Even if we used Wierwille's definition, he didn't bring new light to his generation. Nothing he taught was new; most had been put into print less than ten years before he taught it.
Come on Oaks, you do yourself a dis-service with that comment..."in print 10 years earlier". It was still 'new light' to this generation, no matter who printed it. VP was the one who 'ran with it' so to speak. He was the one who initially took the 'jibes' for it and lo and behold, those who still 'run with it' today are now taking the same 'ribbing and jibes' for it, even from them who initially embraced it and now cower from it.
Come on Oaks, you do yourself a dis-service with that comment..."in print 10 years earlier". It was still 'new light' to this generation, no matter who printed it. VP was the one who 'ran with it' so to speak. He was the one who initially took the 'jibes' for it and lo and behold, those who still 'run with it' today are now taking the same 'ribbing and jibes' for it, even from them who initially embraced it and now cower from it.
But one question, though, Allan:
Where did he come up with the definition that he used?
You see above the definitions that I found lexically. I only remember him simply asserting that this was the definition. It's not, as you are plainly able to see.
There we disagree, Allan. At best, it would have been "new light" to any specific individuals who had heard Wierwille's message without ever having heard Stiles, Bullinger, etc.
As far as "taking ribs & jibes", I disagree that he was the one who "initially" took them. Any opposition to the specific doctrine could have been expressed at any point since the information was made available by the original authors. Most of the mainstream opposition to Wierwille was more due to the anti-cult hysteria of the late 70's than anything else.
But, back to the original point of the thread: Was Wierwille an apostle? The argument can be made if one accepts Wierwille's definition of apostle, and one uses an extremely broad interpretation of "bringing new light to a generation".
But, should we accept his definition? What is it based on? IMHO, it is an example of Wierwille tailoring a definition to further his doctrine.
"Cower from it"? People choose to reject Wierwillian doctrine for a variety of reasons, I don't see "cowering" as one of them!
Oddly enough, I did my research paper on Apostles - specifically Jesus Christ as The Apostle and consequently, the primary example - first use if you will - then I followed it up with the 12 apostles and their commission. I was able to show new light being brought to a generation both practically and doctrinally, both old light that was new the the generation at hand and brand new light. The examples used were Jesus Christ, the 12, and Paul.
I can expound - but I won't. (If i can dig that paper up I might - but I'm about to take a short vacation...) Suffice it to say that there is more to the Bibilical definition than bringing a class to a generation- and vpw doesn't fit the bill......
If one is going to base the claim that vpw was an apostle (a claim that he himself never made - remember? He was THE TEACHER.) on the PFAL class alone - then that argument wouldn't hold water.
Not in the biblically authentic sense. Nor were Wierwille and his ministerial offspring (the star struck Way Corps minions Wierwille “ordained”) authentic prophets. Teachers? They were false teachers.
a. Apostle One of a group made up especially of the 12 disciples chosen by Jesus to preach the gospel.
b. A missionary of the early Christian Church.
c. A leader of the first Christian mission to a country or region.
2. One of the 12 members of the administrative council in the Mormon Church.
3.
a. One who pioneers an important reform movement, cause, or belief: an apostle of conservation.
b. A passionate adherent; a strong supporter.
Perhaps by definition of 3a & 3b, VPW could be considered an apostle... but then you could also say that about anyone in history who started a reform movement, cause, or belief - which even the song "Alice's Restaurant" talks about...
And friends, somewhere in Washington enshrined in some little folder, is a
study in black and white of my fingerprints. And the only reason I'm
singing you this song now is cause you may know somebody in a similar
situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a
situation like that there's only one thing you can do and that's walk into
the shrink wherever you are ,just walk in say "Shrink, You can get
anything you want, at Alice's restaurant.". And walk out. You know, if
one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and
they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony,
they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them.
And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in
singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an
organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said
fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and
walking out. And friends they may thinks it's a movement.
And that's what it is , the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and
all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the
Oddly enough, I did my research paper on Apostles - specifically Jesus Christ as The Apostle and consequently, the primary example - first use if you will - then I followed it up with the 12 apostles and their commission. I was able to show new light being brought to a generation both practically and doctrinally, both old light that was new the the generation at hand and brand new light. The examples used were Jesus Christ, the 12, and Paul.
Was Moses an apostle? He brought new light to a generation.
Jonah?
Nehemiah?
How about Noah? Talk about new light!
I could say an apostle is someone who speaks for God, and every example of an apostle would support that "definition." Just because you can show that the definition fits, doesn't mean that's the definition of the word. An apostle is a sent one, as Mark pointed out. That's the simple meaning of the word. Wierwille pointed out something apostles seem to have in common. Bully for him, but that doesn't define an apostle.
What's "new light" anyway? It seems to me that the people called apostles in the Bible brought truly new doctrine and practice as well as "ways" of "Christianity" to people. New in terms of having never been taught before, ever.
vee pee hardly did that. Especially given his propensity for plagairizing work from books already in print and using wc papers without giving proper credit to the actual authors. Regardless, none of what he taught is something that God revealed to him directly having never been taught in the world before.
Wiewrwille's claim of God's audible promise that was sealed with a snowstorm, along with the "new light" contained in PFAL and his own personal definition of apostle -- were all cleverly crafted so that, while he never had to actually claim it, many of his adoring (but duped) followers would see him as being an Apostle, thus establishing his little kingdom and the unchecked authority that went with it.
As we can see from the examples of a few posters here, some are still duped.
Biblically, the "new light" that an apostle brought, was the Gospel of Jesus Christ -- That he lived, died for the sins of the world, and was raised from the dead -- that he was the Messiah. It was the Gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ.
Wierwille's "new light" consited of no more than an eclectic mix of teachings borrowed or stolen from others before him. None of it was new to his generation. Most, if not all of it was off-the-shelf teachings.
Bullinger had already taught four crucified and the six denials of Peter. For years, the JW's and others had been teaching Jesus is not God. The "manifestations" had been taught by Stiles and Leonard. The "law of believing" (word-faith theology) was already being taught by others long before Wierwille saw the snowstorm.
The only thing "new" about any of it was that Wierwille compiled and repackaged it and put his name on it.
Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God,..
To be an apostle one must be called by Jesus Christ and it can only be done by the will of God
But how do you know some one is a apostle they will tell you Jesus Christ wants them to rise to the job
But how do you know their telling the truth the Christ in you will tell you by discerning of spirits or the fruits of spirit in their lives
Now VPW never said he was one but he called himself a teacher
Was VPW a teacher He could of been in the beginning but he got puff up a human thing look David got puff up
I would think a person with the gift of a teacher needs to do is teach the word of God but to have the gift ministry of teacher Christ must called them to it and it must be by the will of God
But because one has a gift ministry it does not mean they will not sin
He perverted the Biblical and Classical Greek meaning of the word "apostolos" to fit his purposes.
He then doesn't even live up to the measure that he himself set.
Yet...he is venerated even now by a few.
Incredible.
My only regret is that I was sucked into this perversion for a few years.
---------------------------
Oh, and btw, Allan, cower is not the word. Are repulsed is the word.
So your sentence should read,
those who still 'run with it' today are now taking the same 'ribbing and jibes' for it, even from them who initially embraced it and now cower from are repulsed by it.
I think that would be more accurate with those of us about whom you are speaking.
Well, there you have it. ckmkeon said it, so it MUST be so!!! ckmkeon always speaks truth even though is grammar is something to be desired. Let's close this thread up!
“Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds.” II Corinthians 12:12 NKJV
From The MacArthur Study Bible notes on II Corinthians 12:12: the signs of an apostle. Including, but not limited to, “signs and wonders and mighty deeds” [the miracle of the Corinthians’ salvation was also a mark of Paul’s apostleship, I Cor. 9:2]. The purpose of miraculous signs was to authenticate the apostles as God’s messengers [cf. Acts 2:22,43; 4:30; 5:12; 14:3; Rom.15:18; Heb.2:3,4].
And from The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: “APOSTLE [ Gk. Apostolos < apostello – ‘send’ (with stress on the commission and authorization of the sender)]. A missionary, envoy, ambassador; in the NT, one of those who, having seen the risen Christ, is a witness of His resurrection, and commissioned by Him, preaches the gospel to all the nations…NT Usage. – Jesus Christ is the Apostle and High Priest of our profession [Heb. 3:1]…In most of the approximately eighty cases in which the word “apostle” occurs in the NT, it refers to the Twelve or to Paul. Their unique place is based upon the resurrected Jesus’ having appeared to them and having commissioned them to proclaim the gospel as the eschatological action of God in Christ…The apostles are regarded as setting the norms of doctrine and fellowship [Acts 2: 42], the marking posts [Gal. 2: 9], the rule by which one must measure his preaching [Gal.2:2], the foundation [Eph. 2: 20; Rev. 21: 14; I Cor. 3: 11], so that there is no way to Christ that detours around them. Their importance is due to their function of presenting the authentic interpretation of their Lord…
…Paul. – Unlike the Twelve, Paul had not accompanied Jesus during His preaching ministry…In its three accounts of the Lord’s initial encounter with Paul as well as in the apostle’s own writing [e.g. Gal. 1: 16; II Cor. 4: 6], his apostleship is presented as the direct action of the risen Lord Jesus…
…Apostolic Authority. – In the NT there is always a decisive distinction between the Lord Jesus and His apostles. While He has full authority in Himself, their power is only in His Name and in the Spirit given by Him [Acts 3: 6, 12; 9: 34; John 15: 5]…As His witnesses, ambassadors, and vicars [Matt. 10:40; Luke 10:16], they hold the first and most significant place in the primitive Church . Accordingly, they exercise great authority in matters of discipline [Acts 5:1-11; I Cor. 5:1-7; II Cor. 2:1-10; John 20:23; Matt. 16:19; 18:15-22] and other problems facing the churches [iI Cor. 13:2,10: I Thess. 4:2: II Thess. 3:4,6]. Yet they treasure the precept, “you have one teacher, and you are all brethren” [Matt. 23:8; cf. 10:44]. Paul sought to increase the joy of others, not to lord it over their faith [iI Cor. 1:24].”
In my humble opinion, about the only way VPW could be associated with the role of an apostle is the same way that Robert Duvall was – as an actor.
Recommended Posts
Oakspear
Even if we used Wierwille's definition, he didn't bring new light to his generation. Nothing he taught was new; most had been put into print less than ten years before he taught it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
I seem to recall a verse of scripture that refers to laying money at the apostle's feet...
...I suppose if one wanted money laid at their feet...this would be an appropriate title to assume.
Was Wierwille an apostle?...not by anyone's definition....I have my doubts as to whether he was even a Christian.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
I think that HE thought of himself as an apostle.......I think that he also thought that his knowledge and formulas made him a Christian as well.
I am with Groucho....the fruit in his life would appear to define him as being of the flesh.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
allan w.
Come on Oaks, you do yourself a dis-service with that comment..."in print 10 years earlier". It was still 'new light' to this generation, no matter who printed it. VP was the one who 'ran with it' so to speak. He was the one who initially took the 'jibes' for it and lo and behold, those who still 'run with it' today are now taking the same 'ribbing and jibes' for it, even from them who initially embraced it and now cower from it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
But one question, though, Allan:
Where did he come up with the definition that he used?
You see above the definitions that I found lexically. I only remember him simply asserting that this was the definition. It's not, as you are plainly able to see.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
There we disagree, Allan. At best, it would have been "new light" to any specific individuals who had heard Wierwille's message without ever having heard Stiles, Bullinger, etc.
As far as "taking ribs & jibes", I disagree that he was the one who "initially" took them. Any opposition to the specific doctrine could have been expressed at any point since the information was made available by the original authors. Most of the mainstream opposition to Wierwille was more due to the anti-cult hysteria of the late 70's than anything else.
But, back to the original point of the thread: Was Wierwille an apostle? The argument can be made if one accepts Wierwille's definition of apostle, and one uses an extremely broad interpretation of "bringing new light to a generation".
But, should we accept his definition? What is it based on? IMHO, it is an example of Wierwille tailoring a definition to further his doctrine.
"Cower from it"? People choose to reject Wierwillian doctrine for a variety of reasons, I don't see "cowering" as one of them!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Oddly enough, I did my research paper on Apostles - specifically Jesus Christ as The Apostle and consequently, the primary example - first use if you will - then I followed it up with the 12 apostles and their commission. I was able to show new light being brought to a generation both practically and doctrinally, both old light that was new the the generation at hand and brand new light. The examples used were Jesus Christ, the 12, and Paul.
I can expound - but I won't. (If i can dig that paper up I might - but I'm about to take a short vacation...) Suffice it to say that there is more to the Bibilical definition than bringing a class to a generation- and vpw doesn't fit the bill......
If one is going to base the claim that vpw was an apostle (a claim that he himself never made - remember? He was THE TEACHER.) on the PFAL class alone - then that argument wouldn't hold water.
Edited by doojableLink to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
Not in the biblically authentic sense. Nor were Wierwille and his ministerial offspring (the star struck Way Corps minions Wierwille “ordained”) authentic prophets. Teachers? They were false teachers.
Post Tenebras Lux
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChasUFarley
a·pos·tle Pronunciation (-psl) n.
1.
a. Apostle One of a group made up especially of the 12 disciples chosen by Jesus to preach the gospel.
b. A missionary of the early Christian Church.
c. A leader of the first Christian mission to a country or region.
2. One of the 12 members of the administrative council in the Mormon Church.
3.
a. One who pioneers an important reform movement, cause, or belief: an apostle of conservation.
b. A passionate adherent; a strong supporter.
Perhaps by definition of 3a & 3b, VPW could be considered an apostle... but then you could also say that about anyone in history who started a reform movement, cause, or belief - which even the song "Alice's Restaurant" talks about...
And friends, somewhere in Washington enshrined in some little folder, is a
study in black and white of my fingerprints. And the only reason I'm
singing you this song now is cause you may know somebody in a similar
situation, or you may be in a similar situation, and if your in a
situation like that there's only one thing you can do and that's walk into
the shrink wherever you are ,just walk in say "Shrink, You can get
anything you want, at Alice's restaurant.". And walk out. You know, if
one person, just one person does it they may think he's really sick and
they won't take him. And if two people, two people do it, in harmony,
they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them.
And three people do it, three, can you imagine, three people walking in
singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and walking out. They may think it's an
organization. And can you, can you imagine fifty people a day,I said
fifty people a day walking in singin a bar of Alice's Restaurant and
walking out. And friends they may thinks it's a movement.
And that's what it is , the Alice's Restaurant Anti-Massacre Movement, and
all you got to do to join is sing it the next time it come's around on the
guitar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Was Moses an apostle? He brought new light to a generation.
Jonah?
Nehemiah?
How about Noah? Talk about new light!
I could say an apostle is someone who speaks for God, and every example of an apostle would support that "definition." Just because you can show that the definition fits, doesn't mean that's the definition of the word. An apostle is a sent one, as Mark pointed out. That's the simple meaning of the word. Wierwille pointed out something apostles seem to have in common. Bully for him, but that doesn't define an apostle.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
George Aar
Was Edison an apostle then?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
What's "new light" anyway? It seems to me that the people called apostles in the Bible brought truly new doctrine and practice as well as "ways" of "Christianity" to people. New in terms of having never been taught before, ever.
vee pee hardly did that. Especially given his propensity for plagairizing work from books already in print and using wc papers without giving proper credit to the actual authors. Regardless, none of what he taught is something that God revealed to him directly having never been taught in the world before.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Wiewrwille's claim of God's audible promise that was sealed with a snowstorm, along with the "new light" contained in PFAL and his own personal definition of apostle -- were all cleverly crafted so that, while he never had to actually claim it, many of his adoring (but duped) followers would see him as being an Apostle, thus establishing his little kingdom and the unchecked authority that went with it.
As we can see from the examples of a few posters here, some are still duped.
Biblically, the "new light" that an apostle brought, was the Gospel of Jesus Christ -- That he lived, died for the sins of the world, and was raised from the dead -- that he was the Messiah. It was the Gospel of salvation through Jesus Christ.
Wierwille's "new light" consited of no more than an eclectic mix of teachings borrowed or stolen from others before him. None of it was new to his generation. Most, if not all of it was off-the-shelf teachings.
Bullinger had already taught four crucified and the six denials of Peter. For years, the JW's and others had been teaching Jesus is not God. The "manifestations" had been taught by Stiles and Leonard. The "law of believing" (word-faith theology) was already being taught by others long before Wierwille saw the snowstorm.
The only thing "new" about any of it was that Wierwille compiled and repackaged it and put his name on it.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
I agree. So was he an apostle??? No.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved markomalley and others
God loves you my dear friends
Was Wierwille an Apostle?
No! I would say
As for new light there nothing new under the sun
and VPW lived under the sun
Here what a apostle is
Eph 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God,..
To be an apostle one must be called by Jesus Christ and it can only be done by the will of God
But how do you know some one is a apostle they will tell you Jesus Christ wants them to rise to the job
But how do you know their telling the truth the Christ in you will tell you by discerning of spirits or the fruits of spirit in their lives
Now VPW never said he was one but he called himself a teacher
Was VPW a teacher He could of been in the beginning but he got puff up a human thing look David got puff up
I would think a person with the gift of a teacher needs to do is teach the word of God but to have the gift ministry of teacher Christ must called them to it and it must be by the will of God
But because one has a gift ministry it does not mean they will not sin
I will stop here
thank you
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
Bingo again, Goey.
Carefully crafted to elicit the desired response.
The pretensiousness of it kills me. Only exceeded by the whole "Father in the Word" bit. Gack!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
And this is the perverse part of it all.
He perverted the Biblical and Classical Greek meaning of the word "apostolos" to fit his purposes.
He then doesn't even live up to the measure that he himself set.
Yet...he is venerated even now by a few.
Incredible.
My only regret is that I was sucked into this perversion for a few years.
---------------------------
Oh, and btw, Allan, cower is not the word. Are repulsed is the word.
So your sentence should read,
those who still 'run with it' today are now taking the same 'ribbing and jibes' for it, even from them who initially embraced it and now cower from are repulsed by it.
I think that would be more accurate with those of us about whom you are speaking.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ckmkeon
This is simple Yes Dr.Wierwille was a apostle
CK
Link to comment
Share on other sites
sirguessalot
nice one geo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
OK, CK. Wierwille was an apostle.
The Biblical definition of an apostle is:
The questions remain. If he is an apostolos,
Who sent him forth?
Where was he sent forth from?
Where was he sent forth to?
What was the message he was given by the one he sent forth?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Maybe Ben Franklin was one too??
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nottawayfer
Well, there you have it. ckmkeon said it, so it MUST be so!!! ckmkeon always speaks truth even though is grammar is something to be desired. Let's close this thread up!
:blink: :blink: :blink:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
T-Bone
“Truly the signs of an apostle were accomplished among you with all perseverance, in signs and wonders and mighty deeds.” II Corinthians 12:12 NKJV
From The MacArthur Study Bible notes on II Corinthians 12:12: the signs of an apostle. Including, but not limited to, “signs and wonders and mighty deeds” [the miracle of the Corinthians’ salvation was also a mark of Paul’s apostleship, I Cor. 9:2]. The purpose of miraculous signs was to authenticate the apostles as God’s messengers [cf. Acts 2:22,43; 4:30; 5:12; 14:3; Rom.15:18; Heb.2:3,4].
And from The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: “APOSTLE [ Gk. Apostolos < apostello – ‘send’ (with stress on the commission and authorization of the sender)]. A missionary, envoy, ambassador; in the NT, one of those who, having seen the risen Christ, is a witness of His resurrection, and commissioned by Him, preaches the gospel to all the nations…NT Usage. – Jesus Christ is the Apostle and High Priest of our profession [Heb. 3:1]…In most of the approximately eighty cases in which the word “apostle” occurs in the NT, it refers to the Twelve or to Paul. Their unique place is based upon the resurrected Jesus’ having appeared to them and having commissioned them to proclaim the gospel as the eschatological action of God in Christ…The apostles are regarded as setting the norms of doctrine and fellowship [Acts 2: 42], the marking posts [Gal. 2: 9], the rule by which one must measure his preaching [Gal.2:2], the foundation [Eph. 2: 20; Rev. 21: 14; I Cor. 3: 11], so that there is no way to Christ that detours around them. Their importance is due to their function of presenting the authentic interpretation of their Lord…
…Paul. – Unlike the Twelve, Paul had not accompanied Jesus during His preaching ministry…In its three accounts of the Lord’s initial encounter with Paul as well as in the apostle’s own writing [e.g. Gal. 1: 16; II Cor. 4: 6], his apostleship is presented as the direct action of the risen Lord Jesus…
…Apostolic Authority. – In the NT there is always a decisive distinction between the Lord Jesus and His apostles. While He has full authority in Himself, their power is only in His Name and in the Spirit given by Him [Acts 3: 6, 12; 9: 34; John 15: 5]…As His witnesses, ambassadors, and vicars [Matt. 10:40; Luke 10:16], they hold the first and most significant place in the primitive Church . Accordingly, they exercise great authority in matters of discipline [Acts 5:1-11; I Cor. 5:1-7; II Cor. 2:1-10; John 20:23; Matt. 16:19; 18:15-22] and other problems facing the churches [iI Cor. 13:2,10: I Thess. 4:2: II Thess. 3:4,6]. Yet they treasure the precept, “you have one teacher, and you are all brethren” [Matt. 23:8; cf. 10:44]. Paul sought to increase the joy of others, not to lord it over their faith [iI Cor. 1:24].”
In my humble opinion, about the only way VPW could be associated with the role of an apostle is the same way that Robert Duvall was – as an actor.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Excellent response CK! You would make old Doc Vic proud.
I see you have really put your critical thinking skills to work once
again with that very well thought out response and explanation.
Edited by GoeyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.