templelady

Oldies, I have no problem accepting that this is not the TWI you and others personally experienced, I just wish that you could accept that this is the TWI the rest of us did. For us, having TWI claim that they were the only ones with the truth, put us in a spiritual straightjacket--if you believed this, there is absolutely no reason why you would ever go looking elsewhere because less of the truth is never as good as all of the truth. If you believed that VPW was taught directly from God, then there is no reason you would ever go looking to see if other scholars had published the ideas VPW presented as his own before him. If, in fact, God had revealed, or allowed others to find these truths, before VPW was told then GOd would have lied when he told VPW that he was going to teach VPW the truth as it had not been taught SINCE the first century church--and God is not a liar. Add to the above the idea that leaving the household (TWI) would cause disaster to fall on your family, supported by anecdotal evidence of such cases as needed, would mean that most of us were in a mental, emotional bind that restricted our ability to act on a physical plane. Should we have been more open minded, more questioning more proactive? Of course we should have--but when it comes to spritual matters most of us had been conditioned since childhood to believe that only a select few have the pipeline to God, and it is imperative to find one of those select few in order to understand what God wants us to do. Back to the subject of LCM--VPW selected someone who would maintain the fiction that VPW had created and keep the skeletons buried--someone who was power hungry enough that to do so would be in his vested self interests. LCM was tailor made for the job.

One of the advantages to being constantly on probation, or what passed for probation in the mid 80's, meant that I lacked the spritual awareness to be drafted very often. I still did a lot of free work, and not of my choosing either, but far less than many.

SIT as TWI taught it was corrupted. Having experienced the real, I can only say that when that gift becomes part of a persons life experiences it is a profoundly uplifting and changing experience. As to referring to the manifestation of any of the gifts of the spirit as baby: it is my opinion that all gifts are exactly what is needed and in what measure when they are manifested. Hence to declare that any person so manifesting is doing "baby" manifesting is in fact dengrating the manifestation as presented by the person manifesting.

VPW made the choice to read others ideas and opinions about spritual matters. VPW made the choice to accept some of those ideas and opinions as true VPW made the choice to write his own books etc incorporating those ideas VPW made the chioce NOT to cite the persons and sources from where he obtained those ideas and opinions thus committing plagiarism. Does the act of plagiarism invalidate the ideas and opinions? NO Does the act of plagiarism by persons other than VPW make VPW not guilty of plagiarism? NO Plagiarism was committed, whether the outcome of the resulting printed materials was that those ideas and opinions were shared with people who might have never heard them otherwise is irrelevant to the question of whether plagiarism was commited. Whether those ideas and opinions helped people who read VPW's works is irrelevant to whether plagiarism was commmited. I have never understood why it is so difficult for many to understand this.

Sounds like fun--- I wonder of I can find a wandering semi down the road a piece **Mo is really really tired of not being home and anything sounds good****** Seriously, glad no one was injured.

Making faces at a dog???? Okay, I understand the logic that says a criminal killing or maiming a police dog while the dog is "on duty" is the same as injuring any other member of the police force. Logic dictates that the next thing the perp will go after is the human partner. But making faces??? I'm not sure that making faces should even be called a crime if done toward a human police officer. Some things, while rude and uncalled for, just aren't criminal. Annoying and disrespectful but not criminal. There has to be more to this story, right!? I mean arguing or name calling or something.

Look, VPW was at the root of all things a man who knew in his heart of hearts that there was no way he could live up to his self-promoted billing. He found himself in the predicament many of the rest of us have at certain times in our lives, when we overstated our abilities or accomplishments. There comes a time when you have two choices in this situation, you can "come clean" and admit that you either bit off more than you could chew or that you exaggerated. This is a very humiliating position, and most of us hate being humiliated--but we end up facing the music because honesty seems the best way out for us even considering the initial pain involved. VPW, took the other road, adding more untruths to the mix to sustain the original fabrications. Plagerism,in this case, was his only option. To admit that his ideas and teachings came from others was to admit that the pedestal he carved for himself, instead of being marble, was swiss cheese. Like most "sins" it was insideous--each act required more acts in that tangled web of deceit. I often wonder if VPW had been content to be a country pastor without the need for a grandious image, how much good he could have done in his congregations life. He definitely had a gift for drawing people to him, and I think that there was in him a desire to know God, and a desire to help others. Too bad that he allowed the sin of pride to lead to that slipperly slope wherein much of the good he could have done was never allowed to come to fruition.

Maybe I am missing something --but the last I heard they have hospitals in jails, or at least infirmiraries [sic]. People serve time with cancer, diabeties and a host of other diseases. Are we to believe that somehow Ms Hilton's illness is of such a unique character that it could not be addressed in the penal system??? Yeah the cash talked--shame on the State of California which, to avoid having to pay her medical bills, turned her loose. The important thing, IMO, was for her to serve her time in that very unpleasent atmosphere of the penal system in the hopes that she would begin to realize that she needed to think about the consequences before acting. Now that opportunity is gone, once again her folks have come to her rescue and spared their "little girl" from having to face the music. How very sad for Paris, her parents are making her a ethical cripple by shielding her. People , no matter their economic status, do their children a great diservice by protecting them from the realities of cause and effect.

I remembered--but only after being reminded on the news. That is really sad when you consider that my dad's brother, my Uncle Phil, landed on day three at Omaha. Most people don't realize that there were still German bunkers on the hill even at day three and my uncle came ashore with comrades literally dropping beside him as they were raked by those bunkers. To my Uncle Phil To my Uncle Bob To my Father To my Great Uncle Donald To all the rest of the brave men and women who not only landed on D-day but all the other landings in all parts of the world, I offer my thanks and gratitude.

11 million Only makes my point more valid and the entire episode more horrific BTW thanks for the correct Raf

The thing that has always bothered me the most abot the "Myth of the Six Million" is the fact that the crux of the situation is completely obscured. SIX MILLION PEOPLE DIED!! That is the important thing, in the final analysis that is the thing to remember. Hitler killed six million people, whether by gun, or gassing, malnutrition, disease is irrelevant. Arguing that they weren't REALLY Jews; that if they weren't gassed; if they were somehow undesirable in other ways, homosexuality, mentally ill, handicapped, etc.; in no way changes this fact. Again we see VPW at what he did best--getting people so wrapped up in studying the trees that they completely lost sight of the fact they were wandering in a forest and getting progressively more lost.

Making fun of a fellow human who has been caught "with his pants down" imparts knowledge in what way? Obviously this was reported in the news, since everyone knew about it, so it didn't impart knowledge as to letting others know what had happened since they already knew. They clearly knew the behavior was wrong so it didn't impart that kind of knowledge. The only knowledge I see being imparted was that when a fellow human is caught sinning the correct response from a Christian is to make that person an object of ridicule. Is that really the message that should be sent? I know non Christians who don't think that way. Sad, so very sad.

The cussing, the women, the drinking, the (insert whatever vice) were all part and parcel of the idea that once you were "born again" you couldn't lose your salvation. Therefore, everything was permissable, cussing in spittle strewn diatribes became a way to show that you were secure in your "new birth" that you knew you were saved, that nothing could change that. No, I am not of the "once saved always saved" camp, and am not seeking to debate the issue on this thread -just offereing my viewpoint as to the why of the cussing etc.

With my own life as an example I think it is possible for even the most degenerate person to change. That is one of the promises of God--there can be a new life, a new beginning. While for many of us the idea of LCM ever wanting to change is dificult to grasp and/or comprehend, I do not discount the possiblity. So Craig, if you are lurking or posting here, I for one would be interested in what you have to say. I would even go so far as to promise that I would hear you out and respond WITHOUT resorting to flaming of any kind. I think many of my fellow GSCers would be willing to hear, not like or condone, what you have to say if you do it honestly and with no self justification for the more horrendous of your misdeeds. If you truly want a new start, a new beginning, this is the place to find it , amoung those who followed you, and who were hurt by you. Some will never forgive you, some actions created pain so horrific that the scars will always remain. But a MAN, a man of courage and of principle would face those so hurt face on. What, at this point in your life, do you have to lose?

Becoming my *real self* is a work in process. It's takes courage and not just the courage to be free of TWI, bad marriages and toxic relationships in general. It takes courage to face who you are at a personal level--I still keep having to face the less desirable parts of my character. And you have to do that so that you can really relish the good parts of your character. For me the biggest thing was getting rid of "secrets" In regards to my personal life. I try not to have any. My life is an open book--don't get me wrong I do not race thruogh town broadcasting my flaws and past sins to the world--but I don't lie when confronted about them either I think one of the Dukes of Wellington said it best when threatened with blackmail he said, "publish and be damned" Once you let go of the secrets in your life you are relieved of the onerous task of keeping part of yourself hidden and you no longer carry the thought around with you that goes "but would they like me if they knew ----about me?"

I know that some of the young men form my ward at church have formed a group that goes about once a month. They have a blast, and really enjoy themselves. I can think of far less wholesome ways to spend a daythan plenty of fresh air, good companions, a bit of a challenge--if I were younger and in better health I wouldn't mind giving it a try.

Laws are necessary in order for liberty for all to exist. Law is not necessary if a an individual wants total liberty to do as they please, when they please in fact laws would be antithical to the process. To declare that one law a "law of liberty" can encompass all that liberty means is a futile attempt IMO to quantify a belief.

You having more, self proclaimed, spiritual ability DOES NOT equate to others having NO spiritual ability Phileo is desirable Christ wanted us to extend phileo love to ALL UNCONDITIONALLy thus agape' THe practice of Agape toward one's fellow man is to be strived for-- but nowhere in scripture to I find that Heavenly Father declares any form of love as inferior or of little worth. He wants us to expand the love we already posess to agape' not discard it.

OKay johniam, let's talk about misusing Bible verses Please cite the Bible verses that say the following agape' cannot be practiced by those not "born again" I will save you some time, there isn't one. What you and jeaniam are very well versed at is taking a series of verses that are in some way tangentially [sic] connected to the topic at hand, extropolating with a little of your own opinions, stirring well and then presenting it as a fact which supports your position. In the absence of clear definite verses that address whether or not agape is possible for the non-Christian, you are basing your assertions that declare that agape' is not possible for non-Christians on YOUR interpretation of other verses. I really have no desire to get you to change your mind on your interpretation, however, it would be refreshing if you admitted that you are giving us your interpretation as opposed to trying to force down our throats the idea that what you are presenting is what "God said!".

I am reminded of an old joke Seems a local church hired a new pastor and were eagerly looking forwrad to his sermon--come Sunday the pastor stands and preaches a firely sermon the brings tears to the eyes. the congregation suitably impressed praise him as they shake his hand while leaving the church. THe next Sunday is eagerly anticipated and the pastor stands and delivers the EXACT SAME sermon as the previous Sunday. The congregation is a bit more subdued and slightly confused. On the third Sunday the past again preachs the SAME SERMON. Now, becoming alarmed, the deacons send the most senior elder to speak with the pastor. The elder gets right to the point "Pastor, we are concerned because you are preaching the same sermon over and over, what is the problem, here?" To which the pastor replies, " I'm waiting for the congregation to apply what they've been taught before moving on to the next point." Could it be that TWI is still trying to pervail and is thus stuck??

One other thing that TWI was really good at was making the individual believe that they were somehow "responsible" ie "accountable" for things beyond the individuals scope of influence. Didn't get enough people to run a class--"you people have your spritual trap doors open" Your child got hit by a car ---"it's your believing" Your husband is off having another fling with the newest Twigit--"it's your lack of meekness" And the list went on. YOu are accountable for your own actions. PERIOD. If your husband is out "keeping company" with the 18 year old at the motor coach that is your husband's accountability. If you know that the 18 year old is actually 15 and that your husband "raped" her and you do nothing by not going to the authorities you are accountable, at least in part, for what happens to her thereafter in regards to the situation. Notice I didn't say that the right choice was easy, or that the mental and emotional state you were in at the time made it near impossible--we are talking about actions that were or were not taken. There is a tendency in our culture to confuse the action with the excuse or the justification. Hence we see the man caught shoplifting in the local supermarket saying to the arresting officer with great indignation "but, I need the food for my kids" instead of admitting that he stole. God knows the excuses and justifications of why you acted as you did, and He will be generous in taking them into account. What is needed is for you to do is to admit what you did or failed to do with no suger coating.

One of the key problems facing this discussion is that those who are "born again" are invariably self -proclaimed--they say they are and with that they assume the mantle of arbitrators of the public good as well as the "correct" translators [sic] of scripture. This renders any meaningful discussion difficult at best since any disagreement with their stance automatically means you are A) wrong and B) not "born Again"-- Since I have been wrong before the possibility that I am wrong again is not without merit, even though I don't think I am wrong in this case. As to being, "born again", definitionally anyone who accepts Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior has the new birth. The "born again" nomenclature is merely a methodology devised by some to elevate themselves to a self perceived higher ground. So in an effort to get back to track it seems to me, as a Christian, that scripture is very clear. Heavenly Father created all things through Jesus Christ thus all mankind are His children for without Him there would be no life. Heavenly Father and His son Jesus Christ have a love that is all encompassing without regard to whether God's creations are worthy, merit or are in anyway deserving of that love. It is the desire of Heavenly Father that all HIs children exhibit that same agape' love toward each other. Jesus Christ exemplified that love while on this earth and exhorted and gave us directions in order that we would be able to do the same after His death and ressurection. Therefore, since all that Heavenly Father offers to his children (read All mankind) He offers to all of them and since Jesus Christ died for ALL , it seems logical and right from my perspective that agape' love is not only possible for ALL to practice but is actually practiced by people all over the world of different religious persuasions. While the word used to describe the love involved in certain circumstances may not be the Greek agape' ; unconditional, self sacrificing , and altruistic being other words; the practice is not exclusive to any one group of people.

I don't believe in reincarnation but I do consider it possible that there is something called genetic memory. It runs throught the rest of the animal kingdom and I think it very probable that when we experience deja vu what we are actually experiencing is a bit of memory from an ancestor--a memory that has somehow been encoded in our DNA.

First the "born again" theology is a fundamentalist theology the specifics of which are not uniformly codified. Strict fundamentalists will tell you that the followers of Jesus Christ, who are Lutheran, Episcopalian, LDS, Jehovah Witness, 7th Day Adventists, Presbytrerian, Congregational, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodix to name a few are not "born again" Never mind that they have accepted and belive in Jesus Christ as the Son of GOd whose Atonement was made for all of mankind. If I am to follow Jeaniam and pond's belief system it would mean that new born infants are not children of Heavenly Father. What?? The age of accountability?? so they are children of Heavenly Father but then they aren't children of Heavenly FAther after the age of Accountability??? Your own arguments don't even support themselves. I quit -- there is none so blind as those who will not see. You both have painted a world, that is so filled with law that grace no longer has a place. YOu both would do well with an outfit I heard about that is centered in New Knoxville, Ohio...you might want to check it out you should feel right at home.

That nicely sidesteps your original contention that only those "born again" are God's children. It also completely ignores my contention that not being "born again" does not mean that you can't exhibit agape love. Bottom line all people are children of Heavenly Father some people are followers of Jesus Christ -Christians" Agape love can be practiced by any person regardless of religious affliation