoken on that topic extensively over the years.

GSC still matters.

What ever happened with the RICO charges?

13 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

That's all they are. Literally. The only power they ever have is by the agreement of those they seek to control.

13 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

That's all they are. Literally. The only power they ever have is by the agreement of those they seek to control.

This is why I've come to believe that GSC is so important and pray that more who are still in the cult will be lead to it.

Whoops I did it again (quoted OldSkool twice) .  I'll go back right now and look for the posts sent to me previously on how to fix this problem.

P.S.  I love the happy face option above.  (I took this one to mean silly me).

1 hour ago, OldSkool said:

the way international is nothing more than a 501-c3 corporation that reflects the delusional practices of it's founder. You would be sanctified before, during, or after your time in TWI because they dont matter. All they have is mental bondage. Set that aside and they have nothing. Rosalie is a delusional liar to think she has ever determined spiritual consequences in someones life because she wields a salt dish and can quote scripture out of context. Mental bondage. 

So this cult is considered a 501-c3 corporation. therefore it doesn't have to pay taxes on the money that fear-controlled members give to it (many I'm sure with a grudging heart) because it uses the words God, Bible, Jesus Christ, etc.  WOW, to me, that sounds like a big no-no .

6 hours ago, WordWolf said:

With the "administration" approach, no 2 administrations remain in effect alongside each other.  (We can also start drifting into "replacement theology", where Christians supposedly REPLACED Israel, and so on.) 

It's my personal opinion that God's Covenant with Israel remains in effect, and God's Covenant with Christians remains in effect.   I think Jesus, among others, tried to make a point about that very thing, where one person is promised one thing, and another is promised another, and each received what they were promised, independently of each other.

 

I was going to give a reply but I've changed my mind.  I have to go to that "testing or training" site someone mentioned earlier because I'm not sure what to do when this happens.  I'll submit my reply, and try to see if I can delete it so it doesn't show up.  Sorry - "learning curve" and all that

6 hours ago, WordWolf said:

I Corinthians 15: 20-28 (NASB)

²⁰ But the fact is, Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. ²¹ For since by a man death came, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead. ²² For as in Adam all die, so also in ^[i]Christ all will be made alive. ²³ But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, ²⁴ then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to our God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. ²⁵ For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. ²⁶ The last enemy that will be abolished is death. ²⁷ For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is clear that ^[j]this excludes the Father who put all things in subjection to Him. ²⁸ When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

========================

It wouldn't be a bad idea to discuss this in a separate thread, probably in Doctrinal.  I'd prefer to discuss what the Greek said in those verses rather than any English version, since they all will put their own spin on the subject, intentionally or not. 

When someone switches the topic over to "Doctrine," are others involved in the discussion notified somehow?

6 hours ago, WordWolf said:

The final disposition of all humanity (is everyone everywhere and everywhen saved?)  is a good subject for at least 1 thread.  Unfortunately, a few posters got cagey talking around the subject (freaking WHY?), and when I made a thread for the subject, they refused to discuss it.   Too bad, I think there's a lot to say on the subject.

Grease Spotters get cagey - no way!  Who would have thought this was possible? lol

7 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

The sad irony is these are the very things one stands to lose by remaining in a cult, by imitating victor, by standing on his shoulders. 

So f'ing true!  I'm really ....$ed off right now.

7 hours ago, T-Bone said:

This is one of their most effective control tactics.

I think one of the strongest “gravitational pulls” that kept me in line was a fear of what could happen to me or my family if I left…tripped out or copped out.

I remember one very ominous teaching in the way corps. wierwille’s go-to passage for instilling fear in devoted followers was   John 13    - Jesus predicts his betrayal during an evening meal with the disciples, then “As soon as Judas had taken the bread, he went out. And it was night.” (verse 30). wierwille adapted John’s frequent use of something having double meaning – wierwille elaborated on “it was night” for his own fearmongering - stating unequivocally that the only alternative to the ministry that taught you the rightly divided word was oblivion. You walk out on wierwille/TWI it will be night! spiritual darkness. Really bad things happen under the cover of night.

whenever I thought of my future – I could never imagine leaving TWI. The possibility of tripping out / copping out was not a viable option. Thinking of a scenario like that was almost like entertaining thoughts of suicide, or what catastrophes would befall my wife and kids if I tripped out. My life, my dreams, my identity, my hopes, my family’s safety, and security were all wrapped up in my being loyal to the ministry.

Harmful and controlling cults are really crafty fvckers – they exploit primal fears and leave it up to us to construct our own mental prisons.

I'm just stunned and so disheartened.  You wrote, "I remember one very ominous teaching in the way corps."  vp didn't pull any punches with you guys.  You got it full blast.  Does anyone know if it was this bad earlier on in the 6th Corps?

Fear seemed to be full tilt when it concerned breaking a commitment to twi, (even more so when a salt covenant was made).  I left the ministry 3 times and only once did I "fall apart" because of fear - that was when I left the WOW field. 

So many things about the ministry have suddenly become clear from being on this website.  I have never used the word "cult" in my postings - I've always said twi or the ministry.  I've described it as cult-like I think once.  Now I understand why I read the word "cult" so often in many of the posts, often with the "f-word" attached to it.  It really is that bad!

What is "Irish Eyes Internet" on the "Donate" page?

45 minutes ago, OldSkool said:

They consider a person that has left as no longer part of the functioning body of Christ. Still born again, but rewards eliminated and serious consequences to the ones who leave the protection of the household. That little trick is even heavier handed on the way corps with their stupid salt covenant. I actually heard straight out of Rosalie Rivenbarks mouth that the consequences for leaving the way corps are way worse because of the salt covenant.

But sanctification is not a reward - it's what we received from God when we were born again as stated in 1 Cor 1:30, "But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:"  So if a Christian is still born again when he/she leaves TWI, then he/she would still be sanctified.  And if he/she is still sanctified, then 1 Cor 7:14 would still apply.  Right?

9 hours ago, OldSkool said:

Jesus Christ purpose it helps to understand that he is well into his mission of restoring the creation. Essentially Jesus Christ will reign until he has restored the creation and wrested it from the hands of the enemy. He will do what Adam never did...give it all back to God in a symbolic act of obedience and love. I mean it's not that God isn't still one in purpose with Christ. They go hand in hand. Yey, Christ will still lay it all back at the Father's feet instead of keeping it for himself.

Jesus Christ is bringing a new creation into reality. The new birth is the down payment of that creation. At our full redemption at the gathering we will know fully as we are fully known.

There has been so much great stuff to think about from today's posts but I must admit, I'm fading away (getting sleepy).  Apparently I posted the above without a reply from me underneath.  Well thanks to a couple of you, I knew how to edit it in order to add my two cents.

Okay, I think I'm getting it - the title of each "administration" is man made and they are nowhere to be found in the Bible.  So what's written in Revelations is simply what's going to happen in the future.  It doesn't need the title of the "Revelation Administration."  Likewise, the Gospels are about the life of Jesus and does not need to be called the "Christ Administration."  If you stop referring to administrations, you can then get rid of all the man-made teaching that goes along with explaining them.  If I've got this right, it's not a problem letting that doctrine go.

I forgot to include it in the quote above, but I love your line about Jesus not keeping it all to himself when the end comes.  Reminds me of Raffi's "Sharing Song" that my students liked to sing.  It beings with "It's mine but you can have some, with you I'd like to share it..." only in the above case, Jesus would sing to God, "It's mine and you can't have none of it."  Too funny.

1 hour ago, waysider said:

It was often used as a pressure tactic to elicit loyalty to TWI.

"You can't leave now. "What will happen to your kids?"

So they're basically saying that if you leave, you are no longer a Christian and therefore you and your kids are no longer sanctified.  Unbelievable!

3 hours ago, T-Bone said:

Rocky recommended a really cool book      Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived by Rob Bell   a while back  and started a thread about the book    [ to get an idea of the book check out this thread – here  ] .

I’ve read it a couple of times – it’s one of my new favorites. Come to think of it – interesting you brought it up on this thread cuz Love Wins opened my eyes to see God’s love is immeasurably bigger than I could conceive of…You might find some answers and comfort to your concern…and in chapter 6 the author’s scripture references got me to rethink of the pervasive presence and influence of Jesus Christ in the world. 

I should be receiving the book "Undertow" by Charlene Edge any day now.  After I've finished that I would like to read Love Wins.  I will check on the thread you sent me.  Thanks!

7 hours ago, T-Bone said:

Start out with the human condition – no one is perfect…this world is not perfect…take a schlep like me for example.

Is this similar to being a "wretch like me" in the song Amazing Grace?  Inquiring minds just want to know  .  I never understood why TWI changed a "wretch" to a "soul" in that song.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, Nathan_Jr said:

Where else? What is the alternative?

Now that you've asked, I think that if they're not old enough or if they're mentally unable to understand and confess Rom 10:9,10 and get born again thereby becoming a member in the body of Christ (as is the case with my grandson), there is no way God would punish them like those who will be in the resurrection of the unjust.  So that only leaves going to heaven, either at the gathering together or with the resurrection of the just.  I personally prefer at the gathering together but either way, they will be resurrected to life .

17 hours ago, WordWolf said:

So, I swore fealty to Jesus and am his liegeman, he is my liege-lord.  He swore fealty to God Almighty.

God and Jesus are one in purpose, and work together, having worked together for at least 2,000 years.   If they are one in other ways, that only reinforces what needs no reinforcement to me. 

 Corinthians 15: 23-28 I prefer the NASB version of the same verses, they're a little clearer, IMHO.

²³ But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, after that those who are Christ’s at His coming, ²⁴ then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to our God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. ²⁵ For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. ²⁶ The last enemy that will be abolished is death. ²⁷ For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is clear that ^[j]this excludes the Father who put all things in subjection to Him. ²⁸ When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

In what is to come, all will be made subject to Jesus......

...except God Almighty, Who subjected everything to Jesus- He won't be subject to Jesus.  Once everything is subject to Jesus, then Jesus is subjected (as if he isn't now) to God Almighty, subjecting everything to God through Jesus, "that God may be all in all."

 

This is very interesting because verse 24 does say “then” as in ‘at that time’, and not before.  Until Jesus hands over the kingdom to our God and Father, until he has abolished all rule and all authority and power, until he has put all his enemies under his feet including the last enemy, death, and until he has put all things in subjection under his feet, verse 25 says he must reign. Then the son himself will also be subjected to God, so that God may be all in all.

So first he reigns and then at the end, he subjects himself to God.  What is all involved in his reigning?  Is it only accomplishing the 4 "untils" listed above?  Is he working on the 4 "untils" during the Grace admin or does he begin only after he gathers the body of believers?  TWI did teach that Jesus was not a king and did not have a kingdom during the Grace admin.  During that time, he was our Lord and the head of the body of Christ.  Were they accurate on this doctrine?